Showing posts with label Pencak Silat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pencak Silat. Show all posts

Thursday, 25 April 2024

JDJ Registries: Yudansha, Ikkyu holders, and Instructors

A comment from Anonymous was published on the previous blog post: 'Is there a registry of senior grades awarded by JDJ? There are people around claiming they were awarded 4th dans by him (https://amahof.asn.au/members/2022-inductees/tom-bellamy-2022/).'

That got me thinking.

I have a registry of jujutsu dan grades awarded by Jan de Jong (JDJ) that was prepared by Greg Palmer. I would like to develop a registry of jujutsu ikkyu grades and JDJ jujutsu instructors, two separate registries.


The ikkyu grade registry would include those who were awarded ikkyu by JDJ but did not go on to grade shodan. The instructor registry would be those that instructed for JDJ as instructors and not assistant instructors. I will eventually publish all three registries. I'll start.

Before I start, I have come to realise that I have been remiss in my, what I now realise is an incomplete understanding of the 'JDJ tradition.' I have been focused on the JDJ jujutsu tradition, however, there is also the JDJ aikido tradition and the JDJ pencak silat tradition. They are also relevant and significant, and just as innovative, and just as controversial, as his jujutsu tradition. 

Even though I was graded shodan in aikido by JDJ and assisted him in redeveloping his aikido grading system, and I graded highly in his pencak silat and was included in his pencak silat instructor's class after introducing JDJ to a new 'type' of pencak silat that he then went on to teach and include in his grading system, it is jujutsu where I was most highly graded and experienced. If anyone wants to start off a JDJ aikido or pencak silat tradition series, I'll be more than happy to post it on this blog. In the meantime, JDJ's jujutsu tradition: 

JDJ Ikkyu Holders:

Margaret de Jong

Vass D'Esterre

Robert Kirby

Peter Canavan

Rodney Miller

Dennis Dunn

Warwick 'Zak' Jaggard

John Poulton

David Palmer

David Green

Michael Boland

Heidi Romundt

Steve Moller

David Green

Gerald Woods

Adrienne Barlow

Alan Robson

Ross Allanson


JDJ Jujutsu Instructors

Peter Clarke

Robert Hymas

Paul Connolly

Greg Palmer

Ian Lloyd

Robert Kirby

Hans de Jong

Debbie Clarke

John Copley

John Coles

Peter Templeman

Maggie de Jong

Vass D'Esterre

Warwick 'Zak' Jaggard

Heidi Romundt

Darryl Cook

David Green

Joe Fantasia

Manfred (?)

Tony Chiffings

Rodney Miller


Please, dear readers, contribute to these lists if you can. 

Btw, this gathering of names is an attempt at preserving and strengthening the JDJ culture which will enhance the prospects of that culture and the current JDJ ryuha surviving. This idea of 'JDJ culture' will be the subject of a future blog post.





Tuesday, 5 March 2024

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.




 

Thursday, 15 February 2024

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.

Wednesday, 17 January 2024

The Development of the JDJ Jujutsu Grading System Part 3.5: The Mon System and JDJ's Blocking Techniques Classification

This post follows on from the previous post concerning blocking techniques in the Jan de Jong (JDJ) jujutsu mon grading system. Specifically, this post looks at JDJ's classification of blocking techniques that he introduced into the mon grades.

Classification

You will recall from a previous post that the core of all learning is the identification of similarities and differences. One of the proven highly effective means of identifying similarities and differences is classification. Many in the martial arts think of classification as simply being an administrative exercise. They could not be more wrong, as I explain in my book on the science behind all fighting techniques:

Lackoff (1987) warns against such a dismissive attitude. He suggests that there is nothing more basic to our thought, perception, action, and speech than classification and that without the ability to classify we would not function at all, either in the physical world or in our social and intellectual lives.'

JDJ's Classification of Blocking Techniques

JDJ's classification of blocking techniques involves six categories: hard, soft, pushing, pulling, grabbing, and empty. Exploring those categories and the classification system itself is revealing.

Yoseikan Budo Kuzushi and JDJ's Classification of Blocking Techniques

You will recall from a previous post that JDJ included unbalancing (kuzushi) sections in his mon grades. These sections involved unbalancing techniques from hand grabs: e.g., normal single wrist grip - normal unbalancing. These attacks and techniques are taken straight from Yoseikan Budo (YB).

