The Development of the Jan de Jong Jujutsu Grading System 4.0: Nidan

In a previous post, I explained how the Jan de Jong (JDJ) jujutsu grading system was developed by JDJ to further his needs at the time. 

The kyu system was developed because he needed a grading system to support his new business of teaching jujutsu on a full-time basis that was to become his sole source of income. The shodan gradings were developed to provide him with black belt instructors to further his ambitions of teaching in Europe. The nidan and sandan gradings were developed to provide JDJ with a legacy.

The story goes that the technical gradings in the jujutsu system taught by JDJ's instructors, the Saito brothers, finished at sandan with 'Progression to higher grades [being] based on the yudansha's (black belt holder) contributions to ju jitsu, the ryu (style or system), or the school and at the discretion of Shihan Jan de Jong' (Jan de Jong: the man, his school and his ju jitsu system, Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1997, p. 11). 

JDJ needed to develop nidan and sandan gradings so that Peter Clarke, Robert Hymas, and Paul Connelly could be graded as such in order for JDJ to be able to award them higher honorary grades. They were to be his legacy. 

Ironically, when I broached the subject of 'succession planning' with JDJ in the mid-1990s, me being a business/management professional, he did not want to have a bar of it. He literally said that he didn't care what happened after he died because he wouldn't be here. His focus was always on the here and now (possibly the product of his war time experience). That appeared to change when he saw his 'expiration date' approaching, and thus the nidan and sandan gradings were developed and introduced, and the rushing through of Clarke, Hymas, and Connelly to complete those gradings.

You will be familiar with the basic format of the nidan grading because the basic template for the dan grades was set with JDJ's ikkyu in the kyu system. You will recall from the kyu grading post that the kyu system was developed as a one-off, stand-alone grading system with ikkyu being the instructor grading. 

The titles of the below sections are taken from the nidan grading requirements in Jan de Jong: the man, his school and his jujutsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1997, p.51).

Part 1: Kime no Kata

'Demonstrate locks and throws from counters to resistance to locks and throws.'

You will recall from the above referenced ikkyu post that kime no kata is broadly taken as being a revision grading within the JDJ jujutsu grading system. The term 'broadly' is appropriate for this grading.

A general description of this part is that it involves 'changing techniques.'

The requirements of this part are five different joint-locks and three different throws to be demonstrated for the nine basic joint-locks which are resisted. Three different throws and five different joint-locks to be demonstrated for five specified throws that are resisted.

The type of resistance became a matter of debate. Greg Palmer and I are the only other two to have completed nidan and sandan under JDJ. We came after the abovementioned trio and so JDJ got to have a 'second look' at the gradings that he'd developed and only seen once before when the abovementioned trio graded. Thus, the format changed, or improvements were made based on the second look.

The same was true of shodan shinken shobu no kata where the first ones to go through (including the abovementioned trio) performed the 140 attack-defence combinations as a demonstration whereas those who came after had to perform under true reflex conditions. In this case, the form of resistance for Greg and myself differed to that used by the abovementioned trio.

JDJ was against changing techniques because he considered it to mean initially training and performing ineffective techniques, so why did he include this grading in nidan? It is probably because everyone else was teaching changing techniques at the time, and JDJ did include elements into his grading system that he was 'not a fan of' simply because others were doing so at the time, e.g., shiai. This an explanation as to why he changed his ideas of the grading the second time round.

Part 2: Ju Jitsu no Jitsuen

'Arrange a demonstration using up to eight lower grades to show some aspect of ju jitsu. Twenty minutes of explanation type demonstration and ten minutes of fast action are required to be shown.'

Greg Palmer's demonstration has been posted on YouTube in three parts.

JDJ often said that Greg's demo was the best ever, in fact, when the video of the first demo did not work out, JDJ got us (I was a member of Greg's demo team) to do it again so that he had a good video of that demonstration. Why was Greg's demo the best? Because he was a teacher and therefore knew how to train us, a la four-time premiership coach, Alistair Clarkson, who was a teacher before becoming head coach for Hawthorn.

The requirement of this grading reflects JDJ's focus on producing instructors in the dan grades. The basic idea behind this grading is that the instructor should be able to explain to others what jujutsu is, not unlike the Ju Jitsu Rekishi parts in the ikkyu and shodan gradings.

It also reflects that putting on demonstrations was a big part of the promotion of the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS) and JDJ at that time. Demonstration stories abound, with the older generation of the JDJSDS.

Part 3: Shinken Shobu no Kata

'Reflex examination.'

52 attack-defence combinations down from 140 in shodan. There is an increased focus on defences against punches (19).

Part 4: Hantachiwaza no Kata and Kentai Ichi no Kata

'Demonstration with uke in seiza and tori standing.'

'Demonstration of katana and the unarmed application.'

The kentai ichi no kata is an extension of the idea of the Yoseikan Budo (YB) kata that JDJ included in shodan, however, the techniques taught within this kata are not from YB.

I'm not sure, nor have I attempted to find out, where the techniques in these two kata have been taken from. This will be a different case with the future sandan grading post.

Part 5: Tanbo Jutsu and Jo Jutsu

'Demonstrate defences with tanbo.'

'Demonstrate defences against jo.'

The tanbo (short stick) section includes two sections: one where the tanbo is concealed as in the photograph to the right (although only one tanbo is used), and one where the tanbo is 'open', meaning that it is held at the end but concealed behind tori's leg.

