Rules for main forums
- Be nice
- No advertisement
- No events
- No fundraisers
- No topics asking for votes
- Only posts related to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
Ecological method of teaching/training
2 year(s) ago • 9480 views • 228 replies
ARBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
Get used to that sort of feedback. I hear it regularly since I started running CLA sessions at the gym I train at in preparation for setting up my own academy. People learn more, learn it quicker and get a great workout in the process.
What are your go to resources for game ideas?
IBlack beltVerified
CRBrown beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
https://slimemoldgrapplin[...]index.html
That's a fantastic resource, thanks for sharing. It's fun to see that a number of the games are things I've also used (e.g. break the grip in armbar, maintaining the RNC). Something I like looking at, which I think comes under CLA, is modifying variables particularly when one partner is much more advanced. This could be things like the more advanced partner has less time to work the escape, or has to satisfy some other condition first before a win can be counted, or has to do it with their weaker side etc.
For maintaining the RNC / finishing it, I would get more advanced people to start in more disadvantageous positions, e.g. belly down, belly down with hands trapped under themselves etc, or with a time limit to escape.
I didn't realise some of this is similar or could come under CLA until this past weekend when I went to a longsword seminar for HEMA and the instructor explicitly used CLA and was telling us the benefits (seminar was largely aimed at coaches) of using it when teaching HEMA. A lot of the games he had us playing were in essence (if not in form) similar to what I like coaching in BJJ
For maintaining the RNC / finishing it, I would get more advanced people to start in more disadvantageous positions, e.g. belly down, belly down with hands trapped under themselves etc, or with a time limit to escape.
I didn't realise some of this is similar or could come under CLA until this past weekend when I went to a longsword seminar for HEMA and the instructor explicitly used CLA and was telling us the benefits (seminar was largely aimed at coaches) of using it when teaching HEMA. A lot of the games he had us playing were in essence (if not in form) similar to what I like coaching in BJJ
FBlue beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
My current coach is into this method of training, and to be honest I find the sessions very engaging and the material is sticking.
![Slideyfoot [jun]](userimg/5e25cf311adfd.jpg){kind=small}
SJBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
6 month(s) ago
I'm still not a fan of classes that are exclusively CLA, but I like to throw in some games after teaching and drilling a technique. So this thread has continued to be useful, thanks all. :)
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I'm still not a fan of classes that are exclusively CLA, but I like to throw in some games after teaching and drilling a technique. So this thread has continued to be useful, thanks all. :)
My take is that there is not one method that is always best. I use CLA and my lessons are almost all games, but I also add movement drills as warmups and in some games I have a predetermined winner - so opponent is resisting just so much that other can make his move. Also I give tips what might work or basic concepts about the situation - what is the fight actually about... That would not be ecological approach, and I know it can make students think about moves too much. I am not worried about it, because playing games will fix it. (At Grapplers guide I am "crossover" so I used to get a lot of help from you :-)
CGBlack belt 4th degreeVerified
6 month(s) ago
Also I give tips what might work or basic concepts about the situation - what is the fight actually about... That would not be ecological approach
Any eco bros who want to chip in on this one?
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
Any eco bros who want to chip in on this one?
Did I make a mistake in saying something about eco? Should have not mentioned eco. In this case that something is not eco? To be careful I have called my lessons ”short situational sparring games”. Games might have a task and constraits and some way to win a game. I do like to use Rob Biernacki’s ”Unified theory” to explain what might be happening.
SJBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
6 month(s) ago
People do seem to get quite precious about the terminology.
Though I guess I'd also get annoyed if some traditional jujitsu club was claiming to teach BJJ, then shrugged and said the terms don't matter.
Though I guess I'd also get annoyed if some traditional jujitsu club was claiming to teach BJJ, then shrugged and said the terms don't matter.
