Jujitsu to Judo and BJJ

[Neil Yamamoto]

A friend of mine on SPD with about 20 years on just transfered to SWAT. He told me he's got a lot of learning to do and has to work to suppress what he thinks he knows since it's not valid.

I asked him if he fell on his butt the first time wearing full kit and he laughed saying there is a reason they suggest you spend a couple hours a day in the weight room for conditioning.

[wmuromoto]

Ah, there's a reason why the military perfers to induct young people. You can get them to wear all that gear and walk 27 miles a day. Old farts like me, we'd complain about it and then wonder where the Lay-Z-Boy chair is.

One of my peers says, "You don't do budo to get in condition. You get in condition to do budo."

Per Neil's note; bad habits can be learned in anything, modern budo or koryu. That's why I think it's important to find the right teachers, the right styles and the right mindset. There are some koryu groups that are just lame, just as there are some judo or karate, etc., clubs that I wouldn't want to send kids to because they are teaching just wrong stuff.

Wayne Muromoto

[Hissho]

Ah yes, but there are also those supposed "old farts" that smoke all the young guys, showing 'em how its done. Some of that is motivation (maintaining it), and some of that is the older guys learning how to be more efficient in how they move while maintaining a base level of condition relative to the tasks required.

And it is all relative: In the LE tactical world, there is often a discussion regarding PT requirements for SWAT teams: by having a PT standard that only young, aggressive, muscle heads can complete you end up getting a team of young, aggressive muscle heads, when what you really want is mature, measured, tactical thinkers. The latter have to be in shape - but in a job specific way that is not necessarily reflected in being able to throw weights around, be a crossfit animal, and compete in Ironman. Likewise, some of those kinds of athletes may not be able to do the tactical thing very well because of their sport-specific conditioning.

Different subject, but that whole validity thing is also a function of what you have been taught and inculcated. Some is simply lack of tactical training and awareness - Patrol tends not to get the practice and reinforcement (or the debriefing and critique) that tactical units get, especially a full time team like SPD.

However, a good friend of mine once pointed out that being part of that kind of team can at times gloss individual deficiences, which is kinda the point.

[Joseph Svinth]

I should think that a couple months of hiking the hills while wearing all that would build some pretty good cardio endurance -- if it doesn't kill you, blow out your tarsal tunnels or knees, or lead to lumbar fusion.

Hiking the Pakistani/Afghan border is even more problematic. That has to be at least ten thousand feet, in the lower elevations. I wonder how many altitude casualties they are taking?

[Chuck.Gordon]

Concur with Wayne and others about how some of the old stuff relates to modern CQC. Reflects my experience teaching a few folks from EOD and other line units while I lived in Germany. Even without a ruck, the vest, basic load, k-pot and assorted accoutrments drastically affects how you move, and how you CAN move.

Em is a bodyworker who had a practice at Graf while we were there. Among her clients were SF, SEALs and EOD guys, as well as all ranges and sorts of 11B, tankers, etc. We kept kevlar and k-pots in the office, as we had to frequent ranges and training lanes, so one day I kitted her up to show her some of what she was dealing with (just vest and helmet). It was incredibly informative and affected the way she dealt with some of the issues coming across her table.

One of the guys working for me now is a Reservist just coming off 2 back-to-back tours in Iraq. Even as a relative Fobbit, he still had excursions into the desert to support and gather data. He's still dealing with the complications of being a 40-something Reservist who took on two years of active duty that meant he spent a lot of time with 50-60 extra pounds strapped and hung on ...

Another good friend (waves at Kevin is he has time to peek in) was teaching combatives to troops in the 1-4 Infantry at Hohenfels for a few years, and incrporated a lot of his aikido and judo knowledge quite successfully. He's currently training up for a deployment downrange and is getting a LOT of good CQC practice in.

Also, MG Hertling has announced a fairly drastic revamp of some of the Army's CQC curriculum (Matt Larsen, you still around? I haven't kept up as much here in sunny Maryland, but have seen some traffic on it.), refocusing some of the basic-level training on wearing armor whilst fighting, weapons retention and use, etc.

