10th planet JJ vs JJ Fundamentals?

[Brandon Mccaghren]

I don't believe any technique is "a fundamental." However, all techniques can be "fundamental." Let me explain myself.

The fundamentals are not specific techniques. They are, rather, ideas. Philosophies. Expressions. Concepts.

The fundamentals are things like Weight Distribution, Timing, Patience, Proper Framing, Maximizing Leverage, etc...

So a technique like the Bridge and Roll escape is taught on Day One, but why is it that only incredible Black Belts seem to be able to pull it off? Because their understanding of the fundamentals of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that they can convey powerful principles with simple techniques.

Those fundamental principles can be expressed through any technique, provided the teacher has a meaningful understanding of the principles. This is why someone like Jean Jacques Machado can look at your technique, even if it's not a technique that he has ever used, and help you to improve it dramatically. His understanding of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that he can turn any technique, no matter how foreign it may be, into Jiu Jitsu. That's powerful.

So, there are no fundamental techniques. There are only fundamental ideas, and these can be expressed through a variety of curriculums.

[Martin Harris]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Brandon Mccaghren again.

[detroitwillfall]

I don't believe any technique is "a fundamental." However, all techniques can be "fundamental." Let me explain myself.

The fundamentals are not specific techniques. They are, rather, ideas. Philosophies. Expressions. Concepts.

The fundamentals are things like Weight Distribution, Timing, Patience, Proper Framing, Maximizing Leverage, etc...

So a technique like the Bridge and Roll escape is taught on Day One, but why is it that only incredible Black Belts seem to be able to pull it off? Because their understanding of the fundamentals of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that they can convey powerful principles with simple techniques.

Those fundamental principles can be expressed through any technique, provided the teacher has a meaningful understanding of the principles. This is why someone like Jean Jacques Machado can look at your technique, even if it's not a technique that he has ever used, and help you to improve it dramatically. His understanding of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that he can turn any technique, no matter how foreign it may be, into Jiu Jitsu. That's powerful.

So, there are no fundamental techniques. There are only fundamental ideas, and these can be expressed through a variety of curriculums.

i would like to thank everyone who responded! alot of great points and certainly ones i agree with personally.

its kind of like the linkin park quote " everybodys trying to label this shit, there ant no label for this shit, people always try to put a label on this shit and water it down"

[Craig Murray]

I don't believe any technique is "a fundamental." However, all techniques can be "fundamental.".

BMac droppin mad wisdom.

[FRANK BARCA]

We are extra heavy on nogi basics, you can even say ultra heavy

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Enrique "Kiko"]

I don't believe any technique is "a fundamental." However, all techniques can be "fundamental." Let me explain myself.

The fundamentals are not specific techniques. They are, rather, ideas. Philosophies. Expressions. Concepts.

The fundamentals are things like Weight Distribution, Timing, Patience, Proper Framing, Maximizing Leverage, etc...

So a technique like the Bridge and Roll escape is taught on Day One, but why is it that only incredible Black Belts seem to be able to pull it off? Because their understanding of the fundamentals of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that they can convey powerful principles with simple techniques.

Those fundamental principles can be expressed through any technique, provided the teacher has a meaningful understanding of the principles. This is why someone like Jean Jacques Machado can look at your technique, even if it's not a technique that he has ever used, and help you to improve it dramatically. His understanding of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that he can turn any technique, no matter how foreign it may be, into Jiu Jitsu. That's powerful.

So, there are no fundamental techniques. There are only fundamental ideas, and these can be expressed through a variety of curriculums.

I just felt like the student in this clip and B'mac was Bruce.

[Arman Fathi]

I don't believe any technique is "a fundamental." However, all techniques can be "fundamental." Let me explain myself.

The fundamentals are not specific techniques. They are, rather, ideas. Philosophies. Expressions. Concepts.

The fundamentals are things like Weight Distribution, Timing, Patience, Proper Framing, Maximizing Leverage, etc...

So a technique like the Bridge and Roll escape is taught on Day One, but why is it that only incredible Black Belts seem to be able to pull it off? Because their understanding of the fundamentals of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that they can convey powerful principles with simple techniques.

Those fundamental principles can be expressed through any technique, provided the teacher has a meaningful understanding of the principles. This is why someone like Jean Jacques Machado can look at your technique, even if it's not a technique that he has ever used, and help you to improve it dramatically. His understanding of Jiu Jitsu is so deep that he can turn any technique, no matter how foreign it may be, into Jiu Jitsu. That's powerful.

So, there are no fundamental techniques. There are only fundamental ideas, and these can be expressed through a variety of curriculums.

