One technique per class

[skribs127 148]

I've been doing BJJ for 3.5 years now. The teaching style is a complete 180 from what I'm used to in TKD.

• TKD: Each belt has a set number of techniques, combos, forms, and self-defense sequences that need to be learned for the test; or has a lot more forms and then is more open about the approach to technique and self-defense. Every class you can expect to drill kicks and practice forms; and you'll probably also drill hand techniques such as blocks and/or punches. You'll likely drill dozens of different techniques and practice multiple forms every class. You can also expect every class as a white belt to be the same as every other white belt class, every class as a red belt to be the same as every other red belt class, and so on.
• BJJ: 95% of the art is open to kids, 97% of the art is open to white belt adults, 98% of the art is open to blue belts, and everything opens at brown. Most classes are focused on white belts of the age group. Every once in a while, blue belts will get instruction on wristlocks, but most colored belt techniques are left for 1-on-1 training. Each class goes into 1, 2, or 3 techniques that you spend 5-10 minutes each on, and then you do various sparring games to work on the position.

I know it's possible to do BJJ more like TKD. There are some BJJ schools that do this: have a codified curriculum for white (and maybe blue). Roy Dean even has his students go through "crucibles" which are belt tests for every belt color, although upper belts it's more them running a seminar and technical demo than a traditional TKD test.

However, I'm curious if it would be possible to teach TKD in this way. Only teach 1, 2, or 3 technique sequences per class. Maybe even have rank progress similar to BJJ: there's no test, you just get a stripe or a belt when the Master determines you're ready based on mat hours, time-in-grade, progress, ability, attitude, etc. This style would likely do away with forms (because long-term memorization of specific sequences would not be the goal or method) and focus on understanding of the technique and the concepts. Each class would be a deep-dive into something like a 1-step sequence, kicking footwork, striking combination, or something to that effect. And then after drilling those, there would be a specific sparring session (a semi-scripted spar where you train the situation against resistance), and then free sparring using normal sparring rules.

This isn't the direction I'm planning to go. It's more a thought experiment.

 

[Earl Weiss124 24]

Currently doing some BJJ and been thru classes at 4 schools. I prefer the TKD progressive curriculum because in the BJJ schools I often feel like I am learning something without having a proper foundation. Sparring is also an issue . Higher belts might "Let you work" or they might just shut you down. In Tk-D we had a premise that for sparring higher belts could not do any technique the lower belt did not know and their intensity should only be slightly higher than the lower belt. ,

 

[skribs127 148]

Currently doing some BJJ and