BASE= most important in jj.

asymmetrik,

NICE. Those are some good waters.

TT, i think it's a bad idea to place the weight of being the creator/definer
of an english term with universally accepted meaning (in other languages)
on someone.

in regards to its use in grappling... well i hate to be 'that guy,' but.. in
1915 Sakujiro Yokoyama and Eisuke Oshima published a book called
"Judo".

Chapter 2, Section 8: "Posture of Newaza"

irregardless of what we call it or who called it what first, the concept of it
is very important.

asymmetrik,

I hear ya.

But I also think we should give credit where it is due, and I think that certain words that become technical terms do so because somebody defines them that way.

Universally accepted terms in BJJ? That'll be the day. :)

I will say that now you have me TOTALLY curious--in the 1915 Judo book, HOW do they defined "posture" in ne waza??????????

~Chris

So now I'm confused on how to "attack base" when you are in inferior positions.

From mount - I see it (trap a same-side arm & leg and narrow their base).

From bottom of half-guard - I see it (again take away a side and sweep)

From guard - I do NOT see it (because this is where a player can have good base - they keep their hips low and posture up). Is it more using leverage, or is it all about breaking posture before you can attack the base?

From bottom of side-mount - i do NOT see it (I just don't see it).

I'm an idiot.

AI,

Good questions. I think I hijacked this thread unintentionally, and I think your post will get us back.

SO here is the beginning of my answer: it's about where your partner can put his weight. Some positions within the guard are good for balance, and others are not (even with the hips low and upper body aligned). Where do you let him place his weight?

"Where do you let him place his weight"

That's a good question because I never thought about it that way - where do I LET him...

I've always approached it more as my attacks/sweeps will be predicated upon where he positions himself.

That being said, the positions I personally find most difficult is when I let him do the following -

  • hips very low to the mat
  • knees spread apart, heels brought in toward his butt
  • back/neck straight up and pushing his hips into mine
  • he has good arm defense (elbows tucked into my inner thigh)

From here I will typically do one of two things:

1) sit up as if I am going to a kimura and sweep him in the directio of the arm I am attacking (everyone knows this move, but as discussed before, there's no terminology to cite it), or (if he just pushes me back down and defends well),

2) go to buttefly guard or 1/2 butterfly guard (I've got a couple options from there).

The other difficult position is as follows:

-he lifts one knee (say his left) and keeps his left foot flat on the mat. But he keeps his foot/knee back so that I cannot swim under it.
- he places his left forearm against my right thigh (defending his arm)
-he grabs under my left thigh with his right hand and works to underhook it

From here I get my guard passed!

I know I'm going to piss alot of people off by saying what I am going to say but once again I think this is another example of something that is being made more complicated than it really is.

First off: base, posture, stance, balance are all interelated concepts. Yeah, one could argue each are distinct and somewhat different from each other BUT they all, in some way or fashion, interact with each other; so much so that each, individually, would be hard to demostrate (or even develop) without somehow involving the others.

Secondly, base, posture, stance, balance are things one initially learns (and develops) while learning/playing ANY sport and physical activity. One shouldn't think they are only important to bjj or other martial arts. One needs those things for other sports like football, basketball, soccer, etc. IF one actually learned/played other sports one would "naturally" know the importance that base/posture/stance/balance in ones success and development in the sport/activity of choice.

Thirdly, there is a HUGE overlap in regards base/posture/stance/balance in sports/physical activities. You can actually take some of the methods of developing those qualites from one sport and apply it to another. It really isn't that big of a deal nor is it a really big secret. I use methods from both football and wrestling to develop aspects of my base/posture/stance/balance. I also use methods from basketball.

As much as I respect and love Roy Harris alot of what Roy talks about comes from and can be applied to other sports/physical activities. It (the concepts) all becomes "new" and "unique" for people who don't have such a background OR who don't make the connection (between Bjj and other sports/physical activities).

"all becomes 'new' and 'unique' for people who don't have such a background OR who don't make the connection (between Bjj and other sports/physical activities)."

I'll agree with that 100% as it pertains to wrestling (I've seen so many examples). I'm not sure if I agree with football as it pertains to matwork (maybe takedowns). But I sucked at football, so that's probably just me:)

"1) sit up as if I am going to a kimura and sweep him in the directio of the arm I am attacking (everyone knows this move, but as discussed before, there's no terminology to cite it), or (if he just pushes me back down and defends well),"

This does have a terminology: it's called the hip bump sweep or the cross-over sweep.

