Technique Vs Principal : Submission Judo Archives

Technique Vs Principal

From The Underworld Forum

faxia roxa (7/23/99 11:19:23 am)

Thoughts on Technique vs. Principle

Some of you may remember a post I made on the main forum few weeks ago talking about Kano Shihan's idea that Judo should culminate by the practitioner using principles instead of defined techniques. I talked abouut the Itsutsu no Kata, the Form of Five, which Kano created.

He believed that the five "techniques" contained in this form explained the five principles that he considered to be the foundation of all martial arts. That is, he felt that you could construct every technique that ever existed in any martial art simply through a combination of these principles.

So, if I fight based on these principles, I am going to be much stronger than if I fight with individual techniques. Instead of having to go through a defined set of movements, I can simply improvise based on the principles. I can create the most effective technique for any given situation right on the spot. I can perform a technique I've never seen or thought of before and know that it will work because it follows the principles. My movements become "formless", not set and rigid, because I a moving freely with principle instead of being confined to a particular technique. I don't have to waste time analyzing the situation and figuring out which technique or defense is best, I simply act based on the principle.

Now, I've been thinking about this a lot for almost a year now, and I think I'm starting to get a hint of understanding about the way Kano set things up and how Judo moves from the specific to the general. A lot of Judoka think this is backwards, they say early technique like seoi nage are more applicable, where as "advanced" techniques aren't; many advanced techniques address one specific situation only. But that is a superficial analysis based on technique.

In the larger realm of concepts, Judo moves from defined techniques to principle. The reason for this, I think, is surprisingly simple. When we are young, and the world is new, we know things without really knowing them. We know when we hit a button pictures come on the TV, but we don't know how the TV knows we hit the button on the remote or where those pictures come from or how they keep changing. We don't understand enough about how TVs work yet. Also when we are young, we need a rule for each situation. We know we should stick our fingers in the wall outlet, but that doesn't mean we necessarily know that the same thing applies to light sockets. Similarly, when we are early in learning Judo, we "know" techniques but we don't really know why we should do that technique.

In randori we do certain specific techniques, and if they don't work we have trouble knowing what to do. We are rigid, locked into the forms we've been taught. We know specifc points for each technique, but we don't yet have enough background knowledge to see how those points are related and how different techniques share a common principle that makes them effective. Later on, however, we learn about signal waves and electricity and electron guns etc. and we begin to see how TV is based on these underlying principles, and how the same principles are present in other devices. Similarly in Judo, we begin to see how certain principles apply to many techniques. We see WHY our hands push that way in o soto gari, and we see how a different type of push is used for a similar purpose (to off-balance and put the center of gravity over a fulcrum) in, say, tai otoshi.

Eventually, when we learn about enough different electronic devices and why they are the way they are, we se see that they are really all the same things, just applied to different situations or needs. Similarly with Judo. Eventually, we see that all those other concepts and techniques are unnecessary, that they are all just combinations of a few (5) basic principles, and we can essentially forget about the specifics and just recreate them as needed based on the principles. These are my thoughts. I don't claim to be on this ultimate level yet or even really have a notion about what it truly is. I don't think many people in the world can say this. This level takes a lifetime of study to reach, and even then only the best ever get there. But, I thought I would share my ideas about this, I hope you've found it interesting.

faxia roxa (7/24/99 10:15:33 am) Reply Re: Thoughts on Technique vs. Principle Any thoughts or replies are welcome :).

J-Trigger (7/24/99 4:15:21 pm) Reply Awesome!!! Man, you have me hooked on Judo with that post!!! :) I really like this "concept". I think it is totally true. Once you have learned the principles to any martial art, you can use the principles in ANY situation. I too have learned some of these principles but I won't claim I have mastered it-yet. Tai Chi is a good example of this principle. The pulling and pushing to get your opponent of balance (Probably used in Judo too). In Aikido you can move out of the line of attack but grab his arm or wrist while he's in motion and then either "flow" with it or redirect it and "Send him on his way". In most striking arts such as Boxing, you learn how to use your whole body and momentum to create punching power. This is another principle. I have found my self-using ALL these principles threw out the week. It's funny how I don't realize it too. When I'm wrestling with my younger brother or friends, I usually use the Aikido principles. When IÕm moving something heavy, I use my "boxing" principle. These are just some of the examples. Therefore, I have learned some principles that I have found use full other then fighting. I have never seen any one try to explain or acknowledging these principles until now. I'm so psyched for some Judo now! Best Wishes, Trigger¨©ª