The use of the tanbo concealed is unique to JDJ's teachings. It comes from his pencak silat teachings where the short stick (gada) is used singularly or in a pair as in the photograph to the right, and both defensively and offensively.

The JDJ ryuha that offer courses and suggest that they teach to fight with this weapon are delusional and misleading. This grading only teaches a limited number of joint-locking techniques against punches (see below), some 'tricks.' If one wants to learn how to fight with this weapon, one needs to see Peter Clarke at Southern Cross Bujutsu who is the only person to have been graded 'black' in both JDJ's jujutsu and pencak silat, and who is the only person teaching JDJ's pencak silat. The use of this most versatile of weapons is well worth studying, so see Peter Clarke.

The two sections in the tanbo section include a single joint-locking technique inside and outside, left and right, with a straight arm or retracted. Eight defences in all, covering all possibilities, which is a tactical lesson that could be extended further within the grading system. It was well thought out.

This tactical lesson was also present in the original sixth kyu grading, the first grading in the kyu system (see reference above) which was JDJ's original grading system. There are three defences against morote-kote-dori suihei (two hands grabbing the forearm of uke). When I came to realise that JDJ's grading was disjointed and while the mon system was YB based and featured unbalancing, the kyu was not and did not. I asked JDJ about two of the defences that featured unbalancing because they did not fit this newfound realisation. He explained that before he introduced the mon system, he tried to introduce the YB unbalancing into the kyu system, and that in doing so he had changed two of the three defences against the aforementioned attack. The original defences were disengagements that placed tori to the right, left, or in front but away from uke/the attacker. It was a brilliant tactical lesson, but which has since been lost through the retention of JDJ's changes, which are no longer needed due to the introduction of the mon system. 

The defences against a jo (4'6" staff) include seven techniques from the outside and one from the inside and were probably taken from YB. The techniques involve throws, joint-locks, and takedowns.

Once again, the JDJ ryuha advertising that they teach how to fight with this weapon are delusional and misleading. They are teaching 'tricks' that are included in this and other gradings. They are not teaching how to 'fight' with this weapon because if one were being taught how to 'fight' with this weapon, or the short stick, the first and principal technique that would be taught would be striking techniques. And once again, if one wants to learn how to fight with this weapon, one should go and see the abovementioned Peter Clarke at Southern Cross Bujutsu.

Part 6: Kyushowaza

'Demonstrate various pressure point attacks.'

This grading was included in nidan because in the 1990s, everybody was teaching pressure point techniques. Karate, jujutsu, aikido, wing chun, kung fu, everyone was teaching pressure point techniques. Much like ground techniques are now the flavour of the month due to Brazilian Ju Jitsu and everyone is teaching their ground techniques. I was previously unaware that wing chun and karate taught ground techniques. :/ 

George Dillman was at the forefront of this movement at the time. He couldn't sell karate because everyone taught karate so he 'differentiated his product' (marketing 101) by teaching pressure point techniques along with his karate.

I'm open to new ideas and while I was living in London, I attended a seminar hosted jointly by Wally Jay (Small Circle Theory Jujutsu) and Dillman. Jay taught his jujutsu, which basically involved bending a person's fingers backwards, and Dillman taught his pressure point techniques.

He demonstrated a technique where two hits to two different pressure points on the forearm would cause the person to fall to the ground. The explanation was that somehow the two hits caused something to travel along the nerves that caused the person to fall to the ground. His uke was an American airman who had travelled from his posting in Germany to attend Dillman's seminar. Two hits and American airman uke duly falls to the ground.

We pair up and my partner strikes my forearm twice in the designated areas and turns away, only to turn back to find me still standing. He's confused. He tries again but stays looking at me this time and sees the same result. After a couple of more tries, out of frustration, he calls Dillman over. Dillman does his two hits and turns away to explain that this is how it is done, only to turn back and find that I'm still standing. He then lays into my forearm with some almighty punches. Dillman is a short, stocky karateka and does possess powerful strikes as seen in his breaking demonstrations. His powerful strikes cause me to bend over, but not because of any pressure points but because he'd just punched the 'crap' out of my arm (I ended up with two bruises where he punched me). Dillman then walked away without explanation.

At the end of the seminar, Dillman demonstrated his pressure point knock-out technique. A hit to a pressure-point on the jaw that causes the individual to lose consciousness. He demonstrated this first on a teenage girl who was literally hiding behind a male participant at the seminar. Quick hit to the jaw and she's down. When it came to my turn, he was demonstrating this on all of the participants, lucky us, he gives me a short, sharp punch to the side of my jaw, and while I am dazed, I don't go down. I end up with a horrendous headache but not unconscious. No pressure point, just a good short sharp hit to jaw, while holding the other side of the head so that it cannot move and thus dissipate the force applied, moving the brain inside the skull and possibly causing a mild concussion.

Good times, but back to this grading. The pressure points are applied, not in a fighting context but while JDJ is sitting down. This leads to questions as to its effectiveness in a more fluid environment.

When I did my grading, the pressure points around JDJ's trapezius area were a bit pointless on his bull-like upper body. The only way a pressure point could be used effectively there is with a baseball bat. But on his 'chicken-like' legs, he felt every one, and would 'tap-off' to signify that I had got it right and he felt something. Unfortunately, his 'tap-off' was like a focused hit to the back of my head, and I was at risk of receiving a concussion, so much of that part of the grading was done at arm's length with me cringing so as not to be rendered unconscious from a 'tap-off.' This is a grading that required the wearing of protective equipment, e.g., a helmet. :)

Part 7: Shiai

'Free fight with tanto vs tanto.'

