Comment to 'The Quandary of Advanced Adolescent Students' Post

The following is a comment from 'MB' to The Quandary of Advanced Adolescent Students Post:

How do you retain advanced adolescents?

By meeting their developmental needs.

I was one of the students in your teenager class. It was a wonderful experience and one that is still treasured and grieved. I am now a qualified teacher of adolescents and have studied adolescent development.

Adolescents (12-18) are in what Maria Montessori called the ‘third phase of development’. It’s a period of intense transformation and one that needs to be handled sensitively, with consideration paid to its particular needs. Some of the key focus areas for adolescent development: peers, justice, their place in society. On the last point, belonging is a core need for all of us, at all stages, but it’s particularly important to adolescents, who are taking their first steps in adult society and working out how they can fit into this new setting. As a result, the adolescent’s relationship with adults is very important (both for a sense of belonging and value and for a model of how to be an adult).

The teenager class met these needs:
• It was a space for us – belonging and a sense that we were valued enough to be given a place.
• It was a space where we were with peers – social interaction.
• It set us up to succeed, not to fail – justice in action.
• Our instructor built a strong and appropriate rapport with us (not a quasi-parental relationship nor a friendship) – relationship with adult.

For myself, I adored the school. I attended many other classes to develop my skills further, including adult classes. None of the other classes ever felt like my class in the way the teenager class did. I learned from them and enjoyed them, but always saw them as extras. In the adult classes, I didn’t see the other students as peers to build social relationships with, nor did they see me in that way (nor should they have!). I didn’t have a personal rapport with the instructor. I didn’t feel a sense of belonging in those classes; I only ever felt like a guest.

To retain adolescents, give them a place they can belong and succeed, one with peers and a supportive adult.

Thank you, MB, for your kind words and for your informative, informed, and authoritative analysis.

I too treasure and grieve the teenage class. I remember it fondly to this day.

The teenage class was conducted on Saturday mornings at 11am at the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS) hombu.

The teenage class was the only class in the JDJSDS dedicated to teenagers. 

It had the longest average retention rate of any class at the JDJSDS. I know that for a fact because as part of the successful recovery strategy that I developed and implemented at the JDJSDS so that it didn't close (which was Jan de Jong's (JDJ) stated intention), I analysed the retention rates of the many classes conducted at the JDJSDS. 

The teenage class had siblings as members. It also had children of former JDJ instructors and highly graded former members. Those former instructors and highly graded members' children were following in their parent's footsteps, and the parents were engaged and proud to share their kids journey with them. 

I treasure the teenage class because of the culture that we developed together. 

I treasure the teenage class because they were a good bunch of kids. Respectful without respect being demanded. Hard working without being forced to work hard. Enjoying the class and having fun at the same time as working on their craft. Not above giving a bit of cheek (testing their limits) but never crossing the line. 

They were not automons. They did not adopt an unquestioning attitude to their studies/training, which is unfortunately a dominant attitude in the JDJ tradition, as it is in most martial arts. I encouraged them to think about what they were doing and what they were being taught, and to challenge it if it did not make sense or went against principles that were being ingrained. I welcomed their questioning my teaching as it made me a better teacher and jujutsuka.

This is, unfortunately, a common problem in the martial arts. Discipline and respect are often touted as being benefits of martial arts training and as part of martial arts culture. What that most often means is, do not question what is being taught. Adopt an unquestioning attitude to what is being taught. Adopt an unquestioning attitude to what is being taught as the instructor adopted an unquestioning attitude when they were being taught.

It should be noted that not only were all of the members of the teenage class proficient jujutsuka, some were also quite extraordinary, and many went on to tertiary education and successful careers, as MB exemplifies. 

I am proud of them all, as jujutsuka and as people. Intelligent, thinking people who were proficient jujutsuka. 

It should be noted that the class was probably evenly split between males and females, with the females being the equal, if not the better, of the jujutsuka in terms of performance and attitude. When I say attitude, I mean an attitude to stand firm against physical and societal challenges.

It was a privilege to be engaged with those teenagers in that class for that period of time.

I too grieve the teenage class.

