The Development of the Jan de Jong Jujutsu Grading System 5.0: Sandan Part 1

The final technical grading in the Jan de Jong (JDJ) jujutsu grading system is sandan.

This fits with the narrative that the final technical grading in the Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu (THR) jujutsu grading system that JDJ was involved in with his original jujutsu instructors, the Saito brothers, was sandan.

There are only five people who have completed the technical grading system of the jujutsu taught by JDJ under JDJ, and which is apparently part of the THR tradition, are Peter Clarke, Robert Hymas, Paul Connolly, Greg Palmer, and myself. Me - their student. The only 'student' to complete the JDJ jujutsu grading system under JDJ.

Left to right: Peter Clarke, JDJ, Robert Hymas, and Paul Connolly.

Standing and not standing, Greg Palmer and me respectively.

There are some other 'students' that have been graded sandan, and higher, in the JDJ tradition through a JDJ ryuha, however, that grading system is compromised in relation to JDJ's grading system because the head of that ryuha did not grade above shodan under JDJ. Consequently, their nidan and sandan grades contain less and are different to that taught by JDJ. And even in that ryuha's shodan grading, there are mistakes.

You will recall from previous posts that Clarke, Hymas, and Connelly were the first through the nidan and sandan gradings because they were to be JDJ's legacy. Greg and I came through after the first trio. It is important to remember that fact because, among other things, it gave JDJ a chance to review the nidan and sandan gradings that he had developed and to change (improve) upon them. 

This post will be done in two parts because the sandan grading contains 12 parts, whereas shodan and nidan were long enough with nine parts.

You will recall from previous posts that the structure of the dan grades was set with JDJ's initial grading system, the kyu grades, with ikkyu being the instructor grade. 

Note: There is no shinken shobu no kata part in sandan. This is the only grading in JDJ's grading system that does not contain a reflex/shinken shobu no kata part to the grading.

The grading requirements and description of the different parts are taken from Jan de Jong: the man, his his school and his ju jitsu system (Jan de Jong Self Defence School, 1997 (p.52)).

Part 1 Kime no Kata

'Explain the theory and answer questions on demonstrated defences.'

You will recall from previous posts that kime no kata is generally considered to be a revision grading within the JDJ jujutsu grading system. According to the glossary in the abovementioned book, it means 'form of agreement (attack and defences are agreed upon and so form a demonstration)' (p.58).

This grading consists of 57 attack-defence combinations, none of which have been included in any other grading within the JDJ jujutsu grading system; they are all new attack-defence combinations.

When Greg and I did this grading, JDJ asked no questions. Greg was disappointed because he was prepared and wanted to discuss the theory behind the defences. He asked JDJ why he hadn't asked us any questions. JDJ said that he didn't have to because he knew that we know the theory.

I would have liked to have heard any questions that he asked of Clarke, Hymas, and Connolly, and their answers.

Part 2 Ju Jitsu no Jitsuen

'Arrange a 10 minute demonstration on a topic given by Shihan Jan de Jong using only yudansha. Twenty minutes preparation time will be allowed.'

This part follows on from the ju jitsu no jitsuen part in the nidan grading.

The way JDJ conducted this grading was, during the Friday night instructor's class, he'd simply inform the candidate (Clarke, Hymas, Connolly, Palmer, or myself) that they would be putting on a demonstration using yudansha that were attending the class that night. Literally, only 20 minutes to prepare on a subject of JDJ's choosing with the performers present that night.

It was an interesting grading for me as I was instructing my former instructors what to do. I was assessing their capabilities in terms of what they could perform adequately. That was a challenge in itself.

Part 3 Taisabaki no Kata

'Prepare a kata to show the different variations of the body movements.'

The five body-movements are the five main body-movements (taisabaki) taught by Yoseikan Budo (YB).

I did a bit of 'teach the teacher' in this grading. You will recall from a previous post:

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.

Part 4 Sutemiwaza no Kata and Taoshiwaza no Kata

Sutemiwaza no Kata: 'Demonstration and full explanation of the theory of 20 different sacrifice throws and their variations.'

Taoshiwaza no Kata: 'Demonstration and full explanation of the theory of 20 different takedown techniques and their variation.'

This part of the grading is pure YB. 

You will recall from a previous post that I obtained a copy of Minoro Mochizuki's book, Nihonden Jujutsu, from Jan-Erik Karlsson while assisting JDJ teaching for him in Sweden. I gave a copy of that book to JDJ.

The book has many hand-drawn images of techniques. JDJ photocopied 20 of those techniques for each part of this part of the grading and handed them out in the instructors class on a Friday night. This was this part of the sandan grading - taken straight from Mochizuki's book.