The description and issues associated with this section of the grading are discussed in a previous post.

Part 8: Jutsuri no Kata

'Oral examination conducted with at least two other candidates, discussing the technical aspects on any technique selected by Shihan Jan de Jong.'

The idea behind the grading is laudable, however, the technical knowledge within the JDJSDS and within JDJ was lacking at the time. However, a scene from Under the Tuscan Sun is pertinent here:

Martini: Signora, between Austria and Italy, there is a section of the Alps called the Semmering. It is an impossibly steep, very high part of the mountains. They built a train track over these Alps to connect Vienna and Venice. They built these tracks even before there was a train in existence that could make the trip. They built it because they knew some day, the train would come.

JDJ built the tracks, and my work goes a good way to providing that train (see previous post with this proposition and discussing this issue).

What would be some of my questions to candidates undertaking this grading?:

'Why is the final sword technique in ken tai ichi no kata that was taught to you, which you graded, and which you now teach, result in a mutual slaying?'

'What are the similarities and differences between o soto gari, o soto guruma, and o soto otoshi?' The answer to that question is complicated given that even though o soto otoshi is included in the grading system and that has been taught, graded, and is now being taught by the grading candidates, it was never understood or taught properly by JDJ and therefore by his instructors.

'Why is the te nage in the shodan shinken shobu no kata grading such a ridiculous, over complicated technique that has so many changes in direction that it makes one dizzy?' 

'Why are blocks used in conjunction with evasive body-movements in the grading system?'

'What is the purpose of the futari dori and shiai gradings in the grading system?'

Part 9 Ju Jitsu Rekishi

'Candidates are required to submit an essay with no less than 3000 words on a topic to be approved by Jan de Jong.'

My topic was an international franchise proposal for the JDJSDS. How this came about is discussed in a previous post involving our invitation to Jakarta, Java, Indonesia by a Chinese-Indonesian entrepreneur (CIE) in 1995.

It was a fantastic opportunity. One that the vast majority of start-up franchises never get.

The CIE was prepared to fund it all. A house in the Jakarta CBD to act as dojo and residence for instructors from the JDJSDS. A cook, cleaner, driver, translator, food, and a car. Marketing was taken care of as is explained in the abovementioned post. There were European instructors calling out to be included under the JDJ banner, so a successful establishment in Jakarta, fully funded by the CIE, would have gone a long way to establishing an international franchise of the JDJSDS.

JDJ and the CIE were both dead keen, but they were like two trains on different tracks heading in the same direction, but they would never meet. How do you establish an international franchise of the jujutsu taught by JDJ which takes a minimum of 10 years to be graded shodan without compromising standards? That was the question. I came up with the answer, which was the subject matter of my project that satisfied the requirement of this part of the grading.

JDJ never implemented my proposal, even though he was more focused on his international teaching than his domestic school in those days. Why not? That's a question for another day. :)

The next post will look at the final grading in the JDJ grading system - sandan.

 

The Development of the JDJ Jujutsu Grading System 3.8: 7th Kyu

The final grade in the mon system is 7th kyu, red belt. 

The titles of the below sections are taken from the grading sheets in Jan de Jong: the man, his school and his jujutsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1997).

Breakfalls (Ukemi)

Bridgefall, and backwards flat, sideways flat, forwards roll, sideways roll separately over an obstacle. 

The bridge fall, aka o mae ukemi, is the same as in the previous grading.

While responding to a comment on my Facebook post sharing the previous blog post, I remembered that I neglected to explain why sideways roll is so uncommon in the martial arts. It's because most ukemi comes from judo and there is no need for a sideways roll from judo techniques.

I was also reminded that there are some (aikido) that teach a backwards roll that starts to resemble a Jan de Jong (JDJ) sideways roll. That is true, but it is more of a backwards roll than a JDJ sideways roll, however, having said that, it is worth noting because a JDJ sideways roll transitions into a backwards roll.

This is one of the aims of these series of posts, if not this entire blog, and that is to encourage those engaged in martial arts to engage in critical thinking, to seek insights that produce a new and better understanding, rather than just teaching and training what is taught.  

For progression, the o mae ukemi could have been performed over an obstacle in this grading. There is a 'trick' to performing o mae ukemi over an obstacle. 

The trick to performing o mae ukemi over an obstacle, I discovered by observing John Poulton  (ikkyu) in the instructors class way back when. John Poulton is front left, beard, in this photo taken from the JDJSDS Yearbook 1986 - Hakusho. He was performing o mae ukemi over obstacles when none of the other instructors pictured could and ever did. It is simply a forwards roll that you don't come out of; a forwards roll terminating in a backwards flat. :)

There is a lot of history in that photograph. Do the current JDJ ryuha know and study that history and share it with their students? Who can name all in the photograph and their legacy? This blog is about preserving and understanding the history of the JDJ tradition.

Wakai no Kata

You will recall from the 'Historic Ikkyu Part 1' post that JDJ developed wakai no kata to replace Yoseikan Budo's (YB) happoken and sanbogeri. He then moved the kata to nikyu and included it in 7th kyu, the last of the mon grades before the kyu system. Happoken taught blocking and striking skills and sanbogeri taught kicking skills. JDJ's wakai no kata is designed to teach blocking, striking, and kicking skills.