I've always felt Army PT was unrealistic for actual combative fitness, but somehow, the Daily Dozen has survived for decades and the PT test stll stresses a fairly narrow style of fitness that doesn't necessarily carry over into the field.

[Hissho]

From the LE perspective (officer on the street, not particularly tactical), I like and adapted some things from sources like Greg Thompson's book on army combatives, but think that some of it was getting a bit in the weeds in terms of being too technique- and skill-centric regarding some of the ground stuff. I also do not like any takedowns which intentionally bring you to the ground, especially bringing you to the ground first, for an armed professional, and yet several throws in Thompson's book are simply standard BJJ grab on, drop to the ground and drag him down. I think the best and most practical combative elements of the grappling methods can be drawn out and made a system of themselves alongside the standing and grounded armored stuff involving weapons.

That being said, we are seeing a marked increase in situations involving MMA trained folks as suspects and involved parties in the field, and them using it against officers.

We are now teaching our patrol officers that even in weapon retention and armed encounters they have to avoid allowing attackers to take their back or gain dominant positions. We've also had an officer almost get caught in a sankaku jime by a handcuffed suspect and she was not aware what the suspect was actually doing until informed of it by witnesses, and then explained what a "triangle" was. For domestic LE at least, being able to recognize and escape some of the standard control holds and ground submissions is going to be a necessity.

[Joseph Svinth]

Kit --

FWIW, J. Edgar Hoover made some of the same complaints toward the end of WWII, by which time everybody aged 11-18 had been getting combatives training in the public schools, the Boy Scouts, and what not. Why? Well, some of those Fight Tough tricks really do work.

[wmuromoto]

I just have to say I like the observations that Kit and Joe have been making; one practical and tactical from Kit's POV, and Joe's very well researched (how do you find the time to dig up such stuff???!!!) information. Together, it's like an online seminar for me.

For me, koryu is great. I like the process, the training and the system. Some people think koryu is virtually static. But since it has jujutsu, our system at least in the grappling section has an element of change not found in its sword or traditional weapons work..maybe not change for the fad of the day, but in allowing for interpretation of and individual refining of particular movements, piece by piece, to make them work according to research and study. Understanding and observing (and sometimes learning) from radically different systems is part of my overall ongoing learning, both in terms of history (Joe!) and applications (Kit). Thank you, guys.

--Wayne Muromoto

[Hissho]

Drawing upon some discussions in the CQC community I am involved with (their forum is www.totalprotectioninteractive.com) some tie-ins in terms of the thinking there apply to our discussion here.

Joe brought up WWII combatives - those and other methods had a strong base in old school Judo, "traditional" jujutsu, and boxing (Dempsey was actually a trainer) adapted for contemporary application. It was the same thing as is occurring today with BJJ and MMA within certain military and LE groups. The community mentioned above are strong proponents of "Combat Adapted MMA."

In general I consider WWII and modern combatives as analogous to classical kata. These are your "first with the most wins, end the fight now!" moves. In a dangerous environment in which weapons are a given, armed and unarmed usage is directed toward eliminating the ability of the adversary to cause harm to you.

Thus, the rather vicious hand under the chin, slam the back of the head into the ground osoto gari (a staple of old jujutsu, WWII combatives, and modern CQC alike). Weapons-wise, its the kenjutsu form which evades/parries the attackers blade and simultaneously places your blade in a vital spot/disabling spot (i.e. the enemy's sword arm) and your body in a place which does not allow him to recover and harm you. It is the shooting range drill of getting up on target and firing one or more rounds before the enemy is shooting back.

All of these are the ideal and very effective in the main when superior initiative and speed, surprise and violence of action are maintained on the part of the operator.

But what if these things don't work?? Then more extensive combat conditioning and force on force work with opposing wills enters the picture.

Considering that koryu - particularly the early stuff that was developed and used for actual battle - was "By Professionals, For Professionals," one has to assume as the tag line from the Suio-ryu in another E-Budo member's (can't remember which at the moment) has it:

"Your Opponent is Not an Idiot"

Your immediate-resistance-overcoming, fight-ending move might not work on a guy trained to expect and counter it, or who gains the initiative on you.