The abovementioned JDJ ryuha does not include the taoshiwaza no kata section in their sandan grading. I would suggest that it is because the principal of that ryuha did not learn or grade this part of the grading. On the other hand, the YB sutemiwaza had been taught and trained ad nauseum within the Jan de Jong Self Defence School (JDJSDS).

A joint element of this grading is the theory behind the techniques. What is the first theory question that should be asked?

Given that the two parts are sacrifice throws and takedown techniques, the first question that should be asked is: what is the difference between a throw and a takedown?

As I discuss in my as yet unpublished book, The Science Behind All Fighting Techniques, there is no definitive distinction between throwing and takedown techniques in the martial arts literature or teachings, except the one that I provide based on biomechanics. Based on that definition and classification, about 25% of the takedown techniques in the takedown techniques section of this part of the grading are in fact throws.

There is one technique in the takedown section of this part of the grading: oshi otoshi. JDJ said that it meant 'aggressive push-down.' Every time JDJ taught it in the instructors class, he taught it differently. I was confused, not the least because none of what JDJ was teaching worked. I asked Clarke and Hymas separately, 'What are we supposed to be doing here?' They both replied that they didn't know.

At that time, the priority for JDJ and Clarke, Hymas, and Connolly was to get through the grading system so that JDJ could promote them with honorary grades. One technique that did not work - what does it matter.

Mea culpa: I too adopted the same approach as Clarke, Hymas, and Connolly, and did something in the grading, not knowing what I was supposed to be doing, knowing that it was one technique, and it would not affect my overall makes in the grading. I, like them, were going to pass this grading with or without this technique.

After JDJ passed away, and when YouTube came online, I finally saw oshi otoshi being performed by a YB school in Belgium. It is an amazing YB technique, and one which nobody in the JDJSDS has ever performed correctly, even though it is in the grading system.

JDJ did not know how to perform oshi otoshi. It looked similar to other techniques, but it wasn't that technique, and in this instance, it did not work. It was ineffective. 

A similar situation can be found in JDJ's shodan shinken shobu no kata grading with te nage. When I was taught this technique, way back when, I said even then that it did not make sense. Unbalance forward and down, and then up and back to the opposite rear corner, and then forward and down again, and then around the corner - there are so many changes in direction that you get dizzy. And why? It's because it looks like hand-set arm breaking, but that is not the takedown technique. 

When I was assisting two prospective yudansha for the abovementioned ryuha to prepare for their shinken shobu no kata grading, I again encountered JDJ's te nage and its teaching by the instructors of the ryuha. And after all these years, I still thought it was ridiculous, but this time, when searching for an answer, there are so many more resources available. JDJ's te nage should be aikido's ikkyo or nikyo. It is a great technique, when performed correctly, and one that I could perform even in my physical condition.

Part 5 Kodachi no Kata

'Demonstration of kodachi (wakizashi) techniques against katana.'

The kata is taken straight from Michael Finn's Kendo-no-Kata (1986). No deviations whatsoever, and the order is the same.

Part 6 Hojo Jutsu

'Demonstrate use of rope to tie up an opponent.'

This was an interesting grading, and an impractical grading. The techniques were taken from various sources and consisted of tying up a person in intricate ways. The impractical aspect was that the grading did not involve restraining uke before the tying up commenced. They just stood there. It was like a demonstration of wrapping a gift.

Next Post

The next post will discuss the final six parts to the sandan grading.

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

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

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

Breakfalls (Ukemi)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wakai no Kata

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Throwing Techniques (Nage Waza)

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

Body Movements (Taisabaki)

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

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

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

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

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

Unbalancing (Kuzushi)

Normal single wrist grip - Normal and same side unbalancing

Reverse single wrist grip - Reverse and same side unbalancing

Same side single wrist grip - Normal and same side unbalancing

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

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

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

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

Locking Techniques (Kansetsu Waza)

'Two attackers defender's choice of attack.' 

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

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

Basic Blocks and Attacks (Uke and Atemi)

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

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

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

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

Reflex (Shinken Shobu no Kata)

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

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

There is a 'stick-overhead attack.' 

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

This was also a common fault in the JDJSDS.

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

This was something lacking in the JDJSDS as well.

The Development of the JDJ Jujutsu Grading System Part 3.5: 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.

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. 

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?

 

 

Mukae Daoshi and Jan de Jong Jujutsu Gradings

Mukae daoshi is translated as 'embrace and overturn', a unique translation is 'ambushing topple', or 'meeting takedown.' An excellent example of this technique is presented below. The late Sensei Greg Palmer is tori and yours truly is uke.

Shihan Jan de Jong always referred to this technique as mukae daoshi, however, his jujutsu grading sheets do not refer to this term even though this technique/defence is included in the gradings a number of times. The term used in the grading sheets to refer to this technique is ura tai otoshi, reverse body drop.