The JDJ classification of blocking techniques was introduced into the mon system to complement the unbalancing from hand grips, but for moving attacks. This is seen in their use in the various sections in the mon grades, however, it is explicitly seen in the Unbalancing (Kuzushi) - Blocking (Uke) sections in 5th mon and 9th kyu (both part of the mon system; see previous post).

You will recall from the previous post that one of Nakayama's blocking possibilities is unbalancing the opponent with a block. Do the blocks in JDJ's classification unbalance an opponent with the blocking technique?

JDJ's Classification of Blocking Techniques, Unbalancing, and Pencak Silat

JDJ did not originally develop his classification of blocking techniques to compliment the tehodoki kuzushi. He developed it to classify the response to an attack in the pencak silat he taught. This classification was then introduced into his pencak silat grading system. In this way, JDJ was conceptualising 'blocking techniques' as being uke waza.

Uke Waza

Uke waza is often translated in karate as being blocking techniques, however, it actually translates as receiving techniques; techniques used to receive an attack.

In this way, uke waza includes evasive body-movements (EBM), aka taisabaki, and so-called blocking techniques.

There are three ways of dealing with a moving attack in order to avoid injurious contact with the body: (1) 'block' the attack (see below), (2) move the attacking limb or object off the line of attack (deflection), or (3) move off the line of attack (EBM). There are three ways of repositioning oneself to execute a counterattack from a moving attack: (1) 'block' the attack, (2) move the attacking limb off the line of attack (deflection), or (3) move off the line of attack.

The last sentence was in response to a comment received on my Facebook post sharing the previous blog post. I share their conception of taisabaki in that it repositions tori to execute a technique, however, they are only half right. The avoiding injurious contact with the body from an attack aspect of taisabaki can never be forgotten or minimised.

Taisabaki is taught within the JDJ teachings in terms of an EBM to avoid injurious contact with the body. In doing so, it does not necessarily reposition tori in an optimum position to execute a decisive technique. When I began instructing my students that taisabaki is used to avoid injurious contact with the body and to reposition in order to attack, the positioning, distancing, and timing problems they experienced previously tended to sort themselves out. It also changed their mindset from being prey trying to avoid being eaten to being a counterattacker, a fighter.

PS: Uke means to receive. Ukemi is often translated as breakfalls, however, it actually means to receive through or with the body. In this case, ukemi is a biomechanically accurate description of breakfalling techniques. The force applied to the body when landing from a fall is based on Newton's third law of motion: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Newton's 'action' and 'reaction' means mechanical force. In the case of ukemi, the falling body applies force to the landing surface upon impact, and the landing surface applies a reaction force to the falling/landing body, which ukemi is designed to absorb in a way that reduces the risk of injury (see my book on the science behind all fighting techniques).

Unbalancing (Kuzushi) - Blocking (Uke

You will recall from the previous post that an Unbalancing (Kuzushi) - Blocking (Uke) section was included in the 5th mon and 9th kyu gradings. Included in these sections were the demonstration of pushing, pulling, and grabbing block against a low punch and a brushing block against a downwards hit.

A pushing block involves an EBM (irimi) and a pushing force being applied to the opponent's attacking arm to unbalance the opponent (see first image above). A pulling block is the same except the EBM is either nagashi or irimi senkai and a pulling force is applied to the opponent's attacking arm for the same purpose (see image to the right). 

As explained in my book on the science behind all fighting techniques, mechanical force is defined as a push or a pull (see my post published in 2013 that explained the use of the mechanical concept of force to understand all techniques). Whenever an 'object' starts, stops, speeds up, slows down, or changes direction, a force caused that change in motion. As I explain in the aforementioned book, Jigoro Kano, founder of Kodokan Judo, was the quintessential martial arts biomechanist when he described kuzushi as being a push or a pull in his Kodokan Judo.

A grabbing block involves an EBM and 'grabbing' the opponent's attacking arm (see image to right). Unbalancing occurs when the EBM positions tori a small distance away for uke's attacking arm and the grabbing motion pulls said arm to tori's body thereby unbalancing uke. In force-related terms, this involves a pulling force being applied to uke's attacking arm at right angles.

