A wise man (Mr. Harris) once told me there are three levels to look at a move. There is the forest, the tree, and the bark. No matter how you look at it, its still the same move just how closely you're examining it
Countlphie- Your on the right track, just keep working, you're just like the rest of us. Plus don't be afraid of looking for short cuts. If man never looked for short cuts we'd all live in the eastern hemisphere.
shen -
There's just not way to "discuss" your way into being good at jiu jitsu.
--But that's what some people attempt to do. They think: "If I can just get the special details from Professor_________, THEN I will really UNDERSTAND what I am doing and be doing it RIGHT, and then..."
Meanwhile, there is some new dude on the other side of the mat already wrecking people with the move.
I can agree with this -- there's no avoiding the part with a bazillian repetitions.
i think this whole intellectual approach is something that became popular because of certain figures in the jiu jitsu community. i'm not shitting on the intellectual approach by any means, but when i listen to ryan hall explain things, I get blown away, I start to think that the key to technique is in fully understanding those details. i find his explanations so good, I start thinking this is the key to becoming better. and then there's people like john danaher, who's picture has been painted to be this extremely cerebral intellectual who is often described as a "grappling genius." it makes me think that being books smarts, or having "intellect" is an advantage.
they are both intellectual people who can verbalize the mechanics of any technique eloquently. but the bottom line is that they spend shit loads of time on the mats.
shen -
There's just not way to "discuss" your way into being good at jiu jitsu.
--But that's what some people attempt to do. They think: "If I can just get the special details from Professor_________, THEN I will really UNDERSTAND what I am doing and be doing it RIGHT, and then..."
Meanwhile, there is some new dude on the other side of the mat already wrecking people with the move.
After a couple of years of solid training of what is considered the basics, I noticed a good percentage of consistent people become that dude on the other side. It begins happening once they have a solid foundation (a couple years worth of good training).
After a while, people get better at it. There comes a point where they can pick up something on youtube, and will be hitting it in training, even if it is not really related to something else they've been taught previously and hasn't been shown in class.
Also, the value of the attention to details coaches is the fact that if you aren't hitting a certain move, they'll be able to notice and tell you why and what exactly you need to correct, thus making it better for you.
In general, I agree with overintelectualizing early (ie I think it can be detrimental). Give them what they need at a certain point.
I also think a good curriculum gives better results than random techniques.
And, IMO a lot of coaches with attention to detail are aware of what shen mentions and dose the details they give out.
A ton of champs in JJ are very technical (as opposed to pure naturals), as seen from their instructional vids.
.
Master Shen, do you think my thought process is close to Shen-Do orange belt in e-JiuJitsu?
Btw what is the current name of our organization? People ask me what I train from time to time.
A semi-relevant quote from Mark Rippetoe that I like:
"Mediocre athletes that tried like hell to get good are the best coaches".
joe_mama - A semi-relevant quote from Mark Rippetoe that I like:
"Mediocre athletes that tried like hell to get good are the best coaches".
Hahahahahaha, if there's something I can aspire to, that's probably it. Love it.
Actually twelvegage makes an excellent point in regard to the whole "natural talent" concept. I tend to agree with him.
I've read many of the books mentioned. The biggest influence for me in this area is a researcher named Ander Ericson whose research provided the foundation for several of the books mentioned.
People who are so called "naturally talented" are generally individuals who have put in the most time developing that skill in many cases through several different and similar activities.
While I do agree with Shen that the really talented individuals in Bjj don't have to "intellectualize" Bjj in order to be good at it. I don't agree with him that their ability is natural. What I believe is such individuals likely developed that physical ability to be good at something like Bjj through several years of participating in a variety of sports and physical activities starting from their youth.
Again, Bjj is essentially nothing more than a physical activity or something one does with ones body. The more control, awareness and ability to effectively and efficiently move one's own body the easier and faster one is able to not only learn new and different physical activities/skills but also adapt, adjust and improvise with those physical activities/skills.
I've never met a person who picked up Bjj fairly quickly who wasn't already good at other sports/physical activities.
Mastering physical activities/sports prepares one to learn more physical activities/sports.
My suggestion for those who want to know how to learn something like Bjj quickly and efficiently is this:
1) think about a physical activity/sport you have already master (it can be a very basic one like riding a bike or jumping roping or swimming to a more comprehensive one like basketball or soccer)
2) think about the process you used to learn and master that physical activity/sport (you'll probably notice that much of what you did to learn and master that physical activity/sport was intuitive and inductive. You naturally learned things simply from doing the activity. You naturally picked up on details, nuances, particulars, etc either from your own trial and error or by watching others. You also likely engaged many of your senses from visual to tactile/kinesthetic to audio, etc)
3) use the SAME process you used to learn and master other physical activities/sports and transfer it to learning and mastering Bjj.