Why does JDJ refer to this technique as mukae daoshi but refer to it in his grading sheets as ura tai otoshi?

The same technique (or is it?) is called irimi nage, entering throw, in most aikido systems. The term mukae daoshi is a term that tends to be associated with Yoseikan budo/aikido, however, Edgar Kruyning in his The Art of Ju-Jutsu: The Legacy of Minoru Mochizuki's 'Yoseikan' Sogo Budo refers to this technique/defence as both irimi nage and mukae daoshi.

In this technique, or variation of the technique, tori's actions tend to cause uke to bend backwards 'limbo' style, forcing them to fall to the ground. JDJ would have no truck with this variation/technique.

The daoshi in mukae daoshi is taoshi when the 'd' and 't' are interchangeable. Taoshi means takedown. Irimi nage means entering throw. Takedowns and throws are categories of techniques referred to within the martial arts. Is mukae daoshi/irimi nage a takedown or a throw?

Gary Klein in Seeing What Other's Don't: The Remarkable Ways We Gain Insights explains that insights can provide a new and better understanding; one that is more accurate, more comprehensive, and more useful then the one that existed before. One of the paths to gaining insight that Klein identifies is curiosity. He describes the curiosity path in terms of a 'What's going on here?' reaction. The insight does not come from the question, but rather from the pursuit of an answer to that question.

The mukae daoshi 'What's going on here?' questions can lead to insights that produce a new and better understanding about JDJ's teachings; one that is more accurate, more comprehensive, and more useful then the one that currently exists - if only students and instructors studied his grading system rather than simply engaging in it, and asked, 'What's going on here?' 

The Quandry of Advanced Adolescent Students

The following is another couple of photos in the series of photos that Sensei Dan Newcombe, founder of Self Defence Central Dojo and Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu International, generously contributed to this blog for those interested in the Jan de Jong story.

If I remember correctly, the front row from right to left is, Jan de Jong, Dan's father, and Dan's uncle. I could be wrong (not about JDJ of course) and I expect Dan to correct me if I am. Can anyone identify any of the students in the back line? You will of course notice that the badges on the uniforms are not so uniform.

The photo was taken at the Swan River Rowing Club dojo so the photo was taken mid to late 1950s.

Tori in the above photo is Dan's father from the previous photo and uke is a teenage Margaret Kellond who would go on to become Margaret de Jong.

When I look at that photo, I see a kid executing a good throw on an older and larger opponent. This reminded me of an issue we had at the Jan de Jong Self Defence School. How do you retain advanced adolescent students?

I remember training in Saturday afternoon classes under Sensei Peter Clarke and one of the advanced students was a young lad that resembles Dan's father above. He was orange belt as we all were but he was half our size and a lot younger. His straight punch would hit me, literally, just above my groin he was that short. He ended up leaving the club after becoming frustrated training with adults.

How does an advanced adolescent student continue to advance? Or is it expected that they 'stay put' until their bodies catch up with their advanced grading standing?

I know some schools have a 'kids' system even right up to black belt, but is that the way? Only those in that school would understand a junior black belt is different to a senior black belt.

I taught the only teenager's class in the JDJSDS. It was conducted late on Saturday mornings and had the most consistent and longest serving body of students in the school. They were all small teenagers, male and female (in truth the females were better technically and in terms of fighting attitude), and all were advancing. I didn't just teach them, I trained them. We had good teachers in the school but very few who could train students. The last grading I trained them for, as a class, was blue or green belt. Unheard of in the school, the entire class graded together and excelled together. Jan de Jong was mightly impressed.

I then had to have surgery on both shoulders, separately because I agreed with the surgeon that I did not have any friends who would be prepared to wipe my backside after going to the toilet if I had both shoulders operated on at the same time. Maggie de Jong disbanded the class. Her reasoning was that at that level they should be training in the advanced adult classes ... but their bodies were not ready for it. They would have to have made adjustments to most if not all techniques if they were to train with adults. Within three months, none of the students remained with the school.

It is a dilemma. How do you retain advanced adolescent students?

The Infamous Ear Throw

This was a photo of the infamous ear throw that Shihan Jan de Jong shared with me for inclusion in the Jan de Jong: The man, his school and his ju jitsu system book that I wrote for him.

Well, this was not an isolated incident, as the photos generously shared by Sensei Dan Newcombe, founder of Self Defence Central Dojo and Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu International, shows.

First, the challenge, as is so popular of Facebook these days. Who from the Jan de Jong tradition is prepared to attempt such a throw and share photos of that throw on this blog? :)

Second, why is the uke in the second photo wearing a stencil or badge on the back of the right shoulder of his gi?

Old School Wrist Twist Technique

This blog has become a lightening rod for sharing memories about Jan de Jong and his martial arts teaaching.