RCBlack belt 2nd degreeVerified
6 month(s) ago
Last night I lead my first CLA class. I was really happy with the results. I was lucky to have a 2 hour facetime with Priit a few weeks ago. He helped me with resources and potential issue that may arise when trying to come up with a plan. I did "Wrestling For Takedowns without Takedowns". I followed Rob Cole's model with a few modifications. It was a gi class. I had fantastic feedback. I even had one purple belt come up after and tell me that it was the best class he's ever taken at our academy. Made me feel really good. So I'll keep learning and try to add it in to all my classes now. :)
Nice! I'm glad it went well Anthony 🔥
If anyone is interested in learning/how to apply the Constraints-Led Approach I have 6 videos on the Globetrotters YouTube and 2 on the Ecological Dynamics for Submission Grappling YouTube
Ecological Dynamics is just a theory of motor learning and 1 of the training methods is the CLA (Constraints-Led Approach)
Also, I would suggest 2 books to start with to help understand the theory and the method
"How We Learn To Move" by Rob Gray for the Ecological Approach side and "The Constraints-Led Approach" by Keith Davids and Ian Renshaw for applying the CLA
Also, my most recent podcast that goes over a lot of common misconceptions about the approach was on 1-800-BJJ-HELP if you're interested
If anyone is interested in learning/how to apply the Constraints-Led Approach I have 6 videos on the Globetrotters YouTube and 2 on the Ecological Dynamics for Submission Grappling YouTube
Ecological Dynamics is just a theory of motor learning and 1 of the training methods is the CLA (Constraints-Led Approach)
Also, I would suggest 2 books to start with to help understand the theory and the method
"How We Learn To Move" by Rob Gray for the Ecological Approach side and "The Constraints-Led Approach" by Keith Davids and Ian Renshaw for applying the CLA
Also, my most recent podcast that goes over a lot of common misconceptions about the approach was on 1-800-BJJ-HELP if you're interested
RCBlack belt 2nd degreeVerified
6 month(s) ago
Just a quick overview (if anyone cares lol)
Ecological Dynamics is just the lens at which a coach views practice, at a base level you need to believe/make assumptions that perception is direct and understand self-organization
The Constraints-Led Approach has 4 main principles
Session Intention, Constrain to Afford, Representative Learning Design and Repetition without Repetition
With those things as a guide/framework, and through your own understanding of grappling you can start designing practice and CLA activities
Ecological Dynamics is just the lens at which a coach views practice, at a base level you need to believe/make assumptions that perception is direct and understand self-organization
The Constraints-Led Approach has 4 main principles
Session Intention, Constrain to Afford, Representative Learning Design and Repetition without Repetition
With those things as a guide/framework, and through your own understanding of grappling you can start designing practice and CLA activities
IBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I still need to dig into the specific CLA studies to see if I believe that they apply specifically to jiu jitsu because all I hear about CLA is Greg talking without quoting ANY literature. I have not read the studies but my gut reaction is to say the idea of not doing repetitive movement to learn something seems unintuitive. It actually slaps every musicians life experience in the face, because nearly all instruments are learned by repetition until you can get advanced enough to play without memorization. No one learns an instrument by saying "make up your own song, and figure out the chords as you go along".
I don't mean this to start a debate about it, because I haven't studied the literature so don't have a foot hold for debate. But I think a lot of things I've heard Greg say are just demonstrably inaccurate.
I don't mean this to start a debate about it, because I haven't studied the literature so don't have a foot hold for debate. But I think a lot of things I've heard Greg say are just demonstrably inaccurate.
CRBrown beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I'm still not a fan of classes that are exclusively CLA, but I like to throw in some games after teaching and drilling a technique. So this thread has continued to be useful, thanks all. :)
When I was teaching, this was essentially it. The way I see it, without having really delved into the literature on CLA so this may well be covered in that, but there are techniques that are sport specific to BJJ (e.g. submissions) that I don't think could emerge naturally. Similarly, there are movements that are more optimal than others that might seem a bit counterintuitive (e.g. upa). I think those specific techniques and movements though need contextualisation through things like games, and isolating moments in a roll to work on these things in a game fashion can help a lot with that. Like on one end of the spectrum, there's dead drilling followed by live rolling, where you sort of need to put the pieces together yourself where the game can change so much during a roll (through so many positions etc). On the other end, there's introducing games and so on to let things emerge naturally, which if taken to an extreme I think is essentially getting people to re-discover what has already been learned. I would be surprised if the latter is a real representation of how CLA is intended to work but I'm presenting it as something that someone could come away thinking of it after having heard about it.
I prefer somewhere in the middle, where what has been proven to work / be optimal for different positions is demonstrated, but then closely followed by games to work on aspects of those. Basically "these techniques work, but here are some opportunities for you to get them to work for you".
I prefer somewhere in the middle, where what has been proven to work / be optimal for different positions is demonstrated, but then closely followed by games to work on aspects of those. Basically "these techniques work, but here are some opportunities for you to get them to work for you".
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I run a weekly BJJ session where my approach is built around short game based situational sparring. Instead of teaching a "move of the day," I use specific positional tasks to help students discover core principles, heavily utilizing Rob Biernack’s framework (Alignment, Frames, Levers, etc.).
