I remember when I first started training Jiu Jitsu in the 90's getting a blue belt was a very big accomplishment. Perhaps it still is today, but it seems to me that the level of ability of many Jiu Jitsu players is not as good as it was ten years ago. I do think that more techniques have evolved, but I also see more higher belts just aren't as good. I see more guys teaching now than ever before and I see a lot of not so good students. Is it the students, the teachers, or am I imagining this?
Its all about the teachers. For the most part if its a loyal and pretty consistent student their jiu-jitsu and approach to jiu-jitsu is usually a good reflection of their teachers. If they value basics and a foundation and drills, reps, creativity, innovation, and all the other good things that define good jiu-jitsu practitioners then thats usually a reflection of their teacher or their associations ideas. Some people choose to try and teach too early or promote too early or a combination of both . But as the quality of teachers dwindles so does the quality of students and competitors. But with the popularity of anything in this world that is bound to happen. The real factor is potential students educating themselves in what to look for in a good school or teacher and that in itself can be deceiving. It took me a long time to be confident in my ability to teach and find out what attributes i needed to teach my students. As a teacher everyone of my students faults (in jiu-jitsu) i see as something i created or didn't correct. I know you can't help every student but like i said the consistent loyal ones every possible attempt should be made to really help. I think if some teachers were responsible in losing their egos and being humble about understanding if that they just might not be ready to teach or/and if the well qualified teachers saw students as a direct reflection of themselves then i think a lot of the problems you mentioned just might be eliminated. For the record i'm not saying i'm a great teacher or that i have a system intact to help deter my students from looking like or making me look like a retard lol but i am trying :-)
i also believe there are alot of people out there now who are claiming they are ranked grapplers to get more people into their school and make more money so they are watering down the system and giving belts early because their guys are fighting and they want to hype up the person and help push them and it becomes a huge cycle, Unfortunate but its true...
Dude, it's like the wild wild west out where I live. Every Kenpo school around slaps an MMA sign on their school and buys an American JuJitsu membership. Many regional MMA fighters are just loaded with poor video techniques and no fundamentals.
I would strongly concur that it's the teaching. I may not know a whole lot about jiu jitsu but I do know quite a bit about teaching and learning. Teaching well is its own discipline and subject matter expertise alone is not sufficient. A teacher has to have a robust knowledge of not only their subject but a good working knowledge of how people learn and how best to communicate an idea or ideas to a mixed group of students. That's not an easy task.
A good teacher/coach has a plan of instruction and prepares a curriculum with intent. It is not a haphazard "Hmm... what should we go over today..." approach. Subject matter expertise is, of course, necessary for the instructor to be able to go beyond the lesson plan when questions arise and to explain the theoretical underpinnings when necessary (e.g. why you do the set up for *this* technique *this* way because doing it *that* way opens you up to such-and-such a counter, etc.). A good teacher has more than one approach to a lesson and he or she is aware that individual learning needs differ and will adjust as necessary.
Jiu jitsu is especially well-suited to a social learning theory approach. Social learning theory utilizes the idea that the environment is a key component of the learning environment in addition to integrating subject knowledge, task knowledge, and task performance. I know Coach Herzog uses primarilly a social learning approach. He has a series planned well in advance and the techniques progress logically through the whole series across the technique classes; meaning if you go to noon beginner class on Tuesday and 7:00pm beginner class on Thursday you're going to see the same series. Not a kimura attack Tuesday and a leg lock on Thursday. Typically, the series will also incorporate both the attack and defense aspects so both partners are getting reps instead of practicing attacking a fish.; In this way, the student learns to attack against a properly defending opponent using proper technique rather than relying on a opponent's lack of knowledge or gambling that he has weaker technique or position knowledge (which is a criticism I have heard of the 50/50 guard). Technique class is for practicing controlled movement and perfecting the muscle memory under close supervision and with frequent corrections and tweaks from coach. At the end of technique class are one-minute drills. During these, coach starts the class in a position that is advantageous to one player. The goal is to resist about 60% or so and to rep the technique(s) we've been working . Some guys get off track and treat it as "one-minute rolling" but that's not the intent. The point is to drill the techniques you just learned against a resisting opponent who knows what you're trying to do. Yeah, that makes it hard but that's why you drill the technique. Then there are always open mat and rolling sessions. So from a social learning standpoint you have planned curriculum in a logical progression, slow technique practice, practice against resistance, and open rolling. The combination and progression is excellent for developing muscle memory, sensitivity, and application against progressively more difficult challenges. Most importantly, all of this is done in an environment conducive to training for competition -- and environment matters when it comes to developing and applying complicated task knowledge in a high-stress environment. Train the way you fight, practice the way you play, etc, etc.
