SHODAN PART 5: SHIAI
Part 5 of Jan de Jong's (JDJ) jujutsu shodan grading is shiai.
Why Shiai Gradings?
The first question that has to be asked is, why did JDJ include shiai gradings in his jujutsu grading system? That question needs to be asked in the context of the fact that JDJ did not see much of value in shiai as a training method.
I know this for a fact because he specifically told me so and discouraged the practice when I was 'sparring' with a training partner when orange or purple belt. It was reinforced by Robert Hymas, a senior jujutsu instructor at the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS) and who was one of the three that JDJ ultimately awarded Rokudan, when he reiterated JDJ's views from the JDJ perspective.
So why did JDJ introduce shiai gradings into his jujutsu grading system?
One explanation is that he was unfamiliar with grading systems, as has previously been mentioned, and he saw others were including shiai-type gradings into their grading systems. Kodokan Judo for instance. Then there was Tomiki Aikido/Shodokan Aikido and their competition aikido. Karate. Kyokushin karate and their x-man kumite. All of those forms of training were to be found in books, which as previously stated, were a great source of JDJ's 'continuous professional development.' And, of course, the Australian Ju Jitsu Association were lobbying for him to develop a competition format for the organisation given his role as President and National Coach of the organisation.
Given all of that, the second question is, did JDJ know what he was trying to teach or assess in the shiai gradings? What was the purpose of those gradings, other than including them because others were and, of course, to populate the higher grades given his one-off development of the kyu grades as his grading system?
I suggest that JDJ did not know what he was trying to teach or assess in these types of gradings. Sacrilege, I know, however, as will be seen below, that view is supported by the fact that there was virtually no instruction provided by JDJ nor his senior instructors as to what to do in these gradings; what they are trying to teach the student; what is being assessed. This is also supported by the fact that JDJ saw very little of value in this type of training. In this, I agree, which will also be seen below.
But, as always, there is a lot to learn by studying JDJ's shiai-type grades and their introduction, even if they serve no useful purpose ... other than to provide those lessons (see conclusion below).
Ikkyu: Futari Dori
When looking for an image for this section (see left), it appears that futari dori is very much an aikido term and an aikido form of training, albeit very different to JDJ's grading referred to by the same name.
I recently saw a video posted on Facebook by a JDJ ryuha showing a nikkyu training/demonstration of this grading. (a) It was a mess, and (b) I would fail the candidate based on that performance, today.
The candidate in question should not be disheartened by those comments. Their performance was reflective of all who preceded them in this section of the grading. It was reflective of their instructor's performance in their grading, and reflective of their instructor's instructor's performance in their grading. In this case, the fault most definitely lays with the instructor, as it did in the JDJSDS.
Why is the performance in this grading always a mess. It is because the grading candidates abandon all of their training when engaged in this section of the grading. They start moving around all over the place, crouched in anticipation of an attack, and they are more inclined to move backward rather than forward in response to an attack. Was this their actions in any of the many shinken shobu no kata (practical) gradings that came before, and even the shinken shobu no kata grading that this section is a part of? The answer is a resounding, No!
George S. Patton: 'You fight like you train.' That would not appear to be the case within the JDJ tradition when the shiai-type grades are attempted. This raises a question as to the practicality of the shinken shobu no kata method of training.
When I teach or discuss this grading, I suggest the person think Cpt Algren in The Last Samurai when he is confronted by three assailants armed with swords while he is unarmed. He stands his ground and waits for the attackers to attack, to come to him, and then he responds. The application of the 'mind of no mind' lesson in a life-and-death situation. This is representative of the shinken shobu no kata training.
The above is what should be being looked for in this grading, however, that is what is not being demonstrated in this grading. Why not? Because the instructors do not teach tactics for this grading, other than to place one opponent in front of the other. The same instruction given to 1st mon candidates, aged five or six, in the two-attacker section of their grading. This is an issue that will be taken up when the mon grades are considered.
I was going to share my experience in successfully completing this grading as there is a great deal to learn through the analysis of that experience, however, I'm trying to limit the length of these posts, unsuccessfully so as it appears.
How did I go in this grading? I passed. That is about all I can say about my performance. I, like the abovementioned JDJ ryuha demonstrator, moved 'all over the shop.' My two attackers chased me all over the dojo, and it was a large dojo. Did I execute any successful defensive techniques? A block or two, maybe. No locks, no throws, no takedowns. I didn't land any percussion techniques of my own, but then neither did my attackers. Is a pass in this grading not being hit? Is that what this grading is supposed to teach and assess? Is it simply a game of 'stay away'? I don't know, because my instructors would not appear to have known given their instruction and feedback.
Shodan Shiai
Tanto refers to a knife; tanbo a short stick.