faxia roxa (7/24/99 5:34:24 pm) Reply Trigger, Thanks and I hope you find what you are looking for in Judo. As for using pushing and pulling, this was one of the things that made Judo distinctive in the early days. We call off-balancing the opponent for a throw kuzushi. Before Judo, the koryu schools did not practice kuzushi. It was the principle of kuzushi, off-balancing the opponent before the throw to make him "lighter", that finally allowed Kano Shihan to throw his old Kito Ryu Sensei in randori. One of the other distinctive concepts Judo introduced was doing thing with both hands. In fact, the Nage no Kata (Form of Throwing) forces tori do all the throws both left-handed and right-handed. Kano stressed this with all techniques. Before Judo, the martial arts in Japan had a vast bias towards right-handed techniques. They looked on the left-handed forms as "improper". This was less than efficient, because what if you were attacked by a lefty in the streets? You would have ingrained in you miind a set pattern of defense, but that pattern would be designed against a right-handed attack, and would be next to useless against a lefty. Practicing with both hands gave Kano's men a huge advantage, and also helped get the to the phase of working on principle: they had to defend against a attack from both sides, so they couldn't just hard-wire a specific series of motions, the had to learn the PRINCIPLE of the defense, and then apply against which ever side the attack happened to come from.

AMERROSS (7/25/99 11:01:06 am) Reply repost Faxia, I was so impressed with your post, that I wanted to comment and ask a question. As you may know, Russian Martial Art (R.O.S.S.) is based solely on 'principles' to the point that "the concept of technique is absent in Russian Martial Art." It would be very pleasant for others in ROSS in America and worldwide to read your post regarding the authentic nature of Judo. If you would be willing, would you repost your original comment on our forum? The URL is http://AmerROSS.com/bulletin - please post it in the Russian Martial Art forum "Thoughts on Technique vs. Principle". I appreciate this. All of our people would surely enjoy reading your thoughts. Fraternal, Scott Sonnon AmerROSS.com faxia roxa (7/25/99 11:44:03 am) Reply Scott, Absolutely. I am honored by your invitation.

J-Trigger (7/26/99 9:42:58 am) Reply Faxia... Congrats! :) Trigger¨©ª

faxia roxa (7/27/99 11:10:19 am) Reply Thanks Trigger... It is a great honor to have my comments appreciated by someone with the knowledge and well-deserved respect of Mr. Sonnon.

FuryuX (7/30/99 11:51:43 am) Reply Re: Thanks Trigger... Way to go faxia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And just to let you guys know that you are not alone in your search for the principle rather than an encyclopedia of techniques,I too have been researching this idea for several years and was excited as hell when i first figured it out.....and really, really excited when i read of "masters" who were proposong the same thing....my goal before i end this life is to begin to actively apply this to both my fighting and my life. And Scott by recognizing this post for the gem that it is, just put you way up on my list...well actually you were already pretty high but you get my meaning:-) Peace, Love and Brotherhood

J-Trigger (7/30/99 1:45:22 pm) Reply Re: Thanks Trigger... Well said Furyu! Trigger¨©ª

faxia roxa (7/31/99 6:58:47 pm) Reply Re: Thanks Trigger... Yes, very good Furyu. We discussed this in the original thread I referenced IIRC. As with everyone else here, I can only hope that you will find what you are looking for in all places you seek it.

AMERROSS (8/1/99 7:17:40 am) Reply Re: Thoughts on Technique vs. Principle

My friends, In my upcoming book release I explain what I call the "Six Strategies in Jacket Wrestling." This is a theory that I compiled over years of coaching and traveling internationally as US Sambo Team coach. I thought I that you would appreciate its relevance to Faxia's most excellent post... Most people bicker about the Tactical level of implementation in Sambo. They say, "I'd rather do it this way, rather than that way," or "I'd rather wrestle for submission rather than try to throw him for total victory." But this kind of debate between sportsmen is of low value without a comprehensive appreciation for the Strategic level that influences and determines the Tactics one employs.

Sambo is part of Russian Martial Art, which is a part of an Integrated Cultural Philosophy. Actually saying Philosophy and Culture is redundant, for "Culture" is the lived-philosophy of a people. This is one major problem that I have had with people hearing that my background academically was in Philosophy. Most people presume that Philosophy equates to the purely theoretical; a prejudiced descendent of the Greek philosophic tradition, specifically the Platonic. Regardless, a true Philosophy is a System of Theory and Application. Theory and application are two wheels of the same cart, as my mentor, Dr. Jonathon Ellsworth Winter used to note. If we look from a cultural ecological perspective, we gain a unique insight into what philosophy truly is. A Philosophy (read "Culture") is the way in which a substance (or people) adapt to the situation.

Right now I am about to release a rather extensive essay entitled "The Cultural Ecology of Martial Art" for the Journal of Asian Martial Art regarding this issue exactly. In the essay, a preview of my book, I explicate how a Culture comprises a set of basic beliefs that form their Subsistence Strategy (general approach to resource acquisition, such as hunting-gathering, horticulture, pastoralism or agriculture), and Survival Skills (specific methods, or tactics, for accomplishing the subsistence strategy; a subset of which are martial traditions - how a people address competition for resources.).