I cannot remember any defence included in the JDJ jujutsu grading system that uses this type of 'block', not in its purest form at least. An example of its practical use might be in a grabbing-pulling motion when unbalancing uke in a circular motion which is a common tactic in YB and aikido, and JDJ's jujutsu and aikido. If so, why not demonstrate that in the grading rather than a technique that is never used?

 


Brushing block is as described. It brushes the opponent's attacking arm, like brushing dirt of their sleeve. It does not deflect the attacking arm. It doesn't have to because the EBM has taken care of the problem of avoiding injurious contact with the body (see previous post) The attacking arm stays on course without interruption. See below for an illustration of a brushing block (ignoring the strike to the throat).

There is no 'grabbing'. There is no pulling. There is no pushing. How does a brushing block unbalance an opponent? After all, it is included in the section of the grading in which the grading candidate demonstrates unbalancing an opponent using a block? When I asked two of the senior instructors this question, it was suggested that the unbalancing comes from the 'brush' slightly adding to uke's forward motion thereby slightly unbalancing them in that direction. Being polite, that is the very definition of a shoehorned answer/explanation.

If that was a shoehorned answer/explanation, then the answer to the same question in relation to empty blocks is a shoehorned answer/explanation par excellence.

PS: I challenge all students who are engaged in training with JDJ ryuha were these gradings are still employed to ask their instructor how a brushing block unbalances an opponent, which it is supposed to do given that it is included in a section of the grading that examines unbalancing techniques.

Empty Block

JDJ's empty block is no block at all. It is an EBM used to avoid injurious contact with the body. Empty block is part of JDJ's blocking techniques classification but is never mentioned in JDJ's jujutsu grading system. Why not?

JDJ's classification of blocking techniques was used in the JDJ jujutsu grading system to classify unbalancing techniques used against moving attacks. How does an empty block, no block at all and only an EBM, unbalance an opponent? When I asked this question of the senior instructors, it was suggested that by not being where the opponent expected, the opponent would topple forward having not met the expected resistance to the force applied by their attack. That may well happen, however, are you going to base your tactics in a physical confrontation on that assumption?

Hard and Soft Blocks

The hard-soft blocking techniques dichotomy is an oft discussed dichotomy in the martial arts and martials arts literature. It is usually discussed in terms of explaining the superiority of soft blocks over karate hard blocks. Often this argument is supported scientifically with the aid of the concept of forces, an argument that is flawed and shows the lack of understanding in terms of theory that many in the martial arts have.

Examples of the hard karate blocks are the basic high, middle, and low blocks of karate. The example given of soft blocks is deflections. It is suggested that more force is required to be applied with the hard karate blocks than with the soft deflections.

Karate Moves for Beginners

What the arguers do not understand is that these hard karate blocks are in fact deflections (for the most part; see below).

The argument is often that the hard karate blocks apply force against force whereas deflections do not, thus the latter being more efficient. The hard karate blocks do not apply force against force. The apply force at an angle to the attacking limb, thus deflecting the trajectory of the attacking limb. More force is applied to deflect the attacking limb in this case, therefore the only question is, why is more force applied in the case of hard blocks than soft blocks? Is the answer found in Nakayama's blocking possiblity #1 which is the block being used as an attack to discourage further attacks (see previous post)?

What is a 'block'?

Let's go back to the beginning ask the basic question: what is a block? The general definition is to make the movement or flow difficult or impossible. It's to put something in the way of something. 

3 Techniques to Defeat a Block | Joe Daniel Football

The martial arts has a tendency of using terms without reference to their general meaning. There is no better example than that of throws and takedowns in the martial arts. A definitive distinction between these two classes of techniques is abscent in martial arts theory, and those proposed are either incomprehensible or plain wrong, until the one that I proposed in my book on the science behing all fighting techniques. My definition is supported by the general definition of throw and takedown, which the martial arts seem to have ignored.

The abovementioned argument in support of the superiority of soft deflections over hard karate blocks is that the latter apply force against force. The above presented a counter-argument, however, there are exceptions.

Are there true blocks in the martial arts, ones that apply force against force, ones that are put in front of an attack? A shin block is one. 