The tanbo and tanto were usually rolled up newspaper which were then taped. Those makeshift training weapons did inflict a fair 'sting' when hit or stabbed with them, and were capable of causing injury, which they did on occasion.
Second, this could be seen to be a relatively fair grading in that the attackers were not trained in fighting/attacking with a tanto or tanbo whereas the defender was trained in defending against tanto and tanbo attacks, to some degree.
It could be seen to be a relatively fair grading ... in theory. In practice, the armed attacker annihilates the unarmed defender. When the two candidates swap roles, the same result occurs. In order to pass the grading, the difference between the two scores has to be within a certain range otherwise both fail.
When I asked a senior instructor what the purpose of this grading was, he replied that it was to show that even with training that a person would be annihilated by an armed, relatively untrained in fighting with that weapon, attacker. And that is what the grading does show, time and time again. Good lesson. Good to know. Thanks. Cheers.
It was a good thing that I did not take that lesson on board when I was confronted by a knife-wielding assailant on two separate occasions (the starting point of my book on a new and better understanding of our natural and learned responses to a threat).
Third, why free fighting unarmed against a knife and unarmed against a short stick? In fact, why one unarmed against two unarmed in the previous grading? Shouldn't the progression be one unarmed against one unarmed, then one against two, and then one unarmed against one armed, and then both armed with the same weapon, etc.? Where is the one unarmed against one unarmed?
Tomiki was a student of Jigoro Kano, founder of Kodokan Judo, and was eventually graded 8th dan by the Kodokan. He became fascinated by Morihei Ueshiba’s aikido and became one his early students. In his ‘On Jujutsu and its Modernisation’, Tomiki argues for two forms of randori training:
When we analyse the essence of attacks, they fall into two general categories:
1. An opponent, from close in, tries to topple (taosu) or restrain (osaeru) you.
2. An opponent, from a distance, tries to strike, lunge at, or kick you, or with a weapon tries to cut or stab you.
...
The system of randori practice that Master Kano formulated is for the situations described in point 1 above; it is the category of nage-waza, where from close in you apply a waza at the collar and sleeve of a Japanese style judo jacket. A system of randori practice where you would avoid your opponent's attack from a distance (as in point 2 above) and then apply a technique would utilize the atemi-waza and kansetsu-waza. Against this latter attack, the attack from a distance, there is a need to establish such system of randori training.
Randori practiced in aikido usually involves two or more opponents. It is not 'free fighting' per se but simply a 'free flowing' attack and defence with no continued fighting. JDJ had relatively little experience with randori training.
Tomiki's shiai (randori) involved an attacker armed with a knife. Did JDJ adopt Tomiki's shiai to continue that the shiai form of grading included in his one-off instructor grading, ikkyu? Did he include these types of gradings in terms of introducing a randori type in ikkyu and a Tomiki type in shodan? Did he include a short stick element because of its use in his pencak silat? ... Why aren't the attackers trained in the use of the weapons in attack mode?
Lastly, my grading, or I should say, our grading. Dave Palmer and my grading, it was something that had not been seen before or since. It was a literal blood bath. Maggie de Jong had to scrub the walls and mop the mats after the grading to remove the blood that had been spilled during the grading. There was a lot of blood.
This has to be expected when you get two real fighters, not just mere martial artists, together and there are no rules, no protective equipment, and when weapons are involved, and told to 'free fight.'
Again, a great deal can be learned from an analysis of my/our grading, however, post length considerations prohibit the sharing of my/our experience and its analysis.
How did Dave and I do in our grading? We passed ... even though the grading ended with Dave being taken to emergency after I punched him in the forehead with a standing fist punch and blood cascaded down his face and the front of his gi. He was attempting to retrieve a weapon that I had knocked out of his hand, and I instinctively punched him when he advanced to do so. He was knocked back the length of a tatami and as he attempted to advance, I instinctively punched him.
We passed even though I was rendered unconscious during the grading when I landed on my head/neck from a sacrifice throw by Dave (btw, great execution of the technique, dangerous, but great nonetheless).
In terms of OHS, our weapons were not taped rolled up newspaper. The knife was a wooden training knife and the tanbo was a piece of PVS piping wrapped in cloth and then taped. When you got hit with those 'training' weapons, you got hit, and the risk of injury increased exponentially. But we wanted to test ourselves, and of course there was no guidance or supervision provided by the senior instructors.
OHS-wise, nobody from the instructors table came to see how I was when I landed on my head/neck from Dave's sacrifice throw, and when a crack from my neck was heard 'like a "roo shooter's" shot' across the dojo, and as I laid on the ground unconscious for a bit. They simply waited for me to rise and continue the grading, which I did, albeit initially by backing off as the fight had become unfair with now two armed Daves advancing on me.