A few things will happen in a lethal force encounter that continues past the "fight ending" first move: the stress response will be through the roof - and the only way to manage that and remain relatively calm and keep one's mind on task (zanshin) is for the body to be trained enough and conditioned enough to engage in skilled action while under the intense hear rate, breathing, and physical exertion that such a combat will produce. Modern studies are showing that the better prepared and conditioned one is, the more the latter factors are moderated.

We've all heard of "Train Hard, Fight Easy" and the Chinese "The more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in battle."

As well, the more comfortable the warrior is with the resisting opponent/opposing dynamics of another man trying his best to counter and kill him, the better he will be able to be flexible in his responses, counters, and counter-counters and to adapt to the changing dynamic under "tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving circumstances."

"Competitive" training, whether combat sport or force on force work at progressively higher levels and in more challenging situations are a bridge toward that goal.

So many questions arise though. What are you training for? The pushy transient or drunk who might take a swing at you is a far different adversary than an equally trained warrior, a trained/experienced terrorist with no respect for his own life, let alone your, or the "Street Combat Veteran" or suicidal man-with-a-gun willing to fight to the death. Add performance enhancing drugs and you come to expect that your initial moves won't work more often than they will.

And are you a trainer or an actual operator? The operator has to be prepared for those things and thus must (or should) train for them. The trainer can guide another in training, but does not have to be at the same level of "operational readiness," and can probably relax in his own training regimen a bit more. In light of injuries and recovery time, the older guy will certainly have to adjust his training as the years go on. The older guy can also realize efficiencies where his skill and knowledge (craftiness!) will mute the attributes and conditioning of younger, less skilled guys, but only to a point.

[Hissho]

Thought it was appropos the discussion here:

Army drops bayonets, busts abs in training revamp

FORT JACKSON, S.C. – New soldiers are grunting through the kind of stretches and twists found in "ab blaster" classes at suburban gyms as the Army revamps its basic training regimen for the first time in three decades.
Heeding the advice of Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans, commanders are dropping five-mile runs and bayonet drills in favor of zigzag sprints and exercises that hone core muscles. Battlefield sergeants say that's the kind of fitness needed to dodge across alleys, walk patrol with heavy packs and body armor or haul a buddy out of a burning vehicle.
Trainers also want to toughen recruits who are often more familiar with Facebook than fistfights.
"Soldiers need to be able to move quickly under load, to be mobile under load, with your body armor, your weapons and your helmet, in a stressful situation," said Frank Palkoska, head of the Army's Fitness School at Fort Jackson, which has worked several years on overhauling the regime.
"We geared all of our calisthenics, all of our running movements, all of our warrior skills, so soldiers can become stronger, more powerful and more speed driven," Palkoska said. The exercises are part of the first major overhaul in Army basic fitness training since men and women began training together in 1980, he said.
The new plan is being expanded this month at the Army's four other basic training installations — Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., Fort Sill, Okla., Fort Benning, Ga., and Fort Knox, Ky.
Drill sergeants with experience in the current wars are credited with urging the Army to change training, in particular to build up core muscle strength. One of them is 1st Sgt. Michael Todd, a veteran of seven deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.
On a recent training day Todd was spinning recruits around to give them the feel of rolling out of a tumbled Humvee. Then he tossed on the ground pugil sticks made of plastic pipe and foam, forcing trainees to crawl for their weapons before they pounded away on each other.
"They have to understand hand-to-hand combat, to use something other than their weapon, a piece of wood, a knife, anything they can pick up," Todd said.
The new training also uses "more calisthenics to build core body power, strength and agility," Palkoska said in an office bedecked with 60-year-old black and white photos of World War II-era mass exercise drills. Over the 10 weeks of basic, a strict schedule of exercises is done on a varied sequence of days so muscles rest, recover and strengthen.
Another aim is to toughen recruits from a more obese and sedentary generation, trainers said.
Many recruits didn't have physical education in elementary, middle or high school and therefore tend to lack bone and muscle strength. When they ditch diets replete with soda and fast food for healthier meals and physical training, they drop excess weight and build stronger muscles and denser bones, Palkoska said.
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, the three-star general in charge of revamping all aspects of initial training, said his overall goal is to drop outmoded drills and focus on what soldiers need today and in the future.
Bayonet drills had continued for decades, even though soldiers no longer carry the blades on their automatic rifles. Hertling ordered the drills dropped.
"We have to make the training relevant to the conditions on the modern battlefield," Hertling said during a visit to Fort Jackson in January.
The general said the current generation has computer skills and a knowledge base vital to a modern fighting force. He foresees soldiers using specially equipped cell phones to retrieve information on the battlefield to help repair a truck or carry out an emergency lifesaving medical technique.
But they need to learn how to fight.
"Most of these soldiers have never been in a fistfight or any kind of a physical confrontation. They are stunned when they get smacked in the face," said Capt. Scott Sewell, overseeing almost 190 trainees in their third week of training. "We are trying to get them to act, to think like warriors."
For hours, Sewell and his drill sergeants urge on helmeted trainees as they whale away at each other with pugil sticks, landing head and body blows until one falls flat on the ground. As a victor slams away at his flattened foe, a drill sergeant whistles the fight to a halt.
"This is the funnest day I've had since I've been here!" said 21-year-old Pvt. Brendon Rhyne, of Rutherford County, N.C., after being beaten to the ground. "It makes you physically tough. Builds you up on the insides mentally, too."
The Marine Corps is also applying war lessons to its physical training, adopting a new combat fitness test that replicates the rigor of combat. The test, which is required once a year, has Marines running sprints, lifting 30-pound ammunition cans over their heads for a couple of minutes and completing a 300-yard obstacle course that includes carrying a mock wounded Marine and throwing a mock grenade.
Capt. Kenny Fleming, a 10-year-Army veteran looking after a group of Fort Jackson trainees, said men and women learn exercises that prepare them to do something on the battlefield such as throw a grenade, or lunge and pick a buddy off the ground. Experience in Iraq has shown that women need the same skills because they come under fire, too, even if they are formally barred from combat roles.
"All their exercises are related to something they will do out in the field," Fleming said, pointing out "back bridge" exercises designed to hone abdominal muscles where soldiers lift hips and one leg off the ground and hold it steady.
"This will help their core muscles, which they could use when they stabilize their body for shooting their weapon, or any kind of lifting, pulling, or something like grabbing a buddy out of a tank hatch," Fleming said.
Fleming said those who had some sort of sports in high school can easily pick up on the training, while those who didn't have to be brought along. One hefty soldier in a recent company he trained dropped 45 pounds and learned to blast out 100 push-ups and 70 sit-ups, he said.
"We just have to take the soldier who's used to sitting on the couch playing video games and get them out there to do it," Fleming said.
___
Associated Press writer Kevin Maurer contributed to this report from Wilmington, N.C.

[wmuromoto]

"..."We just have to take the soldier who's used to sitting on the couch playing video games and get them out there to do it," Fleming said."

Interesting news bit, Kit. And funny, too. Yep. They're cutting phys. ed programs left and right here in Hawaii too. I just heard that Cal Poly is thinking of dropping "nonessential" programs like art and art history as well...Hmm. Okay. So we cede industrial design, automotive design, commercial graphics, filmmaking, book production and design (all based on knowledge of fine art theory, history and background) to foreign countries as well?

That was going off track a bit. My former student is training troops heading out to Afghanistan in a few weeks. He said one of the things he and his drill sargeant always hear is, "That's not how we learned in basics, sir!" And he tells them, maybe. But it's going to save your butt over there. Stuff that was pointed out: rolling inide of an overturned Humvee, how to take a tumble and get up without hurting yourself, etc.

That's where I think studying competitive training helps: conditioning, strength and agility drills. Where I think "classical" stuff helps is what my student learned: moving around in a yoroi is about the same as moving around in full gear. So movements fighting with a short dagger, truncheon or other weapon is pretty much the same. There's a lot already there so you don't have to reinvent the wheel, so to speak.

The one good thing about the US (at its best of times) is that its better institutions self-critique themselves, rework processes and come up with something better. Sounds like the military is doing that too. A lot of other countries have cultural or other problems with doing it as fast as the Americans can. Now, if we can only get more kids off their couches and into gyms.

Wayne Muromoto

[Hissho]

Same problems we see in LE.