There certainly are other approaches to teaching but because jiu jitsu requires both the mental strategy aspect and the physical application of technique, it is most well suited to a social learning approach. I'd love to hear how some other instructors approach teaching and learning; especially Mr. Green since I know a lot of military training comes from a social learning theory angle.
I also agree with this thread alot of places out here are saturated with "instructors" that say they trained such and such and they know this or that person but when U go check out they ""Gymarage" (Combined the words gym and garage LOL) its a toatal different story, or they see that the whole MMA or Jiu Jitsu thing is whats hot right now and they want a piece of it . . . .
Jason you make it sound as if I have an actual approach to coaching ;).....your gunna set people's expectations to high for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Hyatt
Jason, that is very interesting! I have not analyzed my instruction to see this, but you describe the way I teach 100%!!! I don't know if I would attribute it to my Military background, or my diverse childhood, and a lifetime of fighting. But this seemed to be the most efficient way to teach. That and I try to focus on each students strengths and weakness's. Separately, but still as part of the current technique/class. Everyone has different learning curves, body types, physical abilities etc... So I guess it should be a pretty complex task, If it were not for the passion I have for fighting! I love helping others discover the wonders of the universe of Jiu Jitsu, once you start to truly understand "Jiu Jitsu"!
Yeah, I have noticed a lot of people who say they can grapple and then turn out to be frauds, mostly due to poor teaching or just wanting to fit in to the new trend.
You DO have an actual approach to coaching, it's just that you've developed it over years of teaching and learning from other excellent teachers instead of going out and getting a degree in education theory. The fact that your experiential teaching conforms so well to social learning theory may be accidental or not entirely on purpose, but the end result is still high-quality instruction -- and that's what seems to be missing elsewhere from what I hear around the interwebs. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Herzog
It was a joke brotha ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Hyatt
Countless hours in coaching courses, hundreds of books in my library, and of course excellent coaches over the years as well, nothing is accidental.
See, I shoulda known better. You even tap me on the forums... damn... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Herzog
I really think you have a great niche in the train-the-trainer market. There are a lot of guys who can play jiu jitsu but not nearly as many who can teach it. I would suspect that some of the new moon instructors or folks new to coaching would be interested in a coaching and curriculum development seminar. I seem to remember one of the earliest posts on the old forum was a call for an instructors conference or something to that effect. Did anything ever come of that?
I'm assuming the 10th Planet Cruise is going to replace that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Hyatt
That cruise is gonna be sick. I gotta start saving now...
Do it! Me, Kathy, Urabnski and Jen are all ready planning on it, gunna try and get Scott and a few others as well to go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Hyatt
I think in ways, the Brazilian Jiu Jitsu techniques are decreasing in quality as more schools open up (which sounds a little hypocritical of me). I see more guys claiming to be "High Level" black of brown belts, and all you can verify is that they were blue or purple in Brazil (if they came from there), or they rise VERY quickly with minimal competition (which used to be virtually mandatory) experience to brown or black. OR, the hypocritical promotion for MMA and no-gi competition when they say you can only get promoted with the gi/the gi is "real" jiu jitsu. Now, I do admit to being a little aggravated and possibly over-sensitive, mainly because I'm sick of people falsifying credentials to snow the public and make a buck. In addition to that, some think that if they are from Brazil, they are the ONLY ones to know grappling or Jiu Jitsu. That bothers me.