Gracie and Danaher distinguish between evasion and blocking in their Mastering Jujitsu (2003):

Evasive skills allow you to avoid strikes without contact. There are easy on your body and require proficient motion skills. Blocking allows you to safely absorb impact (rather than avoid it), and it requires sound conditioning and stance skills. (p. 77)

Their blocks include covering block, palm block, double-forearm block, and shin block. The shin block is referred to above as a true block. The double-forearm block (see right image) will be the only other Gracie and Danaher block considered here:

From your fighting stance, turn toward the incoming blow as you simultaneoulsy step away from it slightly. Bring your forearms together and tuck your chin, crunching your upper body inward, like a turtle retreating into a shell. (p. 78)

Aside from never having seen this block used or taught, other than in boxing where huge gloves provide the protection, why is the double-forearm block being used when the step away, the EBM, has taken the defender out of range of the attacker? Even if there is a valid answer, that question should always be asked when a block is used in conjunction with an EBM.

Returning to karate hard blocks. In addition to being deflections, they can also be true blocks depending on the direction of the attack and the body position of the defender. For instance, age uke (rising block, aka high block) is a deflection against a punch but is a true block against a downard hit with no EBM employed. A low block is a true block employed against a low roundhouse kick.

The Dog's Breakfast

You can see that the concept of blocking techniques as applied in the JDJ jujutsu mon grading system is a bit of a dog's breakfast, as it is in the martial arts in general (as I demonstrated in the chapter on blocking techniques in my book on the science behind all fighting techniques). But what to do about it? That is the question that is being raised throughout this examination of the development of the JDJ jujutsu grading system. What would you do?



 

 


Tuesday, 2 January 2024

The Development of the JDJ Jujutsu Grading System Part 2.6: Shodan (Part 5: Shiai)

SHODAN PART 5: SHIAI

Part 5 of Jan de Jong's (JDJ) jujutsu shodan grading is shiai

The translation of shiai in Jan de Jong: The man, his school and his ju jitsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1995) is 'a game, match, or contest.' 

There are a number of shiai gradings in the higher grades (ikkyu to sandan inclusive). Insights, or greater insights, (see Klein) may be gained that lead to a new and better understanding by studying these shiai gradings together rather than separately.

Why Shiai Gradings?

The first question that has to be asked is, why did JDJ include shiai gradings in his jujutsu grading system? That question needs to be asked in the context of the fact that JDJ did not see much of value in shiai as a training method. 

I know this for a fact because he specifically told me so and discouraged the practice when I was 'sparring' with a training partner when orange or purple belt. It was reinforced by Robert Hymas, a senior jujutsu instructor at the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS) and who was one of the three that JDJ ultimately awarded Rokudan, when he reiterated JDJ's views from the JDJ perspective.

So why did JDJ introduce shiai gradings into his jujutsu grading system? 

One explanation is that he was unfamiliar with grading systems, as has previously been mentioned, and he saw others were including shiai-type gradings into their grading systems. Kodokan Judo for instance. Then there was Tomiki Aikido/Shodokan Aikido and their competition aikido. Karate. Kyokushin karate and their x-man kumite. All of those forms of training were to be found in books, which as previously stated, were a great source of JDJ's 'continuous professional development.' And, of course, the Australian Ju Jitsu Association were lobbying for him to develop a competition format for the organisation given his role as President and National Coach of the organisation.

Given all of that, the second question is, did JDJ know what he was trying to teach or assess in the shiai gradings? What was the purpose of those gradings, other than including them because others were and, of course, to populate the higher grades given his one-off development of the kyu grades as his grading system?

I suggest that JDJ did not know what he was trying to teach or assess in these types of gradings. Sacrilege, I know, however, as will be seen below, that view is supported by the fact that there was virtually no instruction provided by JDJ nor his senior instructors as to what to do in these gradings; what they are trying to teach the student; what is being assessed. This is also supported by the fact that JDJ saw very little of value in this type of training. In this, I agree, which will also be seen below.

But, as always, there is a lot to learn by studying JDJ's shiai-type grades and their introduction, even if they serve no useful purpose ... other than to provide those lessons (see conclusion below).

Ikkyu: Futari Dori

At the end of the ikkyu shinken shobu no kata grading (practical grading) there is a section titled Futari Dori (attacks featuring two opponents). The description of the grading refers to two attackers, five attacks in total, and unarmed vs unarmed.

When looking for an image for this section (see left), it appears that futari dori is very much an aikido term and an aikido form of training, albeit very different to JDJ's grading referred to by the same name.