For example, I’ll set up a scenario where the bottom player’s goal is to sweep, while the top player’s only goal is to maintain their base and posture without attempting to pass. Through these tasks, I try to open up the underlying principles of the position. While I might occasionally point out that a certain grip is more efficient or a specific direction of force is more advantageous, the focus is never on rigid choreography.
The Challenge:
Since I only lead one session a week, I’ve noticed a recurring pattern: students often struggle to look past the "technique." They spend their mental energy trying to remember what the specific move was, rather than focusing on the intent or the goal of the task. They seem to be searching for a recipe instead of feeling out the mechanics.
Has anyone else found effective ways to shift the students' focus from "memorizing moves" to "understanding intentions," especially in a limited once-a-week window? How do you reinforce that the "short game" is about the principle, not the sequence?
For example, I’ll set up a scenario where the bottom player’s goal is to sweep, while the top player’s only goal is to maintain their base and posture without attempting to pass. Through these tasks, I try to open up the underlying principles of the position. While I might occasionally point out that a certain grip is more efficient or a specific direction of force is more advantageous, the focus is never on rigid choreography.
The Challenge:
Since I only lead one session a week, I’ve noticed a recurring pattern: students often struggle to look past the "technique." They spend their mental energy trying to remember what the specific move was, rather than focusing on the intent or the goal of the task. They seem to be searching for a recipe instead of feeling out the mechanics.
Has anyone else found effective ways to shift the students' focus from "memorizing moves" to "understanding intentions," especially in a limited once-a-week window? How do you reinforce that the "short game" is about the principle, not the sequence?
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
The theoretical foundation of the ecological approach dates back to the 1960s. Its leading figure, James J. Gibson, published its core concepts during the 1970s and 1980s. Rob Gray frequently references Gibson's work in his own research and coaching materials.
While the approach has been utilized in the coaching of various sports for at least 20 years, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a relatively new addition to this group.
However, it is worth noting that there is no consensus among researchers regarding the absolute superiority of any single skill acquisition method over others. Scientific literature often points out that definitive empirical evidence crowning one approach as universally better remains elusive.
While the approach has been utilized in the coaching of various sports for at least 20 years, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a relatively new addition to this group.
However, it is worth noting that there is no consensus among researchers regarding the absolute superiority of any single skill acquisition method over others. Scientific literature often points out that definitive empirical evidence crowning one approach as universally better remains elusive.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I run a weekly BJJ session where my approach is built around short game based situational sparring. Instead of teaching a "move of the day," I use specific positional tasks to help students discover core principles, heavily utilizing Rob Biernack’s framework (Alignment, Frames, Levers, etc.). For example, I’ll set up a scenario where the bottom player’s goal is to sweep, while the top player’s only goal is to maintain their base and posture without attempting to pass. Through these tasks, I try to open up the underlying principles of the position. While I might occasionally point out that a certain grip is more efficient or a specific direction of force is more advantageous, the focus is never on rigid choreography. The Challenge: Since I only lead one session a week, I’ve noticed a recurring pattern: students often struggle to look past the "technique." They spend their mental energy trying to remember what the specific move was, rather than focusing on the intent or the goal of the task. They seem to be searching for a recipe instead of feeling out the mechanics. Has anyone else found effective ways to shift the students' focus from "memorizing moves" to "understanding intentions," especially in a limited once-a-week window? How do you reinforce that the "short game" is about the principle, not the sequence?
I have found that step by steps definitly change the dynamics in the room from exploring to reproduction.
In my experience this only works well when a solution comes when they have genuinely experienced the problem. That is only rarely the case for a whole room.
So if i feel a student or a group of students have genuinely experienced a problem I tend to mind the following rules of thumb when showing specific solutions:
1. focus more on the result of a solution than on a specific form of execution
2. start them off in the lowest variability stage
3. keep the possibility open for different ways of achieving success
Rule number 1 i think is the most important, because it describes well the change in approach that CLA necessitates. Rather than saying:
<p style="text-indent: 2em;"><i> "RDLR is placing your leg here, hand here, frame on the armpit, bring your knees together... yaddayadda" </i> </p>
I focus on the result, so that would be:
<p style="text-indent: 2em;"><i> "Start off like this [demonstrate], your goal is to get either of their legs extended, just mind that in doing so you should always be facing your opponent until you actually have the leg fully extended"</i> </p>
of course i need them to have a save space to explore so i tell their partners: <i>our mindset is not looking for a pass, we are going to enter their RDLR and stay safe there for as long as we can</i>. "Fuck their RDLR" Biernacki would say. But also, it's basically doing the Dante Leon.