Good to know. Thanks.

m.g. I think you are spot on here.

If I am in a more balanced position than you and I apply pressure in the right way I will make you move in the direction that I want you to without too much effort.

This is the basic principal of BJJ, Judo and JJJ. You can call it posture, base, leverage, new mexico twattoplata sweep whatever. It comes down to basic physics.

I think there were some really good posts from gordon hester on 'base' maybe a blue name type might do the ttt for us

To my mind 'base' means being comfortable to play out my intended game - both physically and mentally.
ie if I am in guard and you are throwing a lot of attacks at me you are disrupting my base (mentally) as I have to adjust my game to defend

If i am in DLR guard top and you keep kicking my knee out I am physically in a bad spot to continue playing my game.

This might be simplistic but it works for me.

The way I work on base is to roll with somebody slightly less skilled than me and encourage them to play extremely aggressively (lots of pulling/pushing and subs) while I carefully pass their guard/sweep etc.

Good discussion guys. I think "base" is for BJJ as "chi" is for Gung Fu -everyone talks bout this magical concept without being able to define it. I think m.g.'s post is spot-on.

One instructor told me itwas essentially, "balance in motion" - that is, positioning your body to do what you want most efficiently. You can't have ideal posture without balance and you can't have ideal balance without posture. You cannot apply ideal leverage without the other two.

The thing that gets me is that "base" is needed for ANY physical movement you do, if you are trying to do it in an ideal way. Thus ANY sport requires 'base'.

SoI think the 'balance in motion' is the best 'catch-phrase' I have heard to sum-it up.

Of course when watching me, you would call it "poetry-in-motion"!

FlyingSpaghMon

balance, flow of energy....

I'm actually in the process of writing my thoughts down in a formal manner on this subject for my website - but the central ideas (explained more fully in the upcoming article of course) are:

Base, Posture and Leverage ARE interconnected and related - but can be spoken of separately.

Each of these concepts changes depending on whether you're on top, bottom, level, attacking or defending.

If you watch the high level matches - the first person to truly break their opponents base/posture usually goes on to win.

Basic definitions:

Base: Control and strategic placement of your center of gravity in relation to your opponents.

Posture: The foundation of posture is good base, but also includes optimal limb placement in relation to your opponent (which is more related to decreasin the likelyhood of submissions and/or maximising your own attacking options)

Leverage: This is the positioning of your body in relation to your opponents based on a focal point where the goal is for you to limit your opponents freedom whilst maximising yours.

To give a quick example where all of this fits in...

Your opponent is in your guard and he has great posture - wide base, looking straight ahead, straight back and upright but not "begging-for-hip-bump" upright of course. He also has a good grip on your belt having wedged it up tightly close to your rib cage with one hand, and with the other he's really found a great position a bit low on your chest (but higher than the other hand).

His arms are also turned slightly so that you can't just pull in with your hips and pull out his elbows - you're going to have to work for this one.

At this stage it's helpful to keep in mind a very important principle that they speak about in chess all the time "For one to take any aggressive action, one must first be in an advantageous position"

This means get all ideas of sweeping or submitting out of your head. Right now the only thing you should be concerned with is disturbing his base and getting his reaction and then going from there. Of course this has to be done fast because he's about to start passing.

There are many ways to loosen his grips - rocking back and forth and then climbing up on one elbow is one - but for this example I'm just going to use the standard two-on-one grabbing of his uppermost gripping arm, sit up a bit and then push his hand out at the moment pull away.

Now the opponent STILL has base, but he's lost posture (this is where the differences between the terms can be seen) so NOW his goal, before he tries to do anything else is to re-establish posture.

This whole thing goes by very, very simple principles - but because it's reaction vs reaction vs reaction it can appear very complex. So forgive me if this little exchange appears to simplified.

For arguments sake we're assuming you have the initiative now and you're able to pull his arm a bit more to one side (your right hand is gripping his right sleeve).

The opponent makes a mistake - he feels he's beginning to lose his base and focuses solely on that part of his posture. He decides to try to flatten you out and then free his arm and then begin establishing good posture again.

It's a mistake because before he's able to stabilize his position you're able to go for a spinning armbar from the guard. You've now got the arm trapped but because he was already on his way, and his reaction was good you are now being crushed and he's beginning the process of escaping the armbar.

It's difficult to breath and difficult to move - he's a wrestler and his base is phenomenal. But you're doing well by maintaining your OWN correct posture. Base at this point isn't about stability (from the bottom) it's about maximising your ability to move under HIS center of gravity to disturb his base.