Just think like Dan. Train hard. It will be alright.
In my opinion 3 years is not a long enough time to perfect anything or be considered a master of anything. Point being is that yes there are some guys that are naturally gifted but it doesn't make them a master of an art. 
Is Jon Jones a master of mma? How about a 10 year old gymnast? The "3 year" point is exactly the point, the more gifted people at the sport are not developing on the same time line as the rest.
Some people are just naturally gifted in the sport. A guy I trained with in Florida 20 years old trained only 2 or 2 and a half years and just won no gi worlds at purple. Also won it at blue.
Kinda like DJ Jackson from Lloyd Irvin.
More reading material on the subject. I guess there is a new book out on the theory of multiple intellegences.
Jerome
http://breakingmuscle.com/sports/athletic-ability-form-intelligence
From this website:
Historically, the stereotype of the “dumb jock” has suggested people with athletic ability are not very smart. More recently, however, athletes have begun to earn the credit they deserve, and, arguably, have always deserved, for their intellect and acumen. Harvard University cognition and education professor Howard Gardner has advanced a theory of multiple intelligences, of which bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is one type. Gardner’s theory provides validation for the notion that sophistication and intellectual rigor contribute to elite athletic performance. It also helps explain how control of and facility with one’s own body actually occur.
Gardner’s book, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, describes all of the multiple intelligences as an alternative to the long-held belief that “intelligence” is along only one dimension. Additional intelligences covered in the book include musical intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and linguistic intelligence, among others. People possessing bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are described as “good at body movement, performing actions and physical control. People who are strong in this area tend to have excellent hand-eye coordination and dexterity.”1
Many readers probably know one or more people who seem to be good at every sport they try, who pick up complex physical movements seemingly effortlessly, who can mimic others’ actions without much challenge. Gardner’s theory helps us view this ability as a form of intelligence, which has positive implications for those of us who like to challenge ourselves physically - even those of us who are not so naturally gifted.
For the less gifted among us, there are ways to improve upon this intelligence as outlined in a recent article.2 Indeed, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is described as one of the more marginalized but also one of the more widely observed intelligences in children.3 Given the evidence that suggests a physical component to learning helps in retention, it behooves all of us to develop our own bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. After all, it’s just fun to DO things!
Rorion Gracie made this same point almost 15 years ago. People accused him of holding back (which he was in some way for sure), but he had one statement on his, I think, Intermediate set, which paraphrased, said something like "I could show you all the details, but that would be the wrong way to teach". Notice that the way he teaches is to give you just enough detaial AND demonstration to make the move functional and then adds details later on. Some people complain that in these cases he was this "hiding" details, but it is really the best way to train.
Notice in atheltics like Judo and wrestling, they do not worry about getting every little last detail of a takedown. They just do it, and the coach refines it along the way. Some cannot even explain the small details. That is difference between COACHING and INSTRUCTING.
Having said all of that, and considering Shen's points, I don't think that is the best approach for people who are not athletes in the truest sense, and are hobbyists. Peole who do it simply as a hobby, pastime, recreational activity, physical activity or intellectual pursuit in terms of the ART, NEED the detail. They are best served by conceptual understanding and intellectual knowledge, and step-by-step procedures, simply because they won't have the physical ability and bodily awareness of an athlete. Different needs, different outcomes, different purposes.
This is why you have tremendous APPLIERS and PERFORMERS of BJJ which make HORRIBLE coaches and instructors. The worst class in BJJ that I ever attended were run by a very high level BJJ athelete. Simply did not not what to teach and how to do it, but i would give my left elbow to perform like him.
Actually the so called hobbyist don't need the "details" either.
Regardless if you're an athlete or a so called regular person you do NOT learn physical things via detailed instruction; you just don't.
The way Rorion teaches Bjj, which he learned from his father, is actually the NATURAL way to learn and master a physical skill.
Again, many people actually hinder their own learning and development by over intellectualizing and by demanding too much detail at first.
why the hell do you not want the details?
i might not "need" them, but i wanna know it. this keeps me interested in learning, training, etc.
anyone who doesn't care about the details doesn't seem all that interested in progression, IMO.....
BshMstr - why the hell do you not want the details?you never give all the details 1st,jordan calls it shadowing,you teach you observe.then you correct what mistakes the majority of the class is making.then when they get it you add more detail
i might not "need" them, but i wanna know it. this keeps me interested in learning, training, etc.
anyone who doesn't care about the details doesn't seem all that interested in progression, IMO.....