I grieve the teenage class because it was immediately disbanded by 'administration' (so as not to name names) when I underwent surgery on one shoulder and then the next along with lengthy recovery and rehabilitation. Within six months, all of the long-standing members of the teenage class were no longer members of the JDJSDS.

Why did the 'administration' terminate the teenage class? Two reasons. First, shortsightedness and ignorance. Second, enmity.

The members of the teenage class were becoming advanced students in terms of their qualifications. Many were green belts and were about to work on their orange belts. An influential member of the administration decided that as they were relatively higher graded, they should be attending adult classes, even though they did not have adult bodies.

It is a quandary. What do you do with advanced adolescent students? Here's an answer. Why not let them continue in the class dedicated to teenagers. They will soon enough be older and physically more mature that they could train in adult classes, or their training partners are adults themselves. The higher grades from ikkyu to shodan will slow them down, as it slows down adults, so that there would not be black belts who had never trained with adults (as there are in some martial arts).

A generation of dedicated JDJ jujutsuka were lost because of a shortsighted, ignorant action that was also driven by enmity. A generation of future instructors. A generation who would then go on to have children of their own who they would introduce to the JDJSDS or whatever ryuha that sprung up from the demise of the JDJSDS after JDJ passed away. Lost, because of a shortsighted, ignorant action that was also driven by enmity.

As mentioned above, JDJ was intending to close the JDJSDS because it was losing money for years. This action caused a cohort of long-term students who had paid thousands of dollars in fees and purchases over the years and would have continued to do so to abandon the school/business. What harm would it have been to allow the class to continue as is, and thereby reap the financial benefits at a time when the business was losing money hand-over-fist?

The enmity? That's a story for another time. 

In sharing this story, I hope that the JDJ ryuha take heed and support adolescents. To paraphrase Morgan Feeman's character is Shawshank Redemption: 'I hope the principals and teachers of JDJ ryuha think about their students rather than themselves. I hope the principals and teachers of JDJ ryuha apply the principal of ju to their teaching of adolescents. I hope the principals and teachers of JDJ ryuha think. I hope.' 

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 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.

The Development of the JDJ Jujutsu Grading System Part 3.1: The Mon System Introduction

The following introduction to the mon system is taken from Jan de Jong: The Man, His School and His Ju Jitsu System (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1995) (the 'JDJ book'):

The Tsutsumi Hozan ryu ju jitsu system originally commenced at Rokku (6th kyu - yellow belt). Jan de Jong has made incremental changes in the techniques and the system over the years, however, the most substantial change was the introduction of the 'mon system' in 1978. (p. 12)

The introduction of the kyu system was discussed in a previous post. 

That post included that the individual levels and colour belt system of Jan de Jong's (JDJ) kyu system reflected that of Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu (THR) included in Tsutsumi Masao and Higashi Katsukuma's Die Selbstverteidigung (Jiu-Jitsu): nebst einem Anhange über Kuatsu (Wissenschaft der Wiederbelebung Verunglückter): mit 72 Abbildungen nach dem Leben (Self-defense (Jiu-Jitsu): along with an appendix on Kuatsu (science of resuscitation of casualties): with 72 illustrations based on life) published in Germany in 1906. It is unknown whether the content of the two grading systems were the same. It is unknown if the JDJ kyu grading system is the THR jujutsu kyu grading system.

It should be noted that a former JDJ jujutsu instructor who ended up teaching for him full-time has stated that during his time (1963-1974), JDJ did not discuss THR in classes or that what was being taught was THR jujutsu.

The mon system was introduced at the front end of the JDJ grading system, however, it will be seen that the same influence had a major impact on the development of the dan system at the back end. How it fits with the kyu system in the middle, well ...

The mon system is comprised of 1st mon to 7th kyu. Why did JDJ refer to the last three gradings in the mon system as kyu grades? From the abovementioned JDJ book (p. 31):

Entry Levels

Age Requirements and First Grading

Under 12 years - 1st Mon

12-15 years - 3rd Mon

Over 15 years - 9th Kyu 

It would appear that JDJ considered mon grades, junior grades and kyu grades, adult grades, when he developed the mon system.