So you get one partner trying to extend the leg, and in a full class focusing on RDLR it would also be keeping a heel and knee off the floor. and the other partner just balancing and angling themselves off to stay safe. And then gradually build it up to fully entangling, sweeping and passing etc.
Rule number 2: say i'm teaching an armbar. i'm looking to put my students in the lowest variability stage as possible. That is usually the very last stage. Again, the instruction is on the partner not om them. So it's more like <i>"hold their elbow line, stop their far shoulder from moving relative to you. while doing so look to fully extend their arm."</i> I try to let them achieve a certain amount of success in those positions and then i introduce more variability, usually by removing a control and instruct them to get that back.
Rule number 3: By focussing on the result my hope is that they will find either their own way or more preferably a totally new way to achieve the goal i've set them. I think that is just very exciting and again: it keeps the option for exploration open. What i need them to ultimately be able to do is problem solve live.
In the end CLA requires a coach to really think differently about BJJ than we have done in the past decades. Rather than focussing on yourself, it is increasingly important to focus on result and to understand the dymanics that influence that problem and the solutions. In a lot of respects the coaching becomes more difficult, but the Jiu Jitsu becomes more easy
In my experience this only works well when a solution comes when they have genuinely experienced the problem. That is only rarely the case for a whole room.
So if i feel a student or a group of students have genuinely experienced a problem I tend to mind the following rules of thumb when showing specific solutions:
1. focus more on the result of a solution than on a specific form of execution
2. start them off in the lowest variability stage
3. keep the possibility open for different ways of achieving success
Rule number 1 i think is the most important, because it describes well the change in approach that CLA necessitates. Rather than saying:
<p style="text-indent: 2em;"><i> "RDLR is placing your leg here, hand here, frame on the armpit, bring your knees together... yaddayadda" </i> </p>
I focus on the result, so that would be:
<p style="text-indent: 2em;"><i> "Start off like this [demonstrate], your goal is to get either of their legs extended, just mind that in doing so you should always be facing your opponent until you actually have the leg fully extended"</i> </p>
of course i need them to have a save space to explore so i tell their partners: <i>our mindset is not looking for a pass, we are going to enter their RDLR and stay safe there for as long as we can</i>. "Fuck their RDLR" Biernacki would say. But also, it's basically doing the Dante Leon.
So you get one partner trying to extend the leg, and in a full class focusing on RDLR it would also be keeping a heel and knee off the floor. and the other partner just balancing and angling themselves off to stay safe. And then gradually build it up to fully entangling, sweeping and passing etc.
Rule number 2: say i'm teaching an armbar. i'm looking to put my students in the lowest variability stage as possible. That is usually the very last stage. Again, the instruction is on the partner not om them. So it's more like <i>"hold their elbow line, stop their far shoulder from moving relative to you. while doing so look to fully extend their arm."</i> I try to let them achieve a certain amount of success in those positions and then i introduce more variability, usually by removing a control and instruct them to get that back.
Rule number 3: By focussing on the result my hope is that they will find either their own way or more preferably a totally new way to achieve the goal i've set them. I think that is just very exciting and again: it keeps the option for exploration open. What i need them to ultimately be able to do is problem solve live.