The proper definition of a philosophy can be seen as comprising a: Doctrine: general beliefs, or world view Strategy: broad brush plans for perpetuating doctrinal beliefs Tactic: specific maneuvers for accomplishing strategic objectives In jacket wrestling, to argue on a Tactical level has very low value, unless the overriding Strategy is fully understood, which in turn has no relevance unless the Doctrine is fully comprehended, which is non-sensical unless the conditions that evolved the general beliefs are fully actualized. What conditions brought forth our method of jacket wrestling that is called Russian Sambo? The Eastern Slavs, our Russian-Style martial ancestors, were basically a non-warfaring people. No, they were not peace-loving either. Being tribal, they did not ascribe to the War/Peace paradigm. They fought when their was need, when the invaders came... not for conquest. The environmental conditions: cold weather demands heavy clothing; snow/ice demands a particular type of footwear. Limited resources demanded rather precise economy of caloric output. There was no sense in struggling more than necessary. When fighting on the ice-covered lake in 1242, I am certain that Yevtapi Kolovrat wanted an end to the battle with the Golden Horde ASAP. The Slavs fought shoulder to shoulder in wave upon wave. One fallen enemy was trampled or speared by the subsequent row of advancing Slavs, if the enemy was not finished from the impact with the frozen earth and water. "The Earth is a fist." From this background a doctrine formed: the most advantageous position to be in is standing facing your opponent who is on the ground; the most disadvantageous position to be in is on the ground facing a standing opponent. From this doctrine formed the strategy, we know as "Total Victory" - to place a man upon his back while remaining standing with the least amount of energy expenditure. From this strategy formed the diverse array of tactics to accomplish the Total Victory, which is seen as the ultimate demonstration of skill in Russian Sambo.

Firstly, for a deeper appreciation of the above, read an old article of mine entitled "Russian Sambo: The Key to Unlock the Guard" - http://www.amerross.com/bulletin/messages/1/102.html?TuesdayJune2919990823am

Russian Sambo is very much Judo-esqe" - she is our Oriental Sister. She values as much as we the Total Victory, which she calls "Ippon". In current time, Sambo appears to differ from her stylistically since Judo is a technique-based system of education. However, Faxia's post was of such strong import for it communicates the original, authentic intent of Judo was the same as Sambo. The notion of technique in Judo was to exemplify a particular arrangement/amalgam of five basic principles. Each technique was designed to be a study of the principles, having little value if taken outside of those context. In modern times, when people study without a teacher (the bulk of practitioners are "tape-taught"), 99% look to the technique as the end, not the means. When we encounter other groups, we must recognize that they have Strategies, Doctrinal Beliefs, and differing situational/environmental factors that formed their beliefs. For instance, the notion of "groundfighting" which typifies BJJ is absent in Sambo.

Sambo is a style of jacket wrestling. The highest demonstration of skill in Sambo is the "total victory" throw. Now most people may misunderstand that a great deal of emphasis is devoted to throws. This is a bit off-target. It is the doctrinal belief and the strategic objective that must be understood to appreciate Sambo at a tactical and technical level. I'll do my best to make this succinct, but having read my work I am certain you are forewarned of my bag-o-windedness. Here is one example of what I call an Sambo's active martial philosophy:

Environment Influences, Doctrine, Strategy, Tactic, Technique - Environmental Influences: (stated above) Doctrinal belief: The most advantageous position to be in on a battlefield is standing facing your opponent. The most disadvantageous position to be in is on the ground facing a standing opponent.

Strategic Objective: Get your opponent to the ground in the most expedient manner while remaining standing, despite the treacherous terrain (ice/snow)

Tactical Maneuver: Throw your opponent in such a way that you do not disturb the terrain greatly, nor expend a great deal of energy. Takedown your opponent in such a way that he has no chance to restabilize the breach of stance integrity and is stunned by the impact with the Earth.

Technical Application - {onsite innovation} You will see what appears to be "groundwork" but this is a subordinate function in Russian Sambo. Here is a second example. Environmental Influences: (stated above) Doctrine: Same as above Strategic Objective: If you cannot remain standing, get your opponent to the ground in such a way that you are in a superior position to apply a finishing hold immediately.

