I feel this was pretty good stuff and wanted to share:
"Here's a very common confusion and pitfall BJJ students
can fall prey to when it comes to the learning process
of discovering the game that fits them.
It's the distinction between defining your routes as I
talked about in the early part of this series, and over
relying on certain strengths - especially when it comes
in the form of "money moves"... especially when those
money moves are themselves overly rooted in one's
physical attributes.
(I'll write it out, then talk about why it's
especially important for older grapplers)
As this relates to the standards of technical
performance we look at in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu grading,
this is a very significant point to grasp.
How do you make the distinction? In my experience
coaching. it really comes down to a matter of two
criteria:
1) Your ABILITY to look at your own game with a
reasonable degree of objectivity (and also to be
receptive to analysis from your coach)
2) Your WILLINGNESS to put your overall development
above your attachment to the money move.
Number 2 has to do with honesty and ego more than
anything else.
Quick side note --
Back in the late 90s and early 2000s, before the UFC
boom, I was one of the proponents of the move toward
"functional" performance training. My friend Matt
Thornton used the paradigm of "image versus
performance" to pose the question of one's motivation
for training...
In other words, are you motivated by factors such as
form over function, status, blind adherence to
tradition, outdated training methods fallaciously
validated by legends of old marital arts masters, etc....
Or are you motivated by what actually, empirically, is
proven to work against fully resisting opponents in a
given area?
As it relates to this topic today, I've noticed that
even these pretty straightforward criteria can be dicey
if someone is not honest enough with themselves to make
the distinction accurately.
Perfect example -- a BJJ student can tap out most
anyone in the school if they are able to land a certain
money move in their repertoire. They win tournaments
with it. Now in this person's mind, this is all the
validation they need that they are on the side of
performance, not on the side of image.
BUT...
Now we come to the self-honesty part. Because winning
in and of itself does not always equal the dedication
to one's technical performance.
I am a proponent of: "training to learn, fighting to
win." In training, the main priority is on learning,
not on keeping score, making excuses, faking or playing
up injuries to give yourself a way out, and all the
other self-deluding crutches people make to protect
their egos. In training, most of the time we are trying
to shelf the physical attributes and also be willing to
work on our weaker areas as well as improve on our
strengths.
In competition (the "fight") you use everything you
can bring to the table... attributes, money moves, etc.,
but with the hope that you were not over-relying on
those qualities during your training and using them to
mask holes in your game.
When an athlete boasts that they "only go 40%" but
everyone can clearly see them relying on strength to
avoid being submitted or lose position, for example,
there's clearly a gap between reality and their ability
to honestly look at themselves on the mat.
My school is known to have high standards for grading
relative to that criteria of technical performance.
This has nothing to do with "sandbagging," but
everything to do with solid development of fundamentals
and technical proficiency - not just whether or not you
can tap someone.
It implies that, although everyone will have their
strengths, there are no real holes in the game relative
to a given belt level, and that the student is self
aware and humble enough to place overall development as
their primary goal and motivation, and see their belt
rank or place on a medal podium as a function of that
process rather than the end in itself.
Why is this especially important for the 40 Plus
grappler?
First of all, falling into the "money move" or "money
position" trap, or using too many attributes as the
means of keeping up with the young bucks will set you
back in your overall development.
As my friend, BJJ Black Belt extraordinaire wrote
recently about small, female black belts like Emily
Kwok and Lily Pagle (whom I've mentioned here before...
the one who achieved her black belt at age 60), one
thing you can be sure of when you see them execute
Jiu-Jitsu: strength and explosiveness are off the
table, and you can be sure when it works it's TRULY
technique.
Second, this point should also liberate you from the
all-too-common phenomenon of beating yourself up when
you "lose" on the mat, and wondering if this game is
for you. Just because you get pinned, submitted, etc.,
that is only part of the picture. Results may be the
only thing that counts in competition, but as you look
at the art of jiujitsu for jiujitsu's sake, you can
take a lot from knowing that you are developing a
complete technical game with minimal reliance on
physical attributes."