Until the introduction of the 'mon system' (refer pate 12) in 1978, people of all ages attempted the yellow belt grading first. Paul Connolly (refer page 19) started under the old system at the age of twelve. Two years later he was the youngest person to grade purple belt showing that it was a challenge but not an insurmountable one. (JDJ Book, p. 27)

The mon grades opened up a whole new market for JDJ - kids and youths/teenagers. Before the mon system, there was only 6th kyu that was trained by and with adults. The above statement concerning the 'old system' being a challenge but not insurmountable is being generous to an extreme.

The 'mon system' is a series of gradings that supplement the original grading system and primarily examine the fundamentals of ju jitsu. It is a rational, scientific approach to the teaching and learning of ju jitsu.

By providing novice ju jitsuka (ju jitsu students) with a basic framework of ju jitsu skills and understanding at the beginning of their training, they are better prepared to tackle the demanding grading system and attain a higher level of proficiency more quickly. The outcome of this bold move has proved extremely successful with the graduates of this system having a deeper understanding of ju jitsu earlier.

These fundamentals link all the techniques and provide a 'system' of self defence rather than a collection of unrelated 'tricks'. Armed with an understanding of these fundamentals, an experienced ju jitsuka could develop their own style of ju jitsu. In ancient times this could mean the loss of likelihood for the original master, or even a challenge for his position or life. Thus these fundamentals were closely guarded secrets and only revealed to very advanced and trained yudansha (black belt holder).

The JDJ book was researched, written, and edited by me, with contributions by the senior instructors of the school and with extensive consultation with JDJ, as acknowledged at the start of the book. The book was based on my understanding of the grading system back in 1995. That understanding has changed significantly in the meantime with further study and reflection, as these series of posts demonstrate.

The gist of the above understanding was derived from Greg Palmer (one of five to complete the JDJ technical grades and be awarded sandan before being awarded yondan for his contributions to JDJ and his school). Greg was able to gain those insights that lead to a new and better understanding because he was a professional trained teacher. How much of those insights were shared by the other instructors and their teaching of the mon system and application to the teaching of the kyu system is open to question.

The reference to 'system' and 'tricks' is reference to systems theory. In the context of systems theory, a system refers to a complex whole, comprised of interconnected and interdependent parts or elements. Systems thinking is an approach to understanding and solving problems that emphasises the examination of the entire system, rather than focusing on its individual components. 

Another way of understanding this approach is contained in the chapter on analysis in my book on the science behind all fighting techniques. In that chapter I refer to Gerry Carr, Sports Mechanics for Coaches, 2edn, 2004:

Carr explains how it is easy to be overwhelmed by the complexity and speed of a skill when it is performed in its entirety. He suggests that when the skill is divided into phases it is far easier to analyse each phase of the skill separately rather than concentrate on the total skill. Dividing a skill into phases also allows us to teach, learn and train each phase separately before combining them to perform the complete skill. It enables us to identify the similarities and differences between different skills which has been described as the core of all learning. Identifying the similarities between techniques and defences means that by training the similar phases we are training a part of a number of techniques or defences rather than just the technique or defence in question. This produces efficiencies in training and produces a system rather than just a collection of techniques.

The reference to 'tricks' in the above JDJ book excerpt, and which has been discussed in a previous post, is reference to skills being considered in their entirety and independent of all other skills. The reference to 'system' is reference to the phases in the performance of a defence; the fundamentals of ju jutsu as the above JDJ book excerpt refers to them as. These phases/fundamentals form the basis for the mon grades, however, how they fit with the kyu grades is another matter.

The idea that these fundamentals in the mon system were the 'secrets' of the THR grading system that JDJ chose to go against tradition and share with novice students was a myth that grew out of JDJ's penchant for not acknowledging the source of his teachings. 

What is missing from the above description of the mon system is that it is based in large part on Yoseikan Budo (YB) teachings. JDJ adopted those teachings and developed the mon system based on those teachings without acknowledging the source of those teachings. Anyone from the YB tradition could comfortably pass all of the mon grades without any instruction from the JDJ tradition. They would also do pretty well with a lot of the gradings in the dan grades.

In terms of the comment in the above extract regarding attaining a higher level of proficiency more quickly and that the outcome of this bold move of introducing the mon system at the front end of the grading system, and how it has proved extremely successful, I will refer to an interview that JDJ participated in. The interviewer asked if JDJ thought it was a good idea to change the system to suit the students.