First question: did the senior instructors of the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS), those that graded shodan before I did, grade this section of the grading? Was it part of the original ikkyu grading? Or was it introduced when Jan de Jong (JDJ) introduced the shodan grading which led to additional gradings being added to the nikyu and ikkyu gradings? I might have been able to tell you, however, I no longer have access to the old grading sheets that I was gifted and which I regifted for the noblest of reasons. It appears that no good deed does go unpunished.

I recently saw a video posted on Facebook by a JDJ ryuha showing a nikkyu training/demonstration of this grading. (a) It was a mess, and (b) I would fail the candidate based on that performance, today.

The candidate in question should not be disheartened by those comments. Their performance was reflective of all who preceded them in this section of the grading. It was reflective of their instructor's performance in their grading, and reflective of their instructor's instructor's performance in their grading. In this case, the fault most definitely lays with the instructor, as it did in the JDJSDS.

Why is the performance in this grading always a mess. It is because the grading candidates abandon all of their training when engaged in this section of the grading. They start moving around all over the place, crouched in anticipation of an attack, and they are more inclined to move backward rather than forward in response to an attack. Was this their actions in any of the many shinken shobu no kata (practical) gradings that came before, and even the shinken shobu no kata grading that this section is a part of? The answer is a resounding, No!

George S. Patton: 'You fight like you train.' That would not appear to be the case within the JDJ tradition when the shiai-type grades are attempted. This raises a question as to the practicality of the shinken shobu no kata method of training. 


When I teach or discuss this grading, I suggest the person think Cpt Algren in The Last Samurai when he is confronted by three assailants armed with swords while he is unarmed. He stands his ground and waits for the attackers to attack, to come to him, and then he responds. The application of the 'mind of no mind' lesson in a life-and-death situation. This is representative of the shinken shobu no kata training.

The above is what should be being looked for in this grading, however, that is what is not being demonstrated in this grading. Why not? Because the instructors do not teach tactics for this grading, other than to place one opponent in front of the other. The same instruction given to 1st mon candidates, aged five or six, in the two-attacker section of their grading. This is an issue that will be taken up when the mon grades are considered.

I was going to share my experience in successfully completing this grading as there is a great deal to learn through the analysis of that experience, however, I'm trying to limit the length of these posts, unsuccessfully so as it appears.

How did I go in this grading? I passed. That is about all I can say about my performance. I, like the abovementioned JDJ ryuha demonstrator, moved 'all over the shop.' My two attackers chased me all over the dojo, and it was a large dojo. Did I execute any successful defensive techniques? A block or two, maybe. No locks, no throws, no takedowns. I didn't land any percussion techniques of my own, but then neither did my attackers. Is a pass in this grading not being hit? Is that what this grading is supposed to teach and assess? Is it simply a game of 'stay away'? I don't know, because my instructors would not appear to have known given their instruction and feedback. 

Shodan Shiai

'Free fight unarmed vs tanto, unarmed vs tanbo, then uke and tori swap roles.'

Tanto refers to a knife; tanbo a short stick.

First, it was a very different time. Occupational health and safety (OHS) did not exist, at least not in these gradings. No safety precautions were taken, other than mats. No restrictions on attacks with weapons. Head, eyes, groin where all acceptable targets for both armed and unarmed participants. No restrictions on techniques. No instructions whatsoever (for the most part).

The tanbo and tanto were usually rolled up newspaper which were then taped. Those makeshift training weapons did inflict a fair 'sting' when hit or stabbed with them, and were capable of causing injury, which they did on occasion.  

Second, this could be seen to be a relatively fair grading in that the attackers were not trained in fighting/attacking with a tanto or tanbo whereas the defender was trained in defending against tanto and tanbo attacks, to some degree.

It could be seen to be a relatively fair grading ... in theory. In practice, the armed attacker annihilates the unarmed defender. When the two candidates swap roles, the same result occurs. In order to pass the grading, the difference between the two scores has to be within a certain range otherwise both fail.

When I asked a senior instructor what the purpose of this grading was, he replied that it was to show that even with training that a person would be annihilated by an armed, relatively untrained in fighting with that weapon, attacker. And that is what the grading does show, time and time again. Good lesson. Good to know. Thanks. Cheers. 

It was a good thing that I did not take that lesson on board when I was confronted by a knife-wielding assailant on two separate occasions (the starting point of my book on a new and better understanding of our natural and learned responses to a threat).