In the end CLA requires a coach to really think differently about BJJ than we have done in the past decades. Rather than focussing on yourself, it is increasingly important to focus on result and to understand the dymanics that influence that problem and the solutions. In a lot of respects the coaching becomes more difficult, but the Jiu Jitsu becomes more easy
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I have found that step by steps definitly change the dynamics in the room from exploring to reproduction. In my experience this only works well when a solution comes when they have genuinely experienced the problem. That is only rarely the case for a whole room. So if i feel a student or a group of students have genuinely experienced a problem I tend to mind the following rules of thumb when showing specific solutions: 1. focus more on the result of a solution than on a specific form of execution 2. start them off in the lowest variability stage 3. keep the possibility open for different ways of achieving success Rule number 1 i think is the most important, because it describes well the change in approach that CLA necessitates. Rather than saying: "RDLR is placing your leg here, hand here, frame on the armpit, bring your knees together... yaddayadda" I focus on the result, so that would be: "Start off like this [demonstrate], your goal is to get either of their legs extended, just mind that in doing so you should always be facing your opponent until you actually have the leg fully extended" of course i need them to have a save space to explore so i tell their partners: our mindset is not looking for a pass, we are going to enter their RDLR and stay safe there for as long as we can. "Fuck their RDLR" Biernacki would say. But also, it's basically doing the Dante Leon. So you get one partner trying to extend the leg, and in a full class focusing on RDLR it would also be keeping a heel and knee off the floor. and the other partner just balancing and angling themselves off to stay safe. And then gradually build it up to fully entangling, sweeping and passing etc. Rule number 2: say i'm teaching an armbar. i'm looking to put my students in the lowest variability stage as possible. That is usually the very last stage. Again, the instruction is on the partner not om them. So it's more like "hold their elbow line, stop their far shoulder from moving relative to you. while doing so look to fully extend their arm." I try to let them achieve a certain amount of success in those positions and then i introduce more variability, usually by removing a control and instruct them to get that back. Rule number 3: By focussing on the result my hope is that they will find either their own way or more preferably a totally new way to achieve the goal i've set them. I think that is just very exciting and again: it keeps the option for exploration open. What i need them to ultimately be able to do is problem solve live. In the end CLA requires a coach to really think differently about BJJ than we have done in the past decades. Rather than focussing on yourself, it is increasingly important to focus on result and to understand the dymanics that influence that problem and the solutions. In a lot of respects the coaching becomes more difficult, but the Jiu Jitsu becomes more easy
Very helpful. I need to make the problem clear. That is what the "fight" is about. Maybe playing a situation without constraits first would clear a problem? Something happens like gripping or unbalancing and after demonstration or feeling the situation, students would understand a problem better? If there is no problem, maybe it is not the right time to start solving it? Just move on to a new situation and come back when someones games has developed so that a problem is real?
Also starting with more constraits, but also moving faster forward can help. It is not good if you always win or always loose. Have to find a good balance to keep every one motivated. By adjusting constraits we can help to balance the score. Constraits just need to be options that could have happened - not random constrictions.
Well I have almost a weeks time to design next weeks short situational sparring games :-)
Also starting with more constraits, but also moving faster forward can help. It is not good if you always win or always loose. Have to find a good balance to keep every one motivated. By adjusting constraits we can help to balance the score. Constraits just need to be options that could have happened - not random constrictions.
Well I have almost a weeks time to design next weeks short situational sparring games :-)
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I can help if you want. Just share your plans here and i can offer some feedback?
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I can help if you want. Just share your plans here and i can offer some feedback?
The Tuesday session starts with a standing warmup where both partners start on their feet. One person provides reactions by pushing, pulling, or rotating. Instead of just following the movement, the other person's task is to exploit that energy and continue the momentum. Specifically, when met with a push, the goal is to use that force to time a sweep, aiming to tap the foot that the partner is pivoting around.
Continuing the warmup on the mats, we practiced the "spin around" movement. This is for when an opponent is escaping side control and you need to spin to the opposite side. This was a requested drill, so we kept it as a technical movement rather than a live game.
The first live game was FYJJ Seated Guard Sweeps. We’ve played this a few times now, but last time I felt the group was overthinking the "correct" way to perform specific techniques instead of focusing on the flow of the game.
We then introduced a new FYJJ Passing game based on Rob Biernacki’s concepts, focusing on guard retention. I want to connect this to the "feel" and connection established in the first warmup. The passer’s goal is to observe the guard player’s movements and learn to react to them dynamically.
Continuing the warmup on the mats, we practiced the "spin around" movement. This is for when an opponent is escaping side control and you need to spin to the opposite side. This was a requested drill, so we kept it as a technical movement rather than a live game.
The first live game was FYJJ Seated Guard Sweeps. We’ve played this a few times now, but last time I felt the group was overthinking the "correct" way to perform specific techniques instead of focusing on the flow of the game.
We then introduced a new FYJJ Passing game based on Rob Biernacki’s concepts, focusing on guard retention. I want to connect this to the "feel" and connection established in the first warmup. The passer’s goal is to observe the guard player’s movements and learn to react to them dynamically.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
Now, you will find that the cues you give a group are where the art of coaching really comes into play. I'm going to suggest some cues for the FYJJ Guard Sweeps that I use a lot, but I recently found that in a different context those cues might not work at all. So don't take it as scripture.