Yes, I know what you're saying, but you know you can learn all the time. And if the results are better one way than the other, why carry on in a way that gives poorer results? I'll give you an example. In 1978 a Major Greg Mawkes MBE asked me if I would go and teach the army self-defence. I said okay and soon afterwards found myself teaching members of the SAS and the Commandoes. Shortly after I had started to do this the Major and I had a discussion about things. He told me that he thought the method of fighting was really good and he was pleased with that. But he said the men were having some difficulty understanding it all. I said this was the usual way of things and that my students were the same. He then explained the army did not have unlimited time to spend on this and that what he needed was quick results.

So it was at that point I had to think things through and see what I could come up with. I looked at the usual way the army taught things and decided I would alter the way I was teaching and come more in line with the army way of doing things. Well, do you know, the people started to pick things up much faster than before, and they could do the techniques much better than before! So I had a talk with my Instructors and said I thought that we should change things so that we were teaching everyone like this. And at that time we changed the way we taught the students. The techniques were still the same, it was only the method of teaching them that was different. And since then things have been much better.

The JDJ ryuha that are teaching JDJ's grading system in any large degree should take note of JDJ's comment regarding carrying on in a way that gives poorer results. I have long argued that JDJ's grading system is 1.0 and is in need of revision. It is overly cumbersome, overly burdensome, and disjointed, not to mention the faults that are contained therein. The grading system is in need of rationalisation and integration. Without it, the JDJ tradition will die, which can be seen through the ever-diminishing JDJ ryuha since JDJ's passing.

If grading system 2.0 is to be realised, one must understand how system 1.0 was developed or evolved. That is one of the main purposes of these series of posts.

JDJ's reference to Mawke's comment that his men (SAS troopers) were having difficulties understanding JDJ's teachings is reference to the kyu system approach. The reference to the Army way of doing things is reference to the mon system approach, which is basically a YB system approach, and which involves the division of a skill into phases (see Carr above). An understanding of this approach can produce the abovementioned improved outcomes, however, as will be demonstrated in the following posts, that understanding is lacking in many of the instructors within the JDJ tradition, including to a large extent JDJ.

Is that understanding lacking, at least in part, due to the way the mon system was introduced? The mon system was introduced into the JDJ grading system in 1978 when the senior instructors were already the instructors to which JDJ referred to in the above interview extract. The ones he referred to talking with about the introduction of the mon grades. In which case, did the senior instructors go through the mon grades? Were their introductory sessions that enabled the instructors who would be teaching these grades to gain an understanding of their content? It has to be understood that the mon grades are a significantly different system to the kyu grades. They are different in the very basis of their conception.

Am I the first black belt to have gone through the mon system? In which case, I am the first to complete the technical grades in the JDJ jujutsu grading system that included the mon grades (only five complete the technical grades and were awarded shodan; me and four of my instructors).

The next post will start to delve into the mon grades in some detail.

The Development of the JDJ Grading System Part 2.7: Shodan (Part 6: Jutsuri no Kata (Theory) and Kotoba no Hyogen (Terminology))

SHODAN PART 6: JUTSURI NO KATA AND KOTOBA NO HYOGEN

Part 6 of Jan de Jong's (JDJ) jujutsu shodan grading includes two parts: jutsuri no kata and kotoba no hyogen.

Jutsuri no Kata

According to Jan de Jong: The man, his school and his ju jitsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1995), jutsuri no kata means 'kata of the reason of the art, theory.'

The description of the jutsuri no kata in the abovementioned book is: 'Oral examination on technical aspects on any technique in all the grades up to and including Ikkyu.'

This grading follows on from Part 5 of the ikkyu grading: 'Oral examination on technical aspects on any technique in Ichimon to Gokyu.'

These gradings are indicators of the instructor element in JDJ's jujutsu grading system. They are indicators that ikkyu and shodan gradings were designed by JDJ to produce high quality instructors as well as high quality practitioners, if not more so. These gradings are a major innovation that was introduced by JDJ into his grading system.

These gradings are known as 'theory gradings.' While the idea is laudable, it's execution was, and is in all JDJ ryuha, flawed because the theory was/is lacking. I can now provide the theory that fulfills the promise of JDJ's innovative theory gradings.