The latest is by Sensei Dan Newcombe, founder of Self Defence Central Dojo and Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu International, who forwarded a number of photographs taken in the 1950s when his father and uncle trained under JDJ.

Dan is the second of three generations of his family that have trained/studied the jujutsu taught by Jan de Jong. He is continuing on in the truest tradition of JDJ by establishing his own school, modifying the grading system so as to improve the outcomes for students, upholding the integrity and standards that JDJ espoused, and attempting to internationalise JDJ teachings.


Dan described the above photo as an 'interesting wrist twist knife pinning on the ground.'

Here is a history lesson for students of the JDJ tradition. That is the original finishing position of a wrist twist technique that JDJ taught. The wrist twist joint locking technique was applied to take the opponent to the ground and then continued in order to apply a wrist twist lock on the ground.

A similar technique is seen in Jiu-Jitsu: El Efectivo Metodo Japones de Autodefensa by Katsukuma Higashi in the early 1900s.

EN3. Higashi began his professional wrestling career in New York City, where he became the subject of articles and books by Irving Hancock and Robert Edgren. See, for example, H. Irving Hancock and Katsukuma Higashi, The Complete Kano Jiu-jitsu (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1924) and Robert Edgren, "The Fearful Art of Jiujitsu," http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_edgren1_0300.htm. Higashi's style, by the way, was not Kodokan judo but Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu jujutsu. 


JDJ changed the finishing to this technique because of the risks inherent in the opponent being on their back with legs and one arm free to attack if the joint lock is not applied expediently and effectively. He changed it to the current form where the opponent is turned over onto their front.

Now for the technical lesson. The evolved/tactically improved/later version of the wrist twist technique means that the wrist twist joint locking technique is now solely a takedown technique and the finishing technique is either a wrist crush or straight arm lock while the opponent is prone (lying on their front).

FYI. The wrist twist technique is never in itself a throwing technique as Shioda increasingly described in his books on aikido. One of his earliest books explained that tori had to jump to avoid injuring their wrist, which is technically not a throw.

O Soto Otoshi

This post is primarily aimed at all who are currently teaching the jujutsu taught by Shihan Jan de Jong OAM 9th Dan. Given that I may never teach my own classes again, it is time to pass on certain insights that improves on JDJ's teachings. It is time to see further then the giant that was JDJ by standing on his shoulders.

The JDJ jujutsu grading system uniquely includes theory questions in order to examine a student's understanding of techniques. This and other similar gradings is aimed at preparing a person to become an instructor. One of the questions that JDJ would commonly ask was, 'What is the difference between o soto gari, o soto guruma, and o soto otosh?'

Firstly, a more complete question would have been, 'What are the similarities and differences' between those three techniques? The second chapter in my The Science Behind All Fighting Techniques concerns the 'core of all learning.' The core of all learning is the identification of similarities and differences. JDJ is using the core of all learning, in part, to examine the student's understanding of the techniques that they have learned.

Secondly, not one person in the Jan de Jong Self Defence School who attempted this grading and who were asked this question would have gotten the answer to this question technically right. Why? Because o soto otoshi was not taught correctly in the JDJSDS.

Wikipedia provides an adequate description of this technique for our purposes.

O soto otoshi is similar to o soto gari in that one leg of uke's is targeted, however, they are different in that with the latter the 'throwing' leg projects upward and with the former it projects downward. In wrestling it is called a lariat-leg sweep whereas in common parlance it may be termed a trip.

Another similarity and difference between o soto otoshi and o soto gari is that they are both techniques where forces are applied to cause uke to fall to the ground/mat, however, the former is a takedown whereas the latter is a throw. My biomechanically based distinction between throws and takedowns included in The Science Behind All Fighting Techniques is that with a throw, forces are applied to cause both of the opponent's feet to leave the supporting surface while with the latter they are not.

O soto otoshi is a takedown, however, it is included in Judo's nage waza, throwing techniques, category because judo does not include a takedown category in their classification of techniques; an issue explored in The Science Behind All Fighting Techniques.

The best book by far on judo 'throwing' techniques is Toshiro Daigo's Kodokan Judo Throwing Techniques. In that book, Daigo explains the basic technique and then provides various variations of that technique. One of the variations of o soto otoshi is to target both of uke's legs. This technique is similar to o soto guruma in targeting both of uke's legs but different in that tori's leg projects upward with o soto guruma but downward with the variation of o soto otoshi.

Interestingly, Daigo compares this variation of o soto otoshi to tai otoshi, body drop (although it is far more devastating taking the opponent backward rather than forward). In the judo classification, tai otoshi is classified as a te waza, hand technique, and o soto otoshi a ashi waza, leg technique, thereby illustrating the flaw in the judo classification of techniques.