For the FYJJGS i usually instruct the bottom person to: Make sure they are always in a position where they can
<b>0. carry weight with their legs (i call this playing aeroplane, as you would with a kid).</b>
1. (nogi specifically) make connections behind the elbows and knees
And then
<b>2. See if they can fully extend, fully bend or block a limb ⇒ Get the hips or the hands to the mat</b>
(i usually demonstrate an x-guard for the leg extension, an armdrag for an arm extension and a tripod for a block. But i think it's better to show different things)
From there their goal should always be to get the shoulders or hips to the mat and win the hip height battle.
For the Guard passing/retention thing i can advise to be very explicit on the win conditions. Otherwise it'll just turn into sparring. No one will learn a thing. Do you have an idea of the skill you want the top and bottom players to develop in that drill?
The first one is gonna be a tough one, because you want them to self organize towards a specific outcome. I would definitly suggest constraining that one differently. Here's what I fear will be the result: people giving the attacking player very unrealistic actions to react upon and then maybe not giving the attacker any leeway at all or falling way too easily. Neither will translate into transferrable skill. Do you agree?
For the FYJJGS i usually instruct the bottom person to: Make sure they are always in a position where they can
<b>0. carry weight with their legs (i call this playing aeroplane, as you would with a kid).</b>
1. (nogi specifically) make connections behind the elbows and knees
And then
<b>2. See if they can fully extend, fully bend or block a limb ⇒ Get the hips or the hands to the mat</b>
(i usually demonstrate an x-guard for the leg extension, an armdrag for an arm extension and a tripod for a block. But i think it's better to show different things)
From there their goal should always be to get the shoulders or hips to the mat and win the hip height battle.
For the Guard passing/retention thing i can advise to be very explicit on the win conditions. Otherwise it'll just turn into sparring. No one will learn a thing. Do you have an idea of the skill you want the top and bottom players to develop in that drill?
The first one is gonna be a tough one, because you want them to self organize towards a specific outcome. I would definitly suggest constraining that one differently. Here's what I fear will be the result: people giving the attacking player very unrealistic actions to react upon and then maybe not giving the attacker any leeway at all or falling way too easily. Neither will translate into transferrable skill. Do you agree?
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
For the sweep game I modified it a little. It is from seated guard and passer just steps between opponent legs. We have played some guard passing games from seated guard against standing passer. Those worked fine. I am hoping to see shin to shin guard, unfair single, ankle pick or some kind of douple leg or backdoor from the sweeper.
For passing game supine guard vs passer. Mostly standing I expect atleast one student to use a pressure type of approach. I need to make the constraits so that it does not happen, because that is all he uses. So no grips for guard player. No clamp guard. For passer what would prevent using a tripod type of pass where he pins opponent with his head and passes? Other than just saying dont do that :-)
Success rate on a game should be 30-70%. Not always winning or loosing.
For passing game supine guard vs passer. Mostly standing I expect atleast one student to use a pressure type of approach. I need to make the constraits so that it does not happen, because that is all he uses. So no grips for guard player. No clamp guard. For passer what would prevent using a tripod type of pass where he pins opponent with his head and passes? Other than just saying dont do that :-)
Success rate on a game should be 30-70%. Not always winning or loosing.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
<i>For the sweep game I modified it a little. It is from seated guard and passer just steps between opponent legs. We have played some guard passing games from seated guard against standing passer. Those worked fine. I am hoping to see shin to shin guard, unfair single, ankle pick or some kind of douple leg or backdoor from the sweeper.</i>
I think one of the hardest things about CLA is that hoping is mostly all you can do if you're expecting very specific results. Unless you somehow prime your students to those solutions. That may or may not be your thing. I'm curious how it plays out! It is helpfull however if you have an explicit idea of which skills you want them to develop in the game.
<i>For passing game supine guard vs passer. Mostly standing I expect atleast one student to use a pressure type of approach. I need to make the constraits so that it does not happen, because that is all he uses. So no grips for guard player. No clamp guard. For passer what would prevent using a tripod type of pass where he pins opponent with his head and passes? Other than just saying dont do that :-)</i>
Again we need to know what skill you are actually trying to develop with the top and bottom player? Usually stating the target skill explicitly helps a great deal in deciding constraints. The game isnt the goal in itself right?
That one player you're trying to force out of his comfort zone. I like that. I could imagine simply something like: you can only contact your partner's upper body with your shins. But that is assuming you want to develop te skill of loose outside passing? You're gonna have to help me out there.
I think one of the hardest things about CLA is that hoping is mostly all you can do if you're expecting very specific results. Unless you somehow prime your students to those solutions. That may or may not be your thing. I'm curious how it plays out! It is helpfull however if you have an explicit idea of which skills you want them to develop in the game.