There was no feedback provided at the end of the grading, however, Hymas did approach me (us?) later and said that JDJ was not happy with the grading. JDJ never expressed that sentiment to us. Even then, I thought, 'How can any of the examiners be unhappy with the grading given the complete lack of direction provided by the instructors as to the conduct and purpose of the grading. Given the complete lack of indication as to what is supposedly being assessed.'
Nidan Shiai
This is the only shiai-type grading where there is an equal footing (see above re the absence of one unarmed v one unarmed). It is an equal footing because the two participants are armed with the same weapon. It is also an equal footing because the two participants have not been trained in the use of the knife and knife fighting. 'What is going on here?'
This is indicative of an issue within the JDJ tradition that I will address in a post associated with the mon grades, and that is that the attackers in the JDJ tradition are not taught how to attack properly. This has implications for the training of defensive tactics.
I prepared for this grading. I learned from the previous shiai-type gradings that I'd undertaken.
The two attackers in my futari dori grading in ikkyu were Hymas and Dave Palmer. I asked Hymas to be one of my attackers because I wanted to test myself against the best. My strategy was to stay away from Hymas and to focus on responding to Dave's attacks or to attack Dave when Hymas attacked me. On the face of it, it was a sound strategy, however, as it turns out, it was a floored strategy. Dave was by far the more dangerous opponent.
Dave committed to his attacks. Hymas knew everything that I knew and knew the defences that I might employ against his attack, so he provided uncommitted attacks with a focus on countering my defence. This is a problem in this type of grading. I know everything you know, and you know everything that I know, and that knowledge impacts on tactics and strategies employed in the grading. It also leads to questions regarding the practicalities of the tactics and strategies thus learned in terms of 'real world' application.
I used this insight in my grading. I would faint an attack and observe the response. I'd faint it again and observe the response. If it was the same response, I'd attack with the anticipation of the response and adjust my attack accordingly. This became a strategy that I shared when engaged in my Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree. If I can discern your strategy, I can develop ways to defeat you.
I hadn't trained the futari dori grading with Hymas and Dave prior to the grading. If I had, I might have discerned Hymas' approach to his attacking role and developed a different strategy going into the grading, e.g., stay away from Dave and focus on Hymas.
In the shodan shiai grading, Dave and I did train the grading together prior to engaging in the grading. I learned that Dave tended to not acknowledge a strike and would walk through it to attack me.
Confidence isn't necessarily everything, but it is a big thing. On a rare occasion that we 'trained' this grading in the instructors class, I was paired with Darryl Cook. Cook is a very good practitioner. He is a contemporary of mine. He is aggressive and he is taller than me, bigger than me, and stronger than me. He was armed with the knife and I was unarmed, but I was 'all over him.' He had no answers. I actually felt physically taller and bigger than him. It was as though I was looking down on him from a height. Hymas took Cook aside to give him some advice since he observed that I was 'kicking his butt,' as the Americans would say. Cook returned and raised his knife to my face. Order was restored in the universe, my perception of my size returned to reality, and there was no more butt kicking.
I knew that Dave gained confidence when he walked through my attacks and 'kicked my butt.' The strategy going into the grading was to not allow that to happen; not to allow him to gain confidence by walking through my attacks and kicking my butt. The first time he tried it, I was ready. I put him on his 'arse', held him by the throat on the ground with my fist raised ready to 'ground and pound.' He covered up and raised both feet-legs ready to kick me.
'Matte, matte, matte', JDJ shouted as he pounded the grading table. Hymas jumped up from the grading table and pulled me back ... and all the while, Dave and I were smiling at each other. We knew what this was all about. It was setting the 'rules' for this grading. Nobody had lost control, in fact, far from it, unbeknown to JDJ, Hymas, and whoever else was sitting on the grading table.
My nidan grading involved a number of candidates, all of whom had been my instructors. I trained a little with all of them, only to see how they fought. And then I studied knife fighting, given that there was zero instruction in knife fighting provided within the JDJSDS. Then I developed strategies to defeat my opponents, my instructors.
Memorably, when paired up with Debbie Clarke, a great practitioner and a real fighter, there was a standoff, so I provided an opening by lifting my hands. You will recall this strategy when ken tai ichi no kata was discussed in a previous post. It was a genuine opening and if she was good enough, she could 'kill' me. No takers. I raised my hands a little higher to entice her into attacking. No takers. A little higher, she attacked, I 'died.' Fair enough.
You will recall from a previous post that many, and most definitely the senior instructors, did not look outside of JDJ's teachings. In preparation for this grading, I looked outside of JDJ's teachings given that there were no specific teachings regarding knife fighting within JDJ's teachings. I also thought that this might give me a competitive advantage.
Attack With Knife From Crouch
Beware of the man who holds his knife this way and who attacks from a crouch, with the blade held close to his body and with his free arm out in front to parry or to help create an opening for a slash or thrust.