The issue of using a block in conjunction with an evasive body-movement (EBM) that was discussed in a previous post is present in this kata.

Last year I saw a JDJ ryuha yudansha demonstrate this kata while teaching it to their students. I would fail that performance if a grading candidate presented it for their 7th kyu grading, let alone a yudansha that has supposedly performed it in two gradings. 

JDJ's wakai no kata includes pencak silat's depok and sempok stances. Same stance but looking forward or backward. It is an extremely versatile stance in terms of an EBM and setting up for strikes, kicks, and unbalancing. 

In the abovementioned performance, the performer did not perform the stances correctly (or simply did not know how to do so), which nullified their tactical effectiveness.

Then of course there was the issue that the kicks were poorly executed, wafting upwards rather than 'shooting' in and out, and the timing of the defensive combinations was all wrong. Basically, it was a blur from start to finish interrupted only by the performer being unbalanced when performing the depok and sempok stances. 

These issues were also common with the performances within the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS), including that of most of the instructors.

The abovementioned JDJ ryuha refers to this stance as a 'cross stance' (kosa dachi). That is a reference to a Japanese karate stance which is 'similar' to the pencak silat depok and sempok except that karate does not realise or understand the potential of this stance.

I attended a seminar co-jointly hosted by Wally Jay and George Dillman while I was living in London. Dillman was on the pressure point bandwagon at that stage, but he also presented his 'study' of karate kata which included a Shotokan kata where this stance is performed. He explained that this stance is entirely useless but that it was a 'secret' of the kata because it was part of a turning move when executing what the JDJ tradition knows as hachi mawashi (hair-chin turning). When Dillman asked what is the point of this stance before his 'explanation', I wanted to put my hand up and say that it was a major feature of a very effective martial art taught to one of the most populous nations on the earth, but I didn't.

Throwing Techniques (Nage Waza)

This is the first time in the mon system that throwing techniques have been introduced. There are four throwing techniques from specified attacks: single lapel grip (low) - hip throw; single lapel grip (high) - shoulder throw; low punch - minor inner reaping; and low punch - minor outer reaping.

Body Movements (Taisabaki)

'Defender's choice of attack, using any block.' 

The issue of 'blocks' and the demonstration of these body-movements as defences has been discussed in previous posts.

All five of YB's basic body-movements are included in this section, along with dodging (kawashi).

The dodging body-movement was included in this grading due to Greg Palmer's lobbying. I argued that dodging was simply a variation of either flowing or sliding body-movements, which I went on to demonstrate in my taisabaki no kata grading in sandan. It was a 'teach the teacher' moment, however, even though they agreed with me, it is still retained in this grading.

To challenge the reader's understanding of this body-movement that they are either training and grading or teaching, is the dodging body-movement as taught a variation of flowing or sliding? Even though JDJ used a dodging body-movement often in his demonstrations, why and how is it different to the one included in this grading? Also, identify the defences in the kyu and dan grades where this dodging body-movement is used in a defence.

Unbalancing (Kuzushi)

Normal single wrist grip - Normal and same side unbalancing

Reverse single wrist grip - Reverse and same side unbalancing

Same side single wrist grip - Normal and same side unbalancing

The unbalancing from single wrist grips is taken straight from YB, however, JDJ is building on YB's teachings. What is JDJ trying to teach/impart with the two forms of unbalancing from the same single wrist grip? Did the instructors (a) understand this lesson, and (b) teach this lesson along with the techniques?

In his later years, JDJ was teaching this lesson and referred to kuzushi and hazushi for the two types of unbalancing. Hazushi means disengagement or release according to the glossary in Jan de Jong: the man, his school and his jujutsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1997). 

The basic idea is that with normal and reverse unbalancing, the captured hand is disengaged whereas with same side unbalancing it is not. This then facilitates one of the nine basic joint-locking techniques taught by the JDJ tradition and which is demonstrated in the mon grades. Same side unbalancing does not necessarily disengage the hand grip, turns the elbow up, thus facilitating straight arm lock, side wrist lock, and wrist crust. Normal and reverse unbalancing disengages the hand grip and keeps the elbow down thus facilitating the other six joint-locking techniques. 

This is a valuable and sophisticated lesson in versatile tactics, a unique one developed by JDJ, that is often not understood within the JDJ tradition. This leads to the question, should it be included in the relatively lowly grades of the mon system?

Locking Techniques (Kansetsu Waza)

'Two attackers defender's choice of attack.' 

The issue of the appropriateness of this stress element in these early gradings has been discussed in numerous pervious posts in this series.

The three kansetsu waza in this grading are arm entanglement (ude garami), side wrist lock (yoko tekubi hishigi), and wrist hand throw (tekubi te nage). The latter two are known by different names in aikido. This completes the nine basic kansetsu waza taught within the JDJ tradition.

Basic Blocks and Attacks (Uke and Atemi)

Three punches and one kick - four basic karate-style blocks. 

There is no unbalancing - blocking section as included in 9th kyu. 

These blocks are often taught in conjunction with an EBM. As has continually been questioned in numerous posts, e.g., The Mon System and Blocking Techniques, what is the purpose of the block when used in conjunction with an EBM. It's not to avoid injurious contact with the body because the EBM takes care of that problem. This is a question that should be asked and answered as it would demonstrate insight and understanding.