Here I'll defer to my chapter on forces in my as yet unpublished book on the science behind all fighting techniques. The following is the introduction to that chapter:

You will recall from chapter one that Gracie and Gracie suggest that a black belt is a fully qualified teacher who knows why a given move works in addition to knowing how to perform the move. That is, they suggest, a black belt understands the biomechanical principles that underlie the move. Biomechanics is the study of forces and their effects on living systems (McGinnis 2005), therefore, a black belt is expected to understand the mechanical concept of force and its effect on humans in the martial arts. This chapter provides that understanding which is sorely lacking in the martial arts.  

There is a bit to unpack in the above extract.

Gracie and Gracie are right, and they are wrong, when suggesting that a black belt is a fully qualified teacher. They are right in terms of the general perception by the public (and maybe Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu), but they are wrong for two reasons: (1) Most Japanese martial arts consider shodan to be a 'beginner's' grading in that the student has mastered the basics. They are not considered to be teachers of any description until 3rd-5th dan. (2) Most martial arts do not teach students/practitioners to be teachers. Teaching requires a different set of skills and knowledge to that of a practitioner. That is why I argued that Greg Palmer was the best teacher at the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS) - because he was a trained teacher. However, Greg also lacked an understanding of biomechanical principle that underlie techniques.

Greg used to say that this is where the JDJ jujutsu grading system was different to most other martial arts grading systems. In the Japanese martial arts, shodan is considered to be a beginner-type grading (see above) whereas in the JDJ jujutsu system, shodan is the equivalent of a 'master' grading in most other grading systems because of the teaching (including theory) elements, and the extensive kyu grading system that came before. In fact, the same may be said of ikkyu given that JDJ developed the kyu system as a one-off grading system with ikkyu being the instructor grade.

In this way, Gracie and Gracie are correct in terms of JDJ shodans (and ikkyus) being fully qualified teachers, at least compared to most martial arts, because there are teaching elements in those gradings. But there is room for significant improvement in those elements, and those improvements are relatively easy to introduce and implement, with the aid of my teachings on the science behind all fighting techniques.

Gracie and Gracie describe the basis of the theory grades in JDJ's grading system. The basis lies in understanding how a technique works. Gracie and Gracie go on to explain that this basis involves an understanding of the biomechanical principles that underlie techniques. I can categorically state that that understanding is missing in the JDJ tradition and in most, if not all, martial arts. My book on the science behind all fighting techniques is designed to fill that void.

The theory grades are no theoretical exercise. They form the basis for teaching, learning, and correcting techniques and performances. It can be done better and provide a consistent standard of instruction for the organisation and its offshoots (see below). 

In the section on 'Force' in the abovementioned chapter in my book:

Kreighbaum and Barthels (1996) suggest that the visualisation of forces is a necessary skill for, among others, teachers and coaches because forces account for the changes in the motion and shape of all things in the environment. It would also be a beneficial skill for students for the same reason.

After a brief introduction to the mechanical concept of force:

Think about every technique taught by martial arts and you will see that they are designed to change the motion of an opponent’s body and/or to cause the deformation of their bodily tissues in order to cause pain and/or injury. Forces cause those changes. Forces are responsible for the effectiveness of every technique taught by martial arts and other activities associated with preparing a person to engage in a violent encounter and those used in violence generally, therefore, it is important for those that teach and study those techniques to understand what forces are and how they can be pictured as they are applied to or by a body. The beauty of it all is that the mechanical concept of force is very easy for the layperson to understand and apply.

The last sentence has been emphasised for obvious reasons.

After explaining the mechanical concept of force that is very easy for the layperson to understand and apply, the following is an extract from the section that refers to JDJ's theory gradings:

The black belt grades in the jujutsu grading system developed by Shihan Jan de Jong OAM 9th Dan (see chapter one) are as much about producing proficient teachers as they are about producing proficient practitioners. Each of the black belt grades include theory gradings, which reflects Gracie and Gracie’s suggestion that a black belt is a fully qualified teacher that is expected to know why a technique works in addition to knowing how to perform it (see chapter one). The theory grading in shodan (first dan) requires the candidate to answer questions on techniques without demonstration. A favourite question of de Jong’s was: ‘What are the forces involved with tai gatame ude kujuki (body-set arm breaking)?’ 