<i>For passing game supine guard vs passer. Mostly standing I expect atleast one student to use a pressure type of approach. I need to make the constraits so that it does not happen, because that is all he uses. So no grips for guard player. No clamp guard. For passer what would prevent using a tripod type of pass where he pins opponent with his head and passes? Other than just saying dont do that :-)</i>
Again we need to know what skill you are actually trying to develop with the top and bottom player? Usually stating the target skill explicitly helps a great deal in deciding constraints. The game isnt the goal in itself right?
That one player you're trying to force out of his comfort zone. I like that. I could imagine simply something like: you can only contact your partner's upper body with your shins. But that is assuming you want to develop te skill of loose outside passing? You're gonna have to help me out there.
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I think one of the hardest things about CLA is that hoping is mostly all you can do if you're expecting very specific results. Unless you somehow prime your students to those solutions. That may or may not be your thing. I'm curious how it plays out! It is helpfull however if you have an explicit idea of which skills you want them to develop in the game. Again we need to know what skill you are actually trying to develop with the top and bottom player? Usually stating the target skill explicitly helps a great deal in deciding constraints. The game isnt the goal in itself right? That one player you're trying to force out of his comfort zone. I like that. I could imagine simply something like: you can only contact your partner's upper body with your shins. But that is assuming you want to develop te skill of loose outside passing? You're gonna have to help me out there.
For sweeping game, I am hoping some kind of continues unbalancing. Some kind of flow.
For passing game I am hoping that passer would feel opponents movement and react to guard retension movements. Learns to predict what most likely is coming and guard player learns to keep atleast one foot inside and get three points of contact as soon as possible.
For the pressure passer. His task could be to get knee on belly? Then he has to pass more upright…maybe.
For passing game I am hoping that passer would feel opponents movement and react to guard retension movements. Learns to predict what most likely is coming and guard player learns to keep atleast one foot inside and get three points of contact as soon as possible.
For the pressure passer. His task could be to get knee on belly? Then he has to pass more upright…maybe.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
Ah i like that. My experience with continuous off-balancing is that you want them to sequence lifting a heel of an extended leg off the floor and keeping the head lower than the hips.
I the guard passing game i also recognize your desire for the students to sequence (re)actions.
So, i think about it like this: <b>Instruction should be geared towards making relevant information in the environment available or more salient.</b>
So for the sweeping game we want to say something that makes the guard player constantly aware of information that they need to keep a heel off the floor, or the head below the hips. The result of their work should be obvious: the hips will be on the floor, or at least one hand will be posted. Those are very visual cues of success.
<p style="text-indent: 50px;">Keep in mind though, that. sequencing requires a lot of trial and error. It requires students to learn from the way their partners react to their attempts and for them to formulate responses.
So you have to make them very aware that this is expected of them and allow them plenty of time. One way to do so might be to award a point for each successful destablization and tasking them to maximize points. This however creates an exercise that has a different character than Rob's FYJJ. </p>
For the loose passing exercise the same goes. What do you have to say to highlight the information that they need to pick up on, so they can successfully start reacting to guard retention movements? How your students will behave will be very dependent on what information you tell them to focus on.
For instance, i tell them to choose grips that allow them to stay outside of the line of their partner's feet. I also tell them to keep the knees off the ground at all times, and I don't allow body to body connection. But it sounds like perhaps you have a different style of passing in mind, which might require different sets of cues
I the guard passing game i also recognize your desire for the students to sequence (re)actions.
So, i think about it like this: <b>Instruction should be geared towards making relevant information in the environment available or more salient.</b>
So for the sweeping game we want to say something that makes the guard player constantly aware of information that they need to keep a heel off the floor, or the head below the hips. The result of their work should be obvious: the hips will be on the floor, or at least one hand will be posted. Those are very visual cues of success.
<p style="text-indent: 50px;">Keep in mind though, that. sequencing requires a lot of trial and error. It requires students to learn from the way their partners react to their attempts and for them to formulate responses.
So you have to make them very aware that this is expected of them and allow them plenty of time. One way to do so might be to award a point for each successful destablization and tasking them to maximize points. This however creates an exercise that has a different character than Rob's FYJJ. </p>
For the loose passing exercise the same goes. What do you have to say to highlight the information that they need to pick up on, so they can successfully start reacting to guard retention movements? How your students will behave will be very dependent on what information you tell them to focus on.