The defences in this section include a karate-style block followed by a punch. This should be taught as an alternative to the singular use of EBMs, or just avoiding an attack. It would be a useful tactic to employ in the free fighting gradings of ikkyu and the dan grades.

Reflex (Shinken Shobu no Kata)

Fifteen defences from holding, strangulation, punching, kicking, stick, and knife attacks. There are two 'restraining techniques' included in the 15 defences, which is to say a pre-emptive application of a joint-locking technique.

All of the defences have been demonstrated in this or previous gradings, as they should be.

There is a 'stick-overhead attack.' 

Last year, I observed a number of classes of a JDJ ryuha where this same attack was used in the lessons. It would appear that uke did not know how to hit a person with a stick. If they made contact with tori, it would be with the butt of the stick held in the hand of uke. This obviously affects the distancing of the defence. With a lot of practice, the student would become proficient at defending themselves against an attack that was trying to hit them in the head with the butt of the stick, however, if someone was actually trying to hit them with a stick, they would literally fall short. 

This was also a common fault in the JDJSDS.

The lesson to be learned here is to teach the students how to attack properly first, and then teach the defence.

This was something lacking in the JDJSDS as well.

The Development of the JDJ Jujutsu Grading System Part 3.7: 8th Kyu

Okay, back on track.

The previous post (before the last post) looked at the first grading in the mon system for adults - 9th kyu. This post looks at the second grading in that system - 8th kyu, red and white belt.

Btw, if you're looking for quality belts and gi for your students at reasonable prices, see Ray Hana's Martial Arts Superstore.

Breakfalls (Ukemi)

Forwards roll, backwards roll, sideways roll, bridgefall, backwards roll over an obstacle, forwards roll over an obstacle, backwards flat over an obstacle, and sideways flat over an obstacle.

The new introduction is bridgefall, also referred to by Jan de Jong (JDJ) as o mae ukemi (major front breakfall). This technique was the subject of a 2010 post in which a video of the technique is posted.

Just as with sideways roll, this technique would appear to be relatively unique to JDJ's teachings, following a Google search and personal experience. 

In a 2010 post, I tell of an experience while teaching with JDJ in Sweden. JDJ demonstrated a 'hip turn' technique which I 'broke my fall' with o mae ukemi. During the break (no pun intended), I was approached by the seminar organiser, an instructor of a jujutsu school, and asked to teach him, not the hip-turn technique but the o mae ukemi to land safely from the execution of the technique. He had never heard of it or seen it before.

A point of differentiation that might be emphasised in the teachings of the jujutsu taught by JDJ, if it is understood by those teaching the jujutsu taught by JDJ.

The introduction of an obstacle for some of the breakfalls demonstrated in the previous grading is an increase in degree of difficulty over the previous grading.

Basic Blocks and Attacks (Uke and Atemi)

Front roundhouse kick, back side drive kick, and front side drive kick. Solo demonstrations. No blocks are included in this section.

A useful inclusion/replacement in this section could be Yoseikan Budo's (YB) sambo geri or yonbo (?) geri. These are exercise or kata that are used to teach three and four kicks respectively. I have found it a very useful exercise to teach, particularly in that it necessitates lifting the knee to stay balanced. Kicking skills are not great in most of those who trained exclusively within the JDJ jujutsu tradition. These kicking skills could be enhanced, based on experience, by training to lift the knee when initiating a kick, which the correct teaching of this kata teaches.

Last year I was assisting ikkyu graded jujutsuka in the JDJ tradition and introduced sambo geri to them. They could not perform the kata/kicks. This is representative of the kicking skills in the JDJ jujutsu, and aikido, tradition. Train your kicks people, and you might have to look outside your school to learn and train how to kick, as I did.

You will recall from the previous post, sambo geri was included in the ikkyu 'Basics' grading which then became the nikyu kime no kata/revision grading. Sambo geri was replaced by JDJ's wakai no kata which is included in the next grading, 7th kyu (part of the mon system), red belt.

Happoken no Kata

As has been stated before in numerous posts, this is a straight-up YB kata. JDJ changed the stances used in the kata which led to questions about the first block. Why is the middle block used when the taisbaki, evasive body-movement, has taken care of the injurious contact with body problem (see post 3.4)?

Last year, I saw a JDJ ryuha yudansha teaching this kata. They clearly had no understanding of the kata. The kata has four different strikes and four different blocks. The aforementioned yudansha was using basically the same striking technique for three of the four strikes.

Said yudansha also had no concept of the timing of the kata. It should be, 1,2 stop. 1,2 stop. 1,2,3,4 stop. Not 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 stop. This was a common problem with the kata and kambangan (pencak silat kata) in JDJ's school. It was a race from the beginning to the end. This compromised techniques and what the exercise was supposed to be teaching. Taking the lead from the Setia Hati pencak silat that I introduced JDJ to and which he began to teach his pencak silat instructors and through them his students, the kata and kambangan were broken down into their constituent parts and trained separately before being put back together again for the complete kata/kambangan. In this way the timing was corrected and the techniques improved.

Another issue is that happoken no kata is only taught and trained as a grading requirement. Once completed, it is hardly, if ever, trained again. Should happoken no kata be examined at the end of the kyu system, ikkyu, to see if the candidate has improved their technique and understanding?

Body Movements (Taisabaki)

'Defender's choice of attack, using any block'

The issue of 'blocks' has been covered in a number of previous emails.