Tactical Maneuver: Throws and Takedowns that require you to engage the ground should either immediately be decisive through a lock or should be immobilizing through a hold-down. Technical Application - {onsite innovation} What I am bag-o-winding is that Sambo has a particular strategy. If your focus is to learn submission groundwork, your involvement with BJJ is ideal - their game concentrates on this. Sambo is very much a "throwing" sport. Yes, there is a great deal that Sambo can contribute to the "submission wrestling" but it must be an honest contribution - Sambo is jacket wrestling. I have seen Sambo players overconfident that that they play is "submission wrestling". It is much more accurate to say that what Sambo is "jacket wrestling". Submission wrestling is a ancillary aspect, a subordinate strategy within Sambo. Perhaps I can finalize this by: Environmental Influences: (stated above)

Doctrine: Again, same as above...

Strategic Objective: Should you lose a dominant position or fail to apply a submission, get out and stand up. Tactical Maneuver: Escapes and Reversals to withdraw and stand. Technical Application - {onsite innovation} In the 60's and 70's Judo, Europe experienced a revolution as Russian Sambists entered the Judo theatre. The new Sambo methodic to Judo events changed the manner in which Classic Judo strategically approached competition. Some said it was a deliberate improvisation, others said it was an inadvertent adaptation to the external influence of Sambo in Judo competitions that the nature of Judo strategy for many was not changed but expanded in scope. BJJ has been the stimulus of a new revolution, and a new strategy, now... in Russian Sambo Sport-wrestling.

A new strategic approach has many Russian Sambists (like myself) on the chalkboard evaluating the new external influence. Russian Sambo had the approach I detailed above, but now considers the new strategic approach in jacket wrestling: Entice your opponent into a ground-fighting environment where the Russian Sambist chooses not to heavily emphasized. In Russian Sambo, the coach trains the player in an organic approach to the sport.

Here are the 6 strategies of jacket wrestling in the order of priority for Russian Sambo: 1. Jacket manipulation, breach of stance integrity, takedown/throw - Total Victory. 2. Jacket control, feint/bait, counter - Total Victory. 3. Above, but both players go to ground, where the submission hold is applied on the way to completion of throw/takedown. 4. Above, but both players go to ground, where the submission is attained upon completion of the throw/takedown. 5. Throw/takedowns for points, stall, stand, redo... until win by point superiority by time or degree (12 pts.) 6. Above, but to ground volley until positional dominance, holddown, work for submission. #6 is only a meager portion of the approach and in Russian Sambo, coaches train their sportsman in the above order from 1-6, but here now... we have the appearance of a new pedagogical approach: Coach the sportsman from #6 first, then work up to #1.

Russian Sambo has adopted the position that since their strategic approach wins consistently 95% of the time within the parameters of Sambo sport-wrestling that we shall continue to hone our talents over our lifetime of jacket wrestling. We do this because our objective is not victory but transformation and development. As we get older we get better. I am still amazed when the old men can still dust me with ease in Russia. This is the point. If a strategic approach cannot adapt to new influences, it proves to be evolutionarily unstable, and it will be unselected for continuation. However, if an approach has continued to exist, it is valid. No strategic approach is better than another. They are just different, each equally valid within the context of their approach. Mastery must be mastery of something. In order to transfer wisdom to our every activity, we need a microcosm, a focus group, an accelerated arena to explore the wisdom of behavior...

We grow within our Philosophy... our cultural perspective. In context of Sambo sport-wrestling, this is the first and foremost guideline - Do not expect victory without understand the nature of the game. Sportsmen that are multi-sport active tend to be highly adaptive, IF they are informed. They also tend to bring a great deal of evolutionarily stable strategies to the development of the sport as a result.

Contrarily, sportsmen that are multi-sport active and do not have a coach that informs them and prepares them appropriately are in jeopardy of defeat and even worse harm. Their coach should prohibit competition (especially in single-combat sports) until a complete comprehension of the rules, conduct of play and objectives are clearly articulated by the coach and internalized by the sportsman. The most effective manner to do this is to require sportsman to train as officials simultaneous to training as competitors. Having the vantage point of an official affords the single best opportunity for developing a cohesive, effective competitive strategy. For example: when adopting a heavy "#6-type" strategy (the "groundfighting" approach), it is highly critical to realize the perspective of the Sambo official/referee.

If a sportsman falls to his back and the other remains standing, the match is over - Total Victory throw conclusive. In this type of strategy, it is crucial to enter the opponent into par terre through contact of at least one knee with the mat. Sambo sport-wrestling developed out of the doctrinal belief system of the Slavic peoples which formed out of certain environmental condition and influences. As a result, a particular strategic approach tends to be the most effective for Sambo sport-wrestling.

This is what it means in the difference between training in Russian Sambo and to competing in Russian Sambo sport-wrestling. One can compete in Russian Sambo sport-wrestling, without having training in Russian Sambo. However, the most effective strategy to adopt is the strategic approach that was forged directly from the doctrinal beliefs which created the sport in the first place.

Fraternal, Scott Sonnon