Beware me. The following was included in the text:
The trained man will use this knife, in the attack, from a crouch, with the left hand forward and the knife held ... close to the body. The outstretched left hand will act as a guard, a foil or a parry, and will help to create the opening for a slash or thrust. The left hand also may be used to distract the adversary's attention - by waving it in his face, by throwing something, or by making sudden darting motions toward him. ...
Beware me and I was a trained man. I was trained in knife fighting by Applegate and not my instructors at the JDJSDS, even though there was a knife fighting grading in the curriculum which the senior instructors (Hymas, Peter Clarke, and Paul Connolly) had successfully completed.
I adopted Applegate's approach, at times, with one important addition. When a thrusting attack was launched, I would move from the left foot forward staggered stance (han zenkutsu dachi) to a cross-stance. Or more accurately, sempok from pencak silat (see image below).
I was well versed in this stance having trained pencak silat for quite some time. Most importantly, the training was with Richard de Bordes school in London rather that at the JDJSDS as JDJ had, as he said, Westernised his pencak silat so that it would be acceptable for a Western audience. He had in fact Japanised it so that it resembled karate to a fair degree.
Moving into this stance from a traditional staggered stance is effectively an evasive body-movement, similar to nagashi (flowing) in JDJ and Yoseikan Budo practice. Interestingly, the image accompanying the Tomiki aikido discussion above shows both aikidoka ostensibly assuming the same stance. The same stance is seen in some karate styles, and it is seen in JDJ jujutsu teachings, however, I would argue that there is less understanding of the use and the structure of this stance in all those arenas than in pencak silat.
Another part of the transition into this stance is that it moves the back hand to the front through the turn of the shoulders. This is also used to great effect in pencak silat.
Part of my strategy was to employ this tactic, moving from a staggered stance into sempok/cross-stance thereby executing an evasive body-movement and moving my rear knife-wielding hand to my front hand and a trusting attack. It was part of my strategy because the other candidates, my instructors, had not seen it before.
Memorably, this tactic was employed against the abovementioned Debbie Clarke.
Debbie lunged forward and I executed the move. She was going to barrel into the now thrusting knife, which was a molded metal knife, and she was in danger of being 'impaled' on impact. I relaxed my grip and as impact occurred, the knife slide through my hand and fell to the floor. It was beautiful, it was perfect ... and it was missed by JDJ. A clean 'kill', and it was not recorded.
JDJ took me aside after the grading and told me that I was the best in the grading. But all that meant was that I knew 'how to play the game' better than my instructors. I learned how to knife fight to some degree whereas they did not due to lack of instruction. I learned a fantastic move and had a greater appreciation for the use of sempok as a fighting tactic. But is that what this grading is designed to impart to students?
Before we leave this section, I was present when two JDJ yudansha engaged in this grading. One has since gone on to be awarded Rokudan by a JDJ ryuha principal. The other had his own ryuha and was a 'fighter.' They 'fenced' with the knives, like one would when fencing. Tapping against each other's knives as fencers tap against each other's swords. I was astounded. Why would anyone consider this approach, particularly given that they were supposedly highly experienced and graded martial artists? But here's the thing, how can you fail them, even though the performance was ludicrous, given that no training nor instruction is given in knife fighting even though this is a knife fighting grading in the grading system.
Sandan Shiai
'Free fight with tanbo vs tanto.'
What is not included in the description of this grading is that the roles are swapped, as in the shodan shiai grading. And as in the shodan shiai grading, the person with the tanbo annihilates the person with the tanto. And as in the nidan shiai grading, the candidates are not trained in the use of fighting with either weapon.
What is the point, other than including shiai-type gradings into the dan grading system and populating the dan grading system given the relatively comprehensive ikkyu grading?
Conclusion
Unlike my instructors, I can teach students how to go about these gradings, but still, what is the point? I can, and have done, train them to defeat the students of other instructors, hands down, but what is the point?
These gradings in the JDJ grading system are seriously floored, but here's the thing. If they are removed or 'fixed', the lessons learned through the above analysis are lost. The insights that can be gained are lost. The new and better understanding that can be derived from those insights are lost. It is a quandry, conundrum, and other such words to describe this situation.
What would you do?
I didn’t take my training far enough to provide a better answer than this. Your arguement regarding the flawed nature of these shiai gradings is convincing and I agree with your analysis.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, I have a few of my own. How does the time invested in training these flawed shiai gradings compare with the analysis and insights that can be gleaned from them?
Is there a more useful, less flawed form of training with real practical value, that could help a practitioner arrive at the same insights instead of shiai as practiced and graded in the JDJ syllabus?
I really enjoy your writings. Both as a student of the school in the early 1990s and for their content as it stands alone. Thank you.