Third, why free fighting unarmed against a knife and unarmed against a short stick? In fact, why one unarmed against two unarmed in the previous grading? Shouldn't the progression be one unarmed against one unarmed, then one against two, and then one unarmed against one armed, and then both armed with the same weapon, etc.? Where is the one unarmed against one unarmed?  

An answer to these questions might be found in Tomiki's explanation of his introduction of shiai (randori) into his aikido.

Tomiki was a student of Jigoro Kano, founder of Kodokan Judo, and was eventually graded 8th dan by the Kodokan. He became fascinated by Morihei Ueshiba’s aikido and became one his early students. In his ‘On Jujutsu and its Modernisation’, Tomiki argues for two forms of randori training:


When we analyse the essence of attacks, they fall into two general categories:
1. An opponent, from close in, tries to topple (taosu) or restrain (osaeru) you.
2. An opponent, from a distance, tries to strike, lunge at, or kick you, or with a weapon tries to cut or stab you.
...
The system of randori practice that Master Kano formulated is for the situations described in point 1 above; it is the category of nage-waza, where from close in you apply a waza at the collar and sleeve of a Japanese style judo jacket. A system of randori practice where you would avoid your opponent's attack from a distance (as in point 2 above) and then apply a technique would utilize the atemi-waza and kansetsu-waza. Against this latter attack, the attack from a distance, there is a need to establish such system of randori training.


Randori practiced in aikido usually involves two or more opponents. It is not 'free fighting' per se but simply a 'free flowing' attack and defence with no continued fighting. JDJ had relatively little experience with randori training.

Tomiki's shiai (randori) involved an attacker armed with a knife. Did JDJ adopt Tomiki's shiai to continue that the shiai form of grading included in his one-off instructor grading, ikkyu? Did he include these types of gradings in terms of introducing a randori type in ikkyu and a Tomiki type in shodan? Did he include a short stick element because of its use in his pencak silat? ... Why aren't the attackers trained in the use of the weapons in attack mode?

Lastly, my grading, or I should say, our grading. Dave Palmer and my grading, it was something that had not been seen before or since. It was a literal blood bath. Maggie de Jong had to scrub the walls and mop the mats after the grading to remove the blood that had been spilled during the grading. There was a lot of blood.

This has to be expected when you get two real fighters, not just mere martial artists, together and there are no rules, no protective equipment, and when weapons are involved, and told to 'free fight.'

Again, a great deal can be learned from an analysis of my/our grading, however, post length considerations prohibit the sharing of my/our experience and its analysis.

How did Dave and I do in our grading? We passed ... even though the grading ended with Dave being taken to emergency after I punched him in the forehead with a standing fist punch and blood cascaded down his face and the front of his gi. He was attempting to retrieve a weapon that I had knocked out of his hand, and I instinctively punched him when he advanced to do so. He was knocked back the length of a tatami and as he attempted to advance, I instinctively punched him.

We passed even though I was rendered unconscious during the grading when I landed on my head/neck from a sacrifice throw by Dave (btw, great execution of the technique, dangerous, but great nonetheless).

In terms of OHS, our weapons were not taped rolled up newspaper. The knife was a wooden training knife and the tanbo was a piece of PVS piping wrapped in cloth and then taped. When you got hit with those 'training' weapons, you got hit, and the risk of injury increased exponentially. But we wanted to test ourselves, and of course there was no guidance or supervision provided by the senior instructors.

OHS-wise, nobody from the instructors table came to see how I was when I landed on my head/neck from Dave's sacrifice throw, and when a crack from my neck was heard 'like a "roo shooter's" shot' across the dojo, and as I laid on the ground unconscious for a bit. They simply waited for me to rise and continue the grading, which I did, albeit initially by backing off as the fight had become unfair with now two armed Daves advancing on me.

There was no feedback provided at the end of the grading, however, Hymas did approach me (us?) later and said that JDJ was not happy with the grading. JDJ never expressed that sentiment to us. Even then, I thought, 'How can any of the examiners be unhappy with the grading given the complete lack of direction provided by the instructors as to the conduct and purpose of the grading. Given the complete lack of indication as to what is supposedly being assessed.'

Nidan Shiai

'Free fight with tanto vs tanto'

This is the only shiai-type grading where there is an equal footing (see above re the absence of one unarmed v one unarmed). It is an equal footing because the two participants are armed with the same weapon. It is also an equal footing because the two participants have not been trained in the use of the knife and knife fighting. 'What is going on here?'