Flowing with front snap kick, entering, entering rotation, major entering rotation, sliding. The first three taisabaki were demonstrated in the previous grading. A progression with the flowing technique is the inclusion of a front snap kick. The final two taisabaki are new inclusions and complete the YB basic taisabaki.

Unbalancing (Kuzushi)

Normal single grip on sleeve (low) - Normal unbalancing - atemi

Normal single grip on sleeve (high) - Reverse unbalancing - atemi

Front both wrists grip - Same side unbalancing - atemi

Rear single wrist grip and strangle - Rear unbalancing - atemi

Normal, same side, reverse, and rear unbalancing are the basic unbalancing techniques from hand grips taught by YB.

Why is atemi included with each unbalancing? What is being examined in this unbalancing section? This is a classic example of a lack of understanding re the YB division of a defence into phases. The stance and positioning when executing the atemi means that this unbalancing demonstration is not necessarily helping when these unbalancing techniques are used within the grading system, other than when finishing with an atemi.

Locking Techniques (Kansetsu Waza)

'Two attackers, defender's choice of attack'

The inappropriateness of this stress grading to demonstrate the learned kansetsu waza has been discussed in a previous post.

The previous grading included wrist twist, arm turning, and body set arm breaking techniques. This grading includes wrist crush, variant arm entanglement, forearm twist. These techniques cover six of the nine basic kansetsu waza taught by JDJ jujutsu (and YB). 

Basic Blocks and Attacks (Uke and Atemi)

Different moving attack with flowing-brushing block-punch, entering-brushing block-punch, entering-double block-punch, flowing-brushing block-punch.

This is not the Unbalancing (Kuzushi) - Blocking (Uke) section introduced in the previous grading, even though brushing block was included in that section in the previous grading. As it is, this is a demonstration of a defence and not a part of the division of defences into phases.

Reflex (Shinken Shobu no Kata)

There are 10 attack-defence combinations included in this section of the grading. Nine of the 10 defences require a joint-locking technique to be demonstrated. The joint-locks include the three demonstrated in the previous grading and the three demonstrated in the above section in this grading, albeit against two attackers and so not assessed for their technical proficiency on their own.

The final defence is agains a stick - overhead attack. Last year I observed a JDJ ryuha class on multiple occasions where a stick - overhead attack was included in the training. The attacker had no idea what they were doing. They were attacking with the butt end of the stick, thus changing the distancing which in term affects the defence. 

The attack should be taught first and then teach the defence. If the attack is flawed, so will be the defence. The defender will become really proficient in defending against a flawed attack, which will probably mean that it will be ineffective against a real attack that is intended to do harm.

The Development of the Jan de Jong Jujutsu Grading System Part 1.2: Historic Ikkyu Part 1: Basics and Current Nikyu Part 1: Kime no Kata

This post follows on from the post, Part 1: The Kyu System.

You will recall from that post that the original Jan de Jong (JDJ) grading system consisted of only the kyu grades, which was a one-off grading system when it was developed. Start to finish, nothing else to follow or precede. That is it! Done and dusted (in the voice of Al Pacino in The Heat).

The image to the right is of a historic grading sheet regarding the requirements of the ikkyu grade which the recipient of my gifting of historical records was kind enough to forward to me based on this series of posts.

In the above linked post, I argued that the ikkyu grading was an instructor grading. That argument is supported by the heading to the above historic grading sheet: Ikkyu (Kyoshi) Instructor. 

All those that attained ikkyu are instructors in JDJ's original grading system, and it could/should be argued that they are instructors under the current system which includes the dan grades. It could/should be argued that they should be referred to as sensei rather than sempai as they are now, given that that is how the ikkyu grading was developed.

Part 1: Basics in the above ikkyu grading requirements reflects the Yoseikan Budo (YB) influence introduced into the grading system, therefore, this grading was introduced post 1969 when JDJ trained for a short time at the YB dojo in Japan (also see below). 

At some stage, the ikkyu Part 1: Basics became nikyu Part 1: Kime no Kata. 

Kime no kata is referred to as 'revision' in JDJ's jujutsu grading system. So the ikkyu Part 1: Basics became a revision grading when it was moved to nikyu, but what is it revising? It is revising the YB inspired mon grades with the ikkyu Part 2: Kime no Kata in the above image being a true revision of the kyu grades. That grading requires the grading candidate to select defences from the kyu grades in the nominated sections in that gradings. 

All of the techniques in Part 1: Basics are YB techniques, including Itsutsu no Kata, Happoken, and Sambogeri. When ikkyu Part 1: Basics becomes nikyu Part 1: Kime no Kata, Happoken and Sambogeri were replaced by Wakai no Kata.

Happoken is a YB kata designed to teach striking and blocking skills.

Sambogeri is a YB kata/exercise designed to teach kicking skills (see image right from Mochizuki's book). In future posts, I will be suggesting that Sambogeri and derivations thereof be introduced into the mon grades to improve the kicking skills of JDJ jujutsuka, which are generally substandard unless the student trained in a percussion based martial art.

Wakai no Kata is a kata that JDJ developed to teach striking, blocking, and kicking skills, along with different stances. Wakai no Kata will be the subject of a future post when exploring the mon system. In that post I will explain why it tends to be poorly performed in the JDJ tradition, even by the majority of instructors.