"Here's a very common confusion and pitfall BJJ students
can fall prey to when it comes to the learning process
of discovering the game that fits them.
It's the distinction between defining your routes as I
talked about in the early part of this series, and over
relying on certain strengths - especially when it comes
in the form of "money moves"... especially when those
money moves are themselves overly rooted in one's
physical attributes.
(I'll write it out, then talk about why it's
especially important for older grapplers)
As this relates to the standards of technical
performance we look at in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu grading,
this is a very significant point to grasp.
How do you make the distinction? In my experience
coaching. it really comes down to a matter of two
criteria:
1) Your ABILITY to look at your own game with a
reasonable degree of objectivity (and also to be
receptive to analysis from your coach)
2) Your WILLINGNESS to put your overall development
above your attachment to the money move.
Number 2 has to do with honesty and ego more than
anything else.
Quick side note --
Back in the late 90s and early 2000s, before the UFC
boom, I was one of the proponents of the move toward
"functional" performance training. My friend Matt
Thornton used the paradigm of "image versus
performance" to pose the question of one's motivation
for training...
In other words, are you motivated by factors such as
form over function, status, blind adherence to
tradition, outdated training methods fallaciously
validated by legends of old marital arts masters, etc....
Or are you motivated by what actually, empirically, is
proven to work against fully resisting opponents in a
given area?
As it relates to this topic today, I've noticed that
even these pretty straightforward criteria can be dicey
if someone is not honest enough with themselves to make
the distinction accurately.
Perfect example -- a BJJ student can tap out most
anyone in the school if they are able to land a certain
money move in their repertoire. They win tournaments
with it. Now in this person's mind, this is all the
validation they need that they are on the side of
performance, not on the side of image.
BUT...
Now we come to the self-honesty part. Because winning
in and of itself does not always equal the dedication
to one's technical performance.
I am a proponent of: "training to learn, fighting to
win." In training, the main priority is on learning,
not on keeping score, making excuses, faking or playing
up injuries to give yourself a way out, and all the
other self-deluding crutches people make to protect
their egos. In training, most of the time we are trying
to shelf the physical attributes and also be willing to
work on our weaker areas as well as improve on our
strengths.
In competition (the "fight") you use everything you
can bring to the table... attributes, money moves, etc.,
but with the hope that you were not over-relying on
those qualities during your training and using them to
mask holes in your game.
When an athlete boasts that they "only go 40%" but
everyone can clearly see them relying on strength to
avoid being submitted or lose position, for example,
there's clearly a gap between reality and their ability
to honestly look at themselves on the mat.
My school is known to have high standards for grading
relative to that criteria of technical performance.
This has nothing to do with "sandbagging," but
everything to do with solid development of fundamentals
and technical proficiency - not just whether or not you
can tap someone.
It implies that, although everyone will have their
strengths, there are no real holes in the game relative
to a given belt level, and that the student is self
aware and humble enough to place overall development as
their primary goal and motivation, and see their belt
rank or place on a medal podium as a function of that
process rather than the end in itself.
Why is this especially important for the 40 Plus
grappler?
First of all, falling into the "money move" or "money
position" trap, or using too many attributes as the
means of keeping up with the young bucks will set you
back in your overall development.
As my friend, BJJ Black Belt extraordinaire wrote
recently about small, female black belts like Emily
Kwok and Lily Pagle (whom I've mentioned here before...
the one who achieved her black belt at age 60), one
thing you can be sure of when you see them execute
Jiu-Jitsu: strength and explosiveness are off the
table, and you can be sure when it works it's TRULY
technique.
Second, this point should also liberate you from the
all-too-common phenomenon of beating yourself up when
you "lose" on the mat, and wondering if this game is
for you. Just because you get pinned, submitted, etc.,
that is only part of the picture. Results may be the
only thing that counts in competition, but as you look
at the art of jiujitsu for jiujitsu's sake, you can
take a lot from knowing that you are developing a
complete technical game with minimal reliance on
physical attributes."
Reply With Quote