I can see dropping the bayonet stuff - even for the "warrior mindset" conditioning it offered.

But picture this - keep the pugil stick stuff ('cuz it directly relates to long gun used as an impact weapon) but add some similar drills using small, stiff plastic or hard rubber training blades, shock knives, and/or stun guns like we saw in that one clip.

Throw "training kit" on as well, padded/weighted vest, and for safety's sake some Macho or Century headgear and goggles so you can really go at it.

Suit 'em both up and have them start at grips after some killer PT....

Kinda sounds like some classical stuff would have a direct application, and you're still getting your combat conditioning and warrior mindset training in.

[Hissho]

And more (to beat a dying horse...):

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index...se_recrui.html

This is a truly disturbing issue. Naturally, the image of the overweight police officer is a common one, and something of a joke to people. I hope we don't get there with the "overweight soldier," especially the young ones/new recruits.

What is rarely addressed - I tread lightly on this in the classes I teach to officers - is that being that far out of shape is a major survival liability. Personal combat is an athletic event, with the stakes all the higher.

An advantage to Judo, BJJ, submission grappling, etc. is that conditioning is part and parcel of the training.

[No1'sShowMonkey]

Regarding packs and loads of combat troops:

A good friend of mine was an active duty Recon operator for the USMC. He served two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. We spoke at length about what his day-to-day combat load was like. Stepping off on a patrol, as the radio operator, he was usually carrying at least 140 lb, if not more. Sometimes he has - in addition to his combat load and ruck - the radio, two to four batteries (with more distributed amongst his squadmates), one more more five gallon water jugs strapped to his pack and any other personal goodies he wanted to carry (more batteries!).

He regularly would talk about how rucking was the most important skill for any soldier, much less a force recon operator. Not everybody does a ton of shooting, but nearly everybody carries an insane amount of gear.

Everything Old is New Again:

During the late Roman Republic, the Marian reforms of the Roman army created some of the first 'professional soldiers' by allowing the enlistment of poor, non-land owning men to the army (versus the previous system wherein a soldier furnished his own arms and thus had to be at least somewhat wealthy to do so) and requiring enlistment for fully twenty years. Further, the legionnaires had significantly revised equipment and training regimens. They called themselves 'Marius Mules', so named for Gaius Marius, the instigator of the reforms and source of the 85+ pounds of non-combat gear that they were forced to carry.

Further, the US Army Special Forces Selection (a feeder for the SF training pipeline) guidelines for fitness emphasize rucking over distance runs. After 9 months training in the style outlined by the SFS guide, the rucking is indeed the limiting factor. The only way to decrease ruck times is to increase step count or lengthen the gait... And still make sure your knees track properly and that your posture isn't shit! Ouch!

Crossfit is fantastic, though.

[newtmonkey]

I think it's a mistake to look at Judo and BJJ as watered-down sport versions of Japanese jujutsu.

Kano was so successful with Judo because he reintroduced sparring back into systems which had for the most part gotten rid of live training. BJJ is "just" Judo with much more focus on groundwork. The important thing is that the men who created Judo and BJJ were already masters of previous systems (traditional Jujutsu or Judo), and they attempted to correct what they saw as flaws in their respective systems.

Proponents say "Japanese Jujutsu was created for use on the battlefield, and so it must be effective" and while there is truth to this, a lot depends on how you train. If you are just sitting there grabbing each other's wrists and flipping yourself to the ground at the slightest feeling of discomfort then I am confident in saying that you are probably not training jujutsu how it was trained originally.

I think for Japanese Jujutsu to be effective, there has to be some free-style sparring in there. It doesn't have to be steel cage bare knuckle sparring, but you have to learn how to pull a technique off on someone that is going to throw a realistic flurry of punches, or is going to instinctively pull away from you wildly when you counter grab them.

In my case, I've found that JJJ, Judo, and BJJ all compliment one another. In only two or so months of training in Judo and BJJ, my JJJ skills have improved dramatically. The style of JJJ I take is pretty strict, and we are not allowed to spar or even really struggle. And though we are also not supposed to learn any other martial arts, in order to improve my skills there I decided I needed to also study a system with a heavy sparring aspect.

I think anyone doing any of the three could benefit from studying the others.