The abovementioned generous provider of the historic grading sheets also commented:

After doing the nikyu revision, Greg Palmer came up to me and said "you have me to thank for that grading". The Boss has tasked him with developing an assessment for those who hadn't done the mons. Further cementing the case for Greg to have been a yondan on completion of sandan.

I argued in the first post of this series that Greg Palmer was the best teacher at the school because he was a trained and qualified teacher, and I don't mean in a martial arts system which is basically amateurish. I was unaware that Greg developed this grading, however, it makes sense because it is a coherent introduction, not revision as suggested above, to the YB system that forms the basis of the mon grades.

With regards to Greg and the awarding of yondan upon completion of the 'technical' grades in the JDJ jujutsu grading system. I would go further than the above commentor and argue that Greg was entitled to be graded rokudan along with the anointed trio. 

Greg's contribution to the grading system far exceeded that of any of the trio, including introducing JDJ to a mindset of progressive gradings. It is generally acknowledged that his understanding of techniques and how to teach them exceeded that of the trio. He also selflessly taught for JDJ for nearly 40 years with no remuneration, unlike two of the trio. He was also the first and only to have established a branch outside the metropolitan area for JDJ.

You will recall in a previous post that I shared an insight that I had gained through studying the development of the JDJ jujutsu grading system, and that is that the instructors teaching the mon grades may not have actually gone through the mon grades. The above comment would appear to confirm that.

In that case, the nikyu revision, as the above provider described it, was not a revision grading for those that did not go through the mon system. It is an introduction to the mon system. It features the YB division of a defence into phases: taisabaki, kuzushi, waza (body-movement, unbalancing, technique). It features the five basic YB taisabaki, their basic kuzushi from hand grips, and their nine basic kansetsu waza (joint-locking techniques) as waza. 

Did the instructors who did not go through the mon system understand that these were phases in a defence? Did JDJ? This might explain some/many of the issues that I have and will be raising in connection with the mon grades and the teaching thereof.

The Development of the Jan de Jong Jujutsu Grading System Part 3.6: 9th Kyu (First Adult Grading in Mon System)

The beginning of the mon system for adults is 9th kyu, brown and white belt. This post will look at the 9th kyu grading.

You will recall from a previous post that the grading is made up of various sections. The following will consider each section. The initial reference point will be the gradings published in Jan de Jong: the man, his school and his ju jitsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1995).

Breakfalls (Ukemi)

Six types of ukemi are demonstrated: (1) forwards, backwards, and sideways rolls, and (2) forwards, backwards, and sideways flats.

1. All of the ukemi, except for sideways roll, are taught in judo (see point 5 below). Most jujutsu schools take their ukemi from judo.

2. Sideways roll is unique to the jujutsu taught by Jan de Jong (JDJ), and it should be taught as such. This is a clear point of differentiation between the jujutsu taught by JDJ and that of all other jujutsu, aikido, and judo teachings. (Marketing 101 - differentiate the product).

I found a 'sideways roll' included in the door-stopper of a book by Marc Tedeschi, Hapkido: Traditions, Philosophy, Technique (2000; 1136 pages, over 9000 photographs). The sideways roll included in Tedschi's book is a barrel roll: starting on all fours, roll sideways and back up to on all fours.

3. Sideways roll as taught by JDJ is best described in terms of the old-school parachute landing involving sequential impact with the landing surface of body parts from the ankle to the shoulder thus reducing the force to be absorbed by the body per unit area and per unit time (see my book on the science behind all fighting techniques).

I did find a similar roll in Kreighbaum and Barthels (1996), Biomechanics: A Qualitative Approach for Studying Human Movement. Apparently this type of sideways roll is taught in volleyball.

4. Sideways roll is generally taught and demonstrated very poorly in the JDJ tradition. Starting off the roll on a flat foot generally results in a sideways flat that transitions into a backwards roll. Jumping into the roll often ends up with the same result. I teach to start off on the edge of the foot with the body arced in a 'C' position with the hip leading and shoulders leaning away from the direction of the fall. This forces the person to have sequential body parts impact (ankle, calf, thigh, hip, shoulder) before transitioning into a backwards roll. An important factor is, as with so many techniques, the direction the practitioner looks when executing the technique. Look at the ground and the body turns forward towards the ground. Look straight ahead or slightly to the other side, and the body stays side-on, thus executing a true sideways roll.

5. Kaiten ukemi (rolling breakfalls) are taught within the JDJ tradition such that the technique ends with the individual facing their opponent. This is a jujutsu approach compared to a judo approach, according to Pat Harrington in Principles of Jujutsu (1997) and Eddie Ferrie in Ju-Jitsu: Classical and Modern (1990):

The major difference between the forward breakfall in judo and jujutsu is the way jujutsu exponents come to their feet facing in the direction from which they have just fallen. It is standard practice to roll and come to your feet, simultaneously turning to face your opponent in a defensive guard. Judoka, on the other hand, roll, stand up and usually carry on walking. (Ferrie 1990, 33)

Judo teaches to walk away (not face the attacker) with kaiten ukemi. It has been suggested that this reflects the lack of combative focus in judo teachings. Do rather than jutsu. The same suggestion has been raised with respect to aikido when kaiten ukemi is taught in the same fashion.

JDJ included the 'judo' approach to kaiten ukemi in the instructors class. Why not include the judo approach in the mon grades? If nothing else, it increases the tactical options for students when regaining one's feet from a kaiten ukemi.