Figure 4.1 Tai gatame ude kujuki (body-set arm breaking). Photo courtesy of Paul Amyes. Reprinted by permission.

De Jong had an intuitive understanding that forces are what makes techniques work, however, neither he nor the grading candidates possessed knowledge of the mechanical concept of force. Their lack of knowledge often resulted in convoluted explanations by grading candidates that may or may not have focused on the essential elements of the technique. De Jong and the grading candidates would have been better served if they had an understanding of the mechanical concept of force when asking and answering those most insightful of questions.

Given the above insight, this is a question that I have asked many of JDJ's and JDJ ryuha ikkyu and yudansha and I have never been disappointed in not receiving an accurate and concise answer; an accurate and concise explanation of what makes the technique work. An accurate and concise explanation is available, as I've suggested above, and that accurate and concise explanation is easily understood by a recipient of said explanation and who has no knowledge of the concept of mechanical force.

I then go on to explain teaching with forces:

The learning of students will be accelerated if they are first taught how to learn. First teach them the mechanical concept of force. Explain that forces are what makes every technique work; that a force is either a push or a pull and that it has a PoA, direction, and magnitude; that the purpose of applying a force is to change the motion of an opponent or to deform their tissues in order to cause pain and/or injury; and then consistently teach techniques using this force-based approach. The students will learn to look for forces when a technique is taught; to look for the essence of the technique. When they come to identify and correct errors in their own or other’s performance, they will go directly to the heart of the technique. 

First, there is an obvious lack of content given that the elements of force have not been shared here but are the subject of the chapter in question. Second, if anyone is interested in learning the concept of force which goes directly to the heart of every technique taught in the martial arts or used in violence generally, please feel free to contact me.

The above extract refers to the learning by students and teaching them how to learn. The following is an extract from the introduction to my book on the science behind all fighting techniques:

The title of Carr’s (2004) Sport Mechanics for Coaches might imply that it is only for coaches, however, Carr explains that his book is written for coaches, teachers, athletes, and sports fans. After explaining how a knowledge of sport mechanics helps produce better sporting performances, Carr explains that his book will help those who coach to become better coaches. That is in line with Gracie and Gracie’s assertion that a knowledge of the why of techniques makes for far better martial arts teachers. Carr also suggests that athletes will discover that the information contained in his book will help improve their performances. Even though I led with Gracie and Gracie’s teacher reference, The Science Behind All Fighting Techniques is written for both martial arts teachers and students (and anyone interested in fighting techniques generally). It will make for far better teachers, as Gracie and Gracie, and Carr suggest. It will also make for far better students. It will make for far better students because (a) they will have far better teachers, and (b) their own knowledge of why a technique works will mean that they will not be as reliant on their teacher’s knowledge of why a technique works and they can take greater responsibility for their own learning experience.

The theory, an understanding of what makes every technique work, does not necessarily need to be the sole province of instructors. It can be shared with students so that they know what to look for when learning and correcting techniques before they even enter a class. However, this cannot be shared with said students if the instructors do not know that theory.

Another of JDJ's favourite theory grading questions was: what is the difference between o soto gari, o soto guruma, and o soto otoshi? All those who answered this question in the JDJ tradition have got the answer at least partially wrong, and they will continue to do so without help.

You will recall from a previous post that the core of all learning is the identification of similarities and differences. A more complete question would have been, what are the similarities and differences between these three techniques? 

One of the similarities is that all three techniques are designed to apply forces in order to cause uke to fall to the ground/mats. A difference is in the application of forces in each of the three techniques, and the difference between throws and takedowns.

In my chapter on throws and takedowns, I demonstrate that there is no accurate, definitive distinction between throws and takedowns in the martial arts and martial arts literature. For instance, the three abovementioned techniques are included in the Kodokan Judo (KJ) syllabus. A unique feature of KJ is the classification of their techniques. Classification is one of the proven highly effective means of identifying similarities and differences. In the KJ classification, there is a throwing class (nage waza) but no takedown class (taoshi waza). Does that mean that KJ does not teach takedown techniques/taoshi waza?