Your posture as a whole at this point is maintaining tight control of the arm whilst keeping your hips mobile.

Now we come to a very common cross-road. Almost all of the time it is impossible to have perfect base EVERYWHERE. This means that usually a perfect base means stability in the areas where the opponent can move you. Disturbing his base can in many cases simply asking yourself where his base less strong or non-existant and trying to move your body into the relevant position to disturb it.

In the case of the person with the trapped arm trying to escape, that area is directly in front of him because of his trapped arm.

Lifting his leg with your arm whilst torquing your hips in that direction could lead to the sweep to finish the armbar, it might not. But this is what you're fighting for and what he's fighting against. Defensive versus attacking attributes play a big role -- however in this scenario all things being equal the person attempting the armbar should be able to sweep as he has the advantage in position.

The person on the bottom has an advantage in position because he has less to keep in mind and his goal is straightforward. The person on top, although having only one goal, has his arm trapped tightly and it can be bent from bottom, side, top etc and lead into other submissions direcly (triangle, omoplata etc) so his reactions have to be just-so.

We also get to see leverage play a big role here - he doesn't want you to have it, and you're trying to get it. And of course leverage doesn't only apply to hip placement during an armbar, it can be about any other position or technique.

I've discovered a few things during rolling as well that have really improved my results.

  • Most beginners mistakes (right up to purple I've seen this actually) are trying to execute a technique without sufficiently disrupting their opponents base or posture. Sometimes it works because of their physical attributes, but often it doesn't.

  • You alway see those above mistakes punished mercilessly when they fight against black belts.

  • I've actually "discovered" sweeps and escapes by simply asking myself where my opponent had no base and figuring out a way to move myself there. For example - some guy was doing this really crushing guard pass by one of my legs was more or less free - I just reversed the position by swinging my leg in the direction where he had no base and we rolled over with me in control. Not really a "sweep" per se - but these spur of the moment things happen all the time when rolling.

Anyway - I think I have officially created a FRAT post.

It's OK, I read it. :)

Frat but good Frat!

I especially agree with the last paragraph, I am always looking for where my opponent is not balanced or what his balance point is. Often all it takes is pulling an arm or pushing a leg and bingo.

"This is the positioning of your body in relation to your opponents based on a focal point where the goal is for you to limit your opponents freedom whilst maximising yours. "

This is not what leverage is from a mechanical point of view. Proper leverage is the efficent use of a lever to perform work.

agreed, leverage is more about mechanical advantage.

"This is not what leverage is from a mechanical point of view. Proper leverage is the efficent use of a lever to perform work."

I'm speaking of leverage in a wider sense as it applies to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu - and that final statement doesn't contradict what is meant by my definition.

Think about anything in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu where leverage is applied and you'll see that when you are the attacker, your opponent's movement is limited (providing a steady fulcrum from which you begin "levering") and your movement is greater (basically being able to move the "lever" at a point farther away from the fulcrum)

Good leverage on an armbar? Opponent is controlled, legs are tight and his movement is limited whereas your hips have a wider range of motion allowing you to apply greater pressure.

Just think about throwing for instance, it's particularly easy to see for hip tosses and over the shoulder throws. If your opponent is "longer" in that he is more upright it will be easier for you because the range of motion you can direct your body through whilst executing the throw is greater, where as the point where the throw spins around should be fixed by correct posture.

What is the natural defense to this? To lower himself, make himself "shorter" and more squat. This limits your range of motion -- This is very much like the difference between putting a tiny bit of pressure on the very end of the lever to get the desired lift, or having to push down with far greater force because you're too close to the fulcrum for it to be an efficient use of force.

So to illustrate what a good throw would be, in relation to the word "leverage" as I defined it previously (and illustrating that it does in fact hold true to the mechanical definition)

Step one in an over the shoulder throw - pull opponent towards you and UP.

Step two - small penetration step inside and turn facing the same direction as your opponent. You've maintained the grip on his sleeve and driven your opposite arm high into his arm pit.

The point of this is to make sure you're "gripping the lever far away from the fulcrum". If he was able to squat YOUR range of motion is limited and you'll not be able to complete the throw.

At this point if all is going well the fulcrum is established (in this case, your hips) and your opponents mobility is limited, whereas YOURS is not.

Step three - "pull down on the lever" in this case this means turning your shoulder in the direction of your opposite foot.