One of the exercises I use when teaching kaiten ukemi involves a person pushing another who executes the kaiten ukemi while the 'pusher' walks towards that person. This demonstrates that one needs to rise to their feet rapidly when used in a defensive situation. Often the person was very close when the person rose to their feet, because of the execution of the kaiten ukemi. One option is to adopt the judo approach in order to create distance between the 'attacker' and defender before turning to face them. The other is the slow rise to the feet is often a product of where the person is looking when they are exiting the roll. Throw your head back to immediately seek out the attacker and the body follows.

Greg Palmer and Peter Templeman (two JDJ yudansha instructors) told of how they did not sustain injuries when coming off a motorcycle at speed because of their kaiten ukemi training. The told of mae kaiten ukemi, ushiro kaiten ukemi, ushiro kaiten ukemi, yoko kaiten ukemi, etc. Only one mae kaiten ukemi - why? Because if the only way you've been taught kaiten ukemi is the 'jujutsu way', it rules out mae kaiten ukemi after any initial use as the person will always be facing the direction from which the fall commenced.

The secret for teaching the jujutsu and judo kaiten ukemi ways? Either a figure-4 or parallel leg arrangement. It's as simple as that. And don't forget where the performer looks.

Basic Blocks and Attacks (Uke and Atemi)

The four blocks are karate style blocks demonstrated solo (high, middle x 2, low: see a previous post).

The two attacks are front snap kick and punch with step. 

I recently saw a video prepared for student instruction where the JDJ ryuha yudansha was demonstrating a front snap kick/front kick. Their attempt to kick high resulted in their toes not being pulled back so as to kick with the ball of the foot. This is what the kick should look like (btw, it is not a 'snap' kick):

Kicking techniques do not tend to be taught too well in the JDJ tradition. For those in the JDJ tradition demonstrating for students or  publishing instruction manuals and/or videos, remember, students will study those images ad nauseum in an attempt to replicate them. If the images are of poor technique, they will work hard to produce poor technique.

Body Movements (Taisabaki)

'Defender's choice of attack, using any block'

The issue of 'any block' was discussed in the previous two posts.

Unbalancing (Kuzushi)

Normal single wrist grip - Normal unbalancing

Same side single wrist grip - Same side unbalancing 

Reverse single wrist grip - Reverse unbalancing

Rear both wrists grip - Rear unbalancing

Front both wrists grip - same side unbalancing

The first four attacks and unbalancings are pure Yoseikan Budo (YB).

The fourth attack and unbalancing is an extension of the basic unbalancings from wrist grips. Why is an extension being added into this section in the first grading an adult will be attempting? Shouldn't the first grading at least just be examining basic techniques. Variations can be introduced in later gradings.

Unbalancing (Kuzushi) - Blocking (Uke)

This section of the grading was discussed in the previous post where the issue of JDJ's classification of blocking techniques as being unbalancing techniques was explored.

Note that the above demonstrated blocks, karate style blocks, are not included in the unbalancing use of blocks in this section of the grading.

It is also worth noting that the required brushing block against a downwards hit in no way, ever, unbalances an opponent. Ever! (see previous post)

Locking Techniques (Kansetsu Waza)

'Two attackers, defender's choice of attack'

This is the first grading for an adult, and they are being expected to defend using a specified kansetsu waza against two attackers. It is their first grading. The inappropriateness of this stress element in this and in all of the mon grades was discussed in a previous post. 

Reflex (Shinken Shobu no Kata)

Shinken shobu no kata is explained and discussed in this post. This grading and training method is another unique aspect of JDJ's teaching and should be appreciated and shared as such (Marketing 101: differentiate the product).

This is an adult's first grading; is there any need for this (or any other) stress element? Maybe it's to acclimatise the student to shinken shobu no kata gradings given that this is the principal form of grading from the kyu grades onwards. Fair enough, but does this mean they are given a lot of leeway in this grading due to the stress element (ditto for the above stress element) and the fact that it is their very first grading?

#1 Normal single grip on the sleeve (low) - Body set arm breaking.

In the above unbalancing section, normal single wrist grip is demonstrated with normal unbalancing. In this defence sequence, body set arm breaking is facilitated by 'same side unbalancing' from a normal single grip on the sleeve (low). Why? Why complicate things in the first grading? Surely it should be to apply the whole taisabaki, kuzushi, waza phases of a technique that the grading seems to be based upon to bring the phases together in a defence?! A systems thinking approach.

#3 High punch - Atemi - body set arm breaking.

The use of atemi to unbalance an opponent, in the kuzushi phase of a defence, has not been introduced to the student in the grading as yet. Why include this new element in this stress section of the grading when other unbalancing methods have been demonstrated in the grading?

#5 Front snap kick - Brushing block - punch.

I would teach a grading candidate to use an 'empty block', no block at all, when executing this defence as a 'teach-the-teacher' exercise (see above re brushing blocks). Would the JDJ ryuha instructors mark the grading candidate down if they did not use a brushing block but simply an evasive body-movement and a decisive punch?

Comment

It may seem like I'm being overly critical of JDJ's efforts, however, it's more about learning from his efforts. First, how would you go about developing a grading system when you have no real experience with a grading system? How you go about introducing a systems based element into a 'collection of defences' grading system when you have no real understanding of systems based thinking? JDJ did a remarkable job given the circumstances, however, it behoves those that follow him to study what he did in order to improve on what he did; to see further by standing on the shoulders of a giant. It behoves them to gain insights and understanding rather than simply to imitate.