I think a quick buck, and lack of discipline and dedication are leading to a decline. I was brought up in martial arts VERY strict. You had to EARN a promotion. If you didn't compete, and even if you did-you literally had to fight for and show you were ready. I agree some promotions are too easy. I saw a case on TUF last night where a Brown Belt, got RNC'd by a guy who clearly had minimal JJ. Over the weekend (last saturday) I saw a kid who was supposed to be a HIGH level blue/purple under a brazilian guy out here be unable to completely control or submit a kid who only had 5 weeks of grappling training (with me. He came to me on the recommendation of one of my MMA students to get some help for this fight). While he didn't win, he stymied the BJJ guy pretty well.
Ah, sorry for the rant. Anyone I promote to blue belt has to have at least 8-12 months steady with me, or some combination of good knowledge of technique and competition experience. For example: if you're with me 6 months or more, and have won your division 2 or 3 times, that's almost a no-brainer for blue. If you've been with me a year, have good knowledge, roll hard and well, and don't compete, then I'll formally test you. It's all relative, but I'm pretty strict as a rule.
Ohhhh, that makes so much sense. If you're dominating at your skill level, then it's time to move up a skill level. If not, then more training is required. I think if more people followed this, we wouldn't see "belt inflation" where your belt is 'worth less' or it 'means less' as time goes on.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Roderick
Super cool.
John, I really like the combination of subjective and objective evaluation in your promotion process. There are so many intangibles in the martial arts the subjective opinion of a highly qualified instructor matters. But I also like using measurable goals and objective qualifications to maintain a standard. Very nice to see as an educator. :)
I try. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I have NEVER asked to be an instructor or be promoted by any of the QUALITY instructors I have. I was ASKED to test and be a rep. I've also had to test for all of them. Whether by sparring/doing an actual test, or demonstrating my knowledge. Plus, I've competed in MMA when there were no regulations or rules, and it was literally "hush-hush" as well as Muay Thai and grappling events. I don't win every time, but I've always tried to test myself. Listen, the proof is in the pudding. When your students start getting your philosophy and understand why you do things, coupled with seeing their own individual success, you know you're doing it right. There needs to be a standard, but also an accounting for individual circumstance. Not everyone wants to compete-so you need to accommodate that. Not everyone tests well or rolls in class well, but may be a monster on the mat or in the cage, so you need to have something for that. You need a curriculum outline, you need a mix of quantifiable and empirical standards to go by. And most of all, you need instincts. You know when someone is ready, even if they don't.
I noticed that when I was down in New Orleans a few weeks ago, the poor techniques and fundamentals. Granted, I'm not anyone...but the guards on these so called "Jiu-Jitsu Fighters" were horrid. And some of these guys came out of the biggest "well known" school in that area.Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ Camacho
Interesting! I bet there is a very heavy regional influence to the local skill level.Quote:
Originally Posted by MWTheory
At least on the competitive level, the overall quality is increasing and I don't see how anyone could argue that it isn't. Competitors are better than ever, and reaching the elite level is becoming harder and harder every year. There are so many top level gyms and coaches. So many kids that have grown up in the sport that are entering adulthood at the super-elite level (The Mendes Brothers for example.) More and more it seems like newer players have no ceilings to their games.
The problem is also commitment, If your training at a " MMA " school for your jiu jitsu, then chances are your instructor isn't 100% committed to jiu jitsu. Jiu jitsu is " vast and complex " and there are many levels and layers to levels and it's a lot to take in. As an instructor you must be a " student of the art " and " love learning " this is the only way to build a solid foundation for students. Who cares about " fancy sweeps " and " submissions " if your student doesn't have excellent survival skills. To add Branches to a " Tree With No Roots " is like Forcing puzzle pieces into places where they " don't Fit "