In my book, I have developed a biomechanical definition (which is classification; see above) of throwing techniques and takedown techniques. An answer to the abovementioned question would include classifying the three techniques as either a throw or a takedown, which in turn would feature an explanation on the application of applied forces to achieve the objective of the technique.

From my chapter on throws and takedowns in the abovementioned book:

What does a student know when they are told that they are about to learn a particular throw or takedown when no distinction is made between those two types of techniques? They know that they are about to learn a technique where forces are applied to cause an opponent to fall to the ground. What does a student know when they have been taught the above biomechanical difference between throws and takedowns, and they are told that they are about to learn a two-legged takedown? They know that forces will be applied (see chapter four) to the opponent that: ...

They know all of this before they even know the name of the technique let alone having seen it demonstrated, just because of the biomechanical classification of throwing and takedown techniques. They know what the gist of the technique is, what makes it work, and they can look for those elements when the technique is demonstrated. When they come to correct errors in their or other’s performance, they know where to start because they know the mechanical elements that make the technique work.

This is also called previewing. Previewing involves using the known to understand the unknown. An example of previewing would be teaching o soto otsohi: 'o soto otoshi is like o soto gari except that ...' Here we run into another small problem. JDJ did not know how to perform o soto otoshi, even though the technique is included as a defence in the gradings a number of times. If JDJ did not know, nor did his instructors and nor did his students. 

I came to know by studying outside of JDJ's teachings. I came to know after reading Toshiro Daido's Kodokan Judo: Throwing Techniques which is the best book by far on the subject, and which liberally uses the identification of similarities to teach throwing techniques and their variations. 

There was no consistency in teachers in the JDJSDS. The development of a theory body of knowledge as suggested above would provide some consistency in the teachers and their teaching in the JDJSDS and the JDJ ryuha. It would also provide a point of differentiation for marketing purposes and produce superior results faster.

Kotoba no Hyogen

The translation of kotoba no hyogen according to the abovementioned JDJSDS book is 'expression (hyogen) of the language (kotoba), terminology.'

The description of the grading in the same book is: 'Oral examination of Japanese terminology used in Ichimon and Ikkyu . General Japanese terminology for weapons will also be examined, e.g., bo, jo, nunchaku, etc.'

This part of the grading is carried on from part 4 of the ikkyu grading which included ju jitsu rekishi (history) and kotoba no hyogen. Jutsuri no kata was a separate grading in ikkyu (part 5).

The description of the kotoba no hyogen part of part 4 of the ikkyu grading is: 'Oral examination of Japanese terminology used in Ichimon to Gokyu. General Japanese terminology for weapons will also be examined, e.g., bo, jo, nunchaku, etc.'

Why did JDJ include these types of gradings in his grading system?

His original grading sheets were all in English so there was no need for translation. Later on, the grading sheets were recast using Japanese terminology. The obvious reason for the necessity of terminology gradings is that the recasting required an understanding of Japanese terminology to understand the grading sheets.

Zak, a full-time instructor for JDJ before my instructors, informed me that JDJ used Japanese terminology for techniques 'always.' He also informed me that things were a lot less formal in his day (1963-1974) and there was no kneeling (seiza), bowing, and 'sensei ni rei' to start classes.

For those JDJ ryuha who have reverted to producing grading sheets using English terms, why then persist with the kotoba no hyogen gradings? It is user friendly to produce grading sheets using English terms, but what is the point of this grading in that case?

JDJ once told me that the reason he introduced these gradings into his grading system was so that his instructors could understand the terms when used in books outside of his system of jujutsu. There are two problems with that explanation: (1) the instructors did not tend to study anything outside of JDJ's teachings as previously explained, and (2) JDJ used different terms at times than are commonly used. For instance, the commonly used shiho nage is JDJ's tekubi te nage, kote geashi is JDJ's tekubi hineri, etc.

Conclusion

JDJ's theory gradings are a major innovation and contribution to all martial arts gradings. It focuses on producing qualified teachers, which is generally lacking in the martial arts. Unfortunately, the theory is lacking, which is where my work comes in to fill that void, and in an easily accessible and useful way.