This is indicative of an issue within the JDJ tradition that I will address in a post associated with the mon grades, and that is that the attackers in the JDJ tradition are not taught how to attack properly. This has implications for the training of defensive tactics. 

I prepared for this grading. I learned from the previous shiai-type gradings that I'd undertaken.

The two attackers in my futari dori grading in ikkyu were Hymas and Dave Palmer. I asked Hymas to be one of my attackers because I wanted to test myself against the best. My strategy was to stay away from Hymas and to focus on responding to Dave's attacks or to attack Dave when Hymas attacked me. On the face of it, it was a sound strategy, however, as it turns out, it was a floored strategy. Dave was by far the more dangerous opponent.

Dave committed to his attacks. Hymas knew everything that I knew and knew the defences that I might employ against his attack, so he provided uncommitted attacks with a focus on countering my defence. This is a problem in this type of grading. I know everything you know, and you know everything that I know, and that knowledge impacts on tactics and strategies employed in the grading. It also leads to questions regarding the practicalities of the tactics and strategies thus learned in terms of 'real world' application.

I used this insight in my grading. I would faint an attack and observe the response. I'd faint it again and observe the response. If it was the same response, I'd attack with the anticipation of the response and adjust my attack accordingly. This became a strategy that I shared when engaged in my Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree. If I can discern your strategy, I can develop ways to defeat you.

I hadn't trained the futari dori grading with Hymas and Dave prior to the grading. If I had, I might have discerned Hymas' approach to his attacking role and developed a different strategy going into the grading, e.g., stay away from Dave and focus on Hymas.

In the shodan shiai grading, Dave and I did train the grading together prior to engaging in the grading. I learned that Dave tended to not acknowledge a strike and would walk through it to attack me.

Confidence isn't necessarily everything, but it is a big thing. On a rare occasion that we 'trained' this grading in the instructors class, I was paired with Darryl Cook. Cook is a very good practitioner. He is a contemporary of mine. He is aggressive and he is taller than me, bigger than me, and stronger than me. He was armed with the knife and I was unarmed, but I was 'all over him.' He had no answers. I actually felt physically taller and bigger than him. It was as though I was looking down on him from a height. Hymas took Cook aside to give him some advice since he observed that I was 'kicking his butt,' as the Americans would say. Cook returned and raised his knife to my face. Order was restored in the universe, my perception of my size returned to reality, and there was no more butt kicking.

I knew that Dave gained confidence when he walked through my attacks and 'kicked my butt.' The strategy going into the grading was to not allow that to happen; not to allow him to gain confidence by walking through my attacks and kicking my butt. The first time he tried it, I was ready. I put him on his 'arse', held him by the throat on the ground with my fist raised ready to 'ground and pound.' He covered up and raised both feet-legs ready to kick me. 

'Matte, matte, matte', JDJ shouted as he pounded the grading table. Hymas jumped up from the grading table and pulled me back ... and all the while, Dave and I were smiling at each other. We knew what this was all about. It was setting the 'rules' for this grading. Nobody had lost control, in fact, far from it, unbeknown to JDJ, Hymas, and whoever else was sitting on the grading table.

My nidan grading involved a number of candidates, all of whom had been my instructors. I trained a little with all of them, only to see how they fought. And then I studied knife fighting, given that there was zero instruction in knife fighting provided within the JDJSDS. Then I developed strategies to defeat my opponents, my instructors.

Memorably, when paired up with Debbie Clarke, a great practitioner and a real fighter, there was a standoff, so I provided an opening by lifting my hands. You will recall this strategy when ken tai ichi no kata was discussed in a previous post. It was a genuine opening and if she was good enough, she could 'kill' me. No takers. I raised my hands a little higher to entice her into attacking. No takers. A little higher, she attacked, I 'died.' Fair enough.

You will recall from a previous post that many, and most definitely the senior instructors, did not look outside of JDJ's teachings. In preparation for this grading, I looked outside of JDJ's teachings given that there were no specific teachings regarding knife fighting within JDJ's teachings. I also thought that this might give me a competitive advantage.

Part of my study re knife fighting was reading Col. Rex Applegate's Kill or Get Killed. The description accompanying the image to the right is:

Attack With Knife From Crouch

Beware of the man who holds his knife this way and who attacks from a crouch, with the blade held close to his body and with his free arm out in front to parry or to help create an opening for a slash or thrust.