Cerebral response. It had me thinking of a quote that I heard Gui Mendes say a while back. First lemme paint the picture: this was the video that gained some controversy from the Gracies since the Mendes brothers were asked about how sport bjj would fare in a streetfight. Gui's response was something along the lines of "Well if you do jiu jitsu the right way in the street, it doesn't matter what technique you use. If it is jiu jitsu done properly, you will be safe." It was something like that. I'm paraphrasing. But the quote was interpreted as people saying "Oh the Mendes bros are morons cuz they think a berimbolo would work in a street fight."

Lemme tell you something. I bet Gui or Rafa could berimbolo the shit out of guys in a street fight and live to get away with it. Why? Because they've broken that position down to the point that they could catch it on the highest level. They're professional athletes. Notwithstanding, I would never recommend someone use that type of technique with such variable consideration for the clinch in a streetfight. If you watch though, their reflexes and distance management as they attack the berimbolo are immaculate. Beyond exceptional. Gui may have spoken for himself and his brother, and maybe some of their black belts I'd bet, but who else? Hence the controversy.

I think Gui's quote was taken out of context, and I can appreciate where his point of view is coming from. The problem I have with it however is that some may not look too deeply into the quote with his broken English and decipher what he meant by "Jiu jitsu the right way". That means perpetual consideration for distance management, points of contact, elbows, hips, knees, timing patience all of what bmac said etc. etc. It's jiu jitsu principles upon principles. And then principles upon that. Go on youtube and watch Rafa whoop Jake Shields' ASS and you'll know what I'm talking about. That video is the Da Vinci code, I swear to God. He didn't berimbolo in it, but my overall point is that if the principles are understood, considered, and applied, there's virtually no technique that can't receive further refinement. So basically echoing Bmac

[detroitwillfall]

Cerebral response. It had me thinking of a quote that I heard Gui Mendes say a while back. First lemme paint the picture: this was the video that gained some controversy from the Gracies since the Mendes brothers were asked about how sport bjj would fare in a streetfight. Gui's response was something along the lines of "Well if you do jiu jitsu the right way in the street, it doesn't matter what technique you use. If it is jiu jitsu done properly, you will be safe." It was something like that. I'm paraphrasing. But the quote was interpreted as people saying "Oh the Mendes bros are morons cuz they think a berimbolo would work in a street fight."

Lemme tell you something. I bet Gui or Rafa could berimbolo the shit out of guys in a street fight and live to get away with it. Why? Because they've broken that position down to the point that they could catch it on the highest level. They're professional athletes. Notwithstanding, I would never recommend someone use that type of technique with such variable consideration for the clinch in a streetfight. If you watch though, their reflexes and distance management as they attack the berimbolo is immaculate. They're beyond exceptional. Gui may have spoken for himself and his brother, and maybe some of their black belts I'd bet, but who else? Hence the controversy.

I think Gui's quote was taken out of context, and I can appreciate where his point of view is coming from. The problem I have with it however is that some may not look too deeply into the quote with his broken English and decipher what he meant by "Jiu jitsu the right way". That means perpetual consideration for distance management, points of contact, elbows, hips, knees, timing patience all of what bmac said etc. etc. It's jiu jitsu principles upon principles. And then principles upon that. Go on youtube and watch Rafa whoop Jake Shields' ASS and you'll know what I'm talking about. That video is the Da Vinci code, I swear to God. He didn't berimbolo in it, but my overall point is that if the principles are understood, considered, and applied, there's virtually no technique that can't receive further refinement. So basically echoing Bmac

Thank you Arman!

I too was mislead in a way when i made the decision to leave my "sport" jiu jitsu school for a gracie affiliate. Everything is all extremely orchestrated from the point of contact to the cult like structure. dont get me wrong i think combatives has some real benefit, and i will be dedicating the next 3 months to go through it however i think it would of been better to have it out there that it isnt the "end all be all" of fundamentals/self defense."

Regarding a few posts above to Master Bravo's comments, what is the nogi basics taught at HQ or the main affiliated schools? im just curious as to see if it differs from the erik paulsons CSW dvd collection i have.

[Craig Murray]

. dont get me wrong i think combatives has some real benefit,
.

I would love to do the combatives. Since learning about their approach I've felt like it was a really smart way to begin the journey. Makes sense to me for a lot of reasons.

[Eddie Bravo]

In the early years of 10p, I focused most of my teachings on a very aggressive clinching offense. I didn't spend much time on defense at all. In football there's an old saying, "the best defense is a good offense", and that was my mind set back then. But now with the 32 flows that are in the 10p warm up curriculum, defense and escapes have become a very big part of the system.