Are you saying there is a study that measured the effectiveness of repetitive training against competition results, with a control group, in a grappling sport? If so, could we get a reference as I'd genuinely like to read it.

A good (rather fresh) scientific overview about motor learning, use of constraints-led-approach and game/task design https://www.sciencedirect[...]9122000089 I would love to know what the original poster thinks about how e.g. the article above and the references there interact with the ideas and references he has posted in his blog.

Anecdotally, task repetition training has been an effective means of learning motor skills for over two thousand years and has been corroborated scientifically through countless studies. Since jiu-jitsu techniques are a motor skill, the effectiveness of employing task repetition training is undeniable. This fact leads to a tricky question: What is the optimal number of repetitions needed to achieve learning in jiu-jitsu students? Discover the answer and more in Part 3 of The Science of Teaching Jiu-Jitsu series: Task Repetition Training. https://hangoutjjc.blogsp[...]-part.html Parts 1-2 are available at this link: https://hangoutjjc.blogsp[...]-part.html Parts 4 - 6 will be released over the next several weeks. Follow The Hangout Jiu-Jitsu Club Facebook page for more research-based jiu-jitsu and law enforcement content: https://www.facebook.com/[...]uJitsuClub

it is highly unlikely that there are any 'right' ways to teach it. Way too many variables at play here. Everything from capability of the student, their experience, how a technique was taught, hell, what the student ate before training.

Since jiu-jitsu techniques are motor skills, and there is nothing that contradicts that task repetition training is ineffective for grapplers, I stand by my opinion.

One needs different ways to learn depending on your skill sets, experiences and athletic abilities.

One needs different ways to learn depending on your skill sets, experiences and athletic abilities.

EVEN FOR TOTAL BEGINNERS, than task repetition training (also known as 'drilling' for many people and 'repping' for others)

Task repetition is not the same as drilling. There are many different types of drilling. For example, positional drilling by its very nature forces athletes to use different techniques and consider alternatives.

How is Souders using it as a marketing ploy when he isn't making any money on it outside of running a gym? He doesn't charge drop-in fees, he doesn't sell instructionals or books, or gis, or rashguards, or t-shirts. He doesn't charge to appear on podcasts. Seems like he's giving a lot away for free. You can say that everyone learns from different methods, it's just that a lot of academic research suggests that isn't entirely true, and that there may be more optimal ways to learn. Not that the traditional way doesn't work at all - but thst it's not even close to the most efficient or effective way. To each their own though.

If he is genuinely making zero money off promoting and teaching eco, then fair enough (and kudos, that would be laudable). However, at the very least I am assuming he's using all the eco content to bolster his name recognition, which leads on to teaching gigs, seminars, etc. Dogma is dangerous, whether that's 'only eco works', 'eco doesn't work at all' or whatever. Balance, diversity and compromise are usually best, in my experience.

Dogma is dangerous, whether that's 'only eco works', 'eco doesn't work at all' or whatever. Balance, diversity and compromise are usually best, in my experience.

People used to think disease was spread by smells. It's not actually the worst theory as most disease spreads by things that do stink, but now we have germ theory. But we don't need germ theory and stink theory, it's one or the other. Perception is either direct or indirect. We don't need both ideas for skill acquisition. I think it's helpful that people are being pushed to think about what they believe and evidence what they teach. Especially since the average sports team is coached by someone who puts <10% of the effort into being a professional coach, compared to the effort they put in to be a good competitor.

I don't see how him being asked to come and teach seminars, classes, etc. and receive payment for his time, effort, and knowledge is any different than what ANY jiu-jitsu instructor does for a living. My point is, he's not looking to make a fortune on Ecological Dynamics or applying CLA to jiu-jitsu as a means of becoming a millionaire. He worked hard to develop a deep understanding of the science behind this method and people are benefitting from it, so he deserves compensation for his work when he's called upon - just like anyone else - and in my opinion he's probably not expecting ENOUGH. Either way man, we're all different, I agree to on that. I'm sure the research will yield evolving results regarding motor skill development. When better stuff comes out I'll adopt as much of that as I can, too. But for right now, the overwhelming results point toward this being far better than alligator crawls, shrimps up and down the mat, and zero-resistance instruction and drilling practice.

Thinking is good, yes. Dogma prevents that. Anybody who says 'only THIS way is good' is not somebody I am likely to engage with.

I don't think anybody sensible believes zero resistance training is a good idea, if that was all somebody ever did. Bruce Lee was saying that decades ago. The 'dead drilling' thing is a straw man argument these days, in my experience. It's just a starting point, to learn the mechanics, but then add increasing levels of resistance.

But it's not. It still makes up the MAJORITY of jiu-jitsu practice at a lot of schools. Rote repetition practice followed by open sparring. If your technique of the day was a specific triangle choke set-up, your students may see that one time during all the live rolls that evening - versus putting them in that small-sided game where they get to explore the diamond, for example, and learn to maintain that position long enough to search defeat the defense mechanisms put forth by the other player. They will probably get 5-10x the 'reps' of that triangle set-up and finish in that fashion, exponentially improving their game intelligence in that area. Multiply that by how many times that student shows up per week, over the course of months and years, and it becomes more clear how much faster and better an athlete can become with this approach. Check out a classic Gracie gym and watch the format. They are LUCKY to get 3-5 rounds of sparring against live resistance. Even if the student's focal point is self-defense, if you aren't spending a considerable amount of time dealing with and overcoming pressure, resistance, etc. then you are setting yourself up for cognitive dissonance.

I dispute that it's the majority at a lot of schools. I've been to plenty of gyms, that was not my experience. But it would be interesting to see proper research into the state of BJJ teaching across various countries, if somebody with an academic background in a relevant subject ever wanted to undertake that.