For instance, i tell them to choose grips that allow them to stay outside of the line of their partner's feet. I also tell them to keep the knees off the ground at all times, and I don't allow body to body connection. But it sounds like perhaps you have a different style of passing in mind, which might require different sets of cues
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I will film next tuesdays session. It makes developing games easier.
Student have not seen my passing. Only some game demonstrations. I do like to use as much as I can my body for passing. Legs against legs and wedging and pressuring to get reactions.
This discussion has made my own goals for students reaction much clearer. Hope you have time to comment on next tuesdays clips.
Student have not seen my passing. Only some game demonstrations. I do like to use as much as I can my body for passing. Legs against legs and wedging and pressuring to get reactions.
This discussion has made my own goals for students reaction much clearer. Hope you have time to comment on next tuesdays clips.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
Absolutely! Looking forward to it!
HLPurple beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I have a couple of conceptual seeds for Tuesday's training. In principle, if I want flow-style movement, it means not getting stuck holding a single position or grip—at least if the control isn't actually moving the opponent. This can happen if the passer drops their center of gravity very low. Perhaps the first goal in the game could be simply to off-balance the opponent—not even getting a hand or hip to the mat. If the off-balancing (kuzushi) succeeds, the next goal could be getting a hand or hip to the mat, and eventually, a full sweep?
The second idea relates to "connection." At the start of training, we warm up with a dance exercise that introduces the push-pull mechanic. When actually applying an opponent's push, for example, we want to redirect the pushing body or limb to the side simultaneously as we pull. So: push-pull-redirect? In the passing game, we could initially ask the passer to stay "in the pocket" and constantly look for entries or initiate them. Maybe a couple of rounds could be done where the passer doesn't actually need to pass; instead, the guard player refines their recovery movements while the passer gets a feel for the rhythm and learns to anticipate those recoveries?
The second idea relates to "connection." At the start of training, we warm up with a dance exercise that introduces the push-pull mechanic. When actually applying an opponent's push, for example, we want to redirect the pushing body or limb to the side simultaneously as we pull. So: push-pull-redirect? In the passing game, we could initially ask the passer to stay "in the pocket" and constantly look for entries or initiate them. Maybe a couple of rounds could be done where the passer doesn't actually need to pass; instead, the guard player refines their recovery movements while the passer gets a feel for the rhythm and learns to anticipate those recoveries?
BVBlack belt 2nd degreeVerified
6 month(s) ago
Lately I’ve been experimenting more deliberately with CLA in my classes. Mixed results, of course, but that’s part of the process. One approach that’s been working extremely well is starting with the end-state.
This week I taught the triangle from guard to complete beginners. I first had them run a clean, step‑by‑step finishing sequence from the fully locked triangle. Once they understood the “destination,” I dropped them into different guard configurations and added constraints so they had to navigate their way back to that same finishing structure.
Surprisingly effective for first‑timers.
This week I taught the triangle from guard to complete beginners. I first had them run a clean, step‑by‑step finishing sequence from the fully locked triangle. Once they understood the “destination,” I dropped them into different guard configurations and added constraints so they had to navigate their way back to that same finishing structure.
Surprisingly effective for first‑timers.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
I like how you’re thinking about it. Trying it is the only way to know for sure.
If i had to point out a worry it’s that you should be mindful of the following principle:
<b>keep the exercise as close to sparring as possible. </b>
Think of it each exercise as a sparring match, but with these constraints that limit the space students can explore.
My worry is that if the exercise doesnt resemble sparring closely enough, their efforts will make them better at that exercise, but not better at jj.
If i had to point out a worry it’s that you should be mindful of the following principle:
<b>keep the exercise as close to sparring as possible. </b>
Think of it each exercise as a sparring match, but with these constraints that limit the space students can explore.
My worry is that if the exercise doesnt resemble sparring closely enough, their efforts will make them better at that exercise, but not better at jj.
LSBlack beltVerified
6 month(s) ago
Lately I’ve been experimenting more deliberately with CLA in my classes. Mixed results, of course, but that’s part of the process. One approach that’s been working extremely well is starting with the end-state. This week I taught the triangle from guard to complete beginners. I first had them run a clean, step‑by‑step finishing sequence from the fully locked triangle. Once they understood the “destination,” I dropped them into different guard configurations and added constraints so they had to navigate their way back to that same finishing structure. Surprisingly effective for first‑timers.
Im a firm believer in this. It is what i meant with starting in the lowest variability state possible.
Then you gradually introduce more variability
Then you gradually introduce more variability