Beware me. The following was included in the text:

The trained man will use this knife, in the attack, from a crouch, with the left hand forward and the knife held ... close to the body. The outstretched left hand will act as a guard, a foil or a parry, and will help to create the opening for a slash or thrust. The left hand also may be used to distract the adversary's attention - by waving it in his face, by throwing something, or by making sudden darting motions toward him. ...

Beware me and I was a trained man. I was trained in knife fighting by Applegate and not my instructors at the JDJSDS, even though there was a knife fighting grading in the curriculum which the senior instructors (Hymas, Peter Clarke, and Paul Connolly) had successfully completed. 

I adopted Applegate's approach, at times, with one important addition. When a thrusting attack was launched, I would move from the left foot forward staggered stance (han zenkutsu dachi) to a cross-stance. Or more accurately, sempok from pencak silat (see image below).


I was well versed in this stance having trained pencak silat for quite some time. Most importantly, the training was with Richard de Bordes school in London rather that at the JDJSDS as JDJ had, as he said, Westernised his pencak silat so that it would be acceptable for a Western audience. He had in fact Japanised it so that it resembled karate to a fair degree.    

Moving into this stance from a traditional staggered stance is effectively an evasive body-movement, similar to nagashi (flowing) in JDJ and Yoseikan Budo practice. Interestingly, the image accompanying the Tomiki aikido discussion above shows both aikidoka ostensibly assuming the same stance. The same stance is seen in some karate styles, and it is seen in JDJ jujutsu teachings, however, I would argue that there is less understanding of the use and the structure of this stance in all those arenas than in pencak silat.

Another part of the transition into this stance is that it moves the back hand to the front through the turn of the shoulders. This is also used to great effect in pencak silat. 

Part of my strategy was to employ this tactic, moving from a staggered stance into sempok/cross-stance thereby executing an evasive body-movement and moving my rear knife-wielding hand to my front hand and a trusting attack. It was part of my strategy because the other candidates, my instructors, had not seen it before. 

Memorably, this tactic was employed against the abovementioned Debbie Clarke.

Debbie lunged forward and I executed the move. She was going to barrel into the now thrusting knife, which was a molded metal knife, and she was in danger of being 'impaled' on impact. I relaxed my grip and as impact occurred, the knife slide through my hand and fell to the floor. It was beautiful, it was perfect ... and it was missed by JDJ. A clean 'kill', and it was not recorded. 

JDJ took me aside after the grading and told me that I was the best in the grading. But all that meant was that I knew 'how to play the game' better than my instructors. I learned how to knife fight to some degree whereas they did not due to lack of instruction. I learned a fantastic move and had a greater appreciation for the use of sempok as a fighting tactic. But is that what this grading is designed to impart to students?

Before we leave this section, I was present when two JDJ yudansha engaged in this grading. One has since gone on to be awarded Rokudan by a JDJ ryuha principal. The other had his own ryuha and was a 'fighter.' They 'fenced' with the knives, like one would when fencing. Tapping against each other's knives as fencers tap against each other's swords. I was astounded. Why would anyone consider this approach, particularly given that they were supposedly highly experienced and graded martial artists? But here's the thing, how can you fail them, even though the performance was ludicrous, given that no training nor instruction is given in knife fighting even though this is a knife fighting grading in the grading system. 

Sandan Shiai

'Free fight with tanbo vs tanto.'

What is not included in the description of this grading is that the roles are swapped, as in the shodan shiai grading. And as in the shodan shiai grading, the person with the tanbo annihilates the person with the tanto. And as in the nidan shiai grading, the candidates are not trained in the use of fighting with either weapon.

What is the point, other than including shiai-type gradings into the dan grading system and populating the dan grading system given the relatively comprehensive ikkyu grading?

Conclusion

Unlike my instructors, I can teach students how to go about these gradings, but still, what is the point? I can, and have done, train them to defeat the students of other instructors, hands down, but what is the point? 

These gradings in the JDJ grading system are seriously floored, but here's the thing. If they are removed or 'fixed', the lessons learned through the above analysis are lost. The insights that can be gained are lost. The new and better understanding that can be derived from those insights are lost. It is a quandry, conundrum, and other such words to describe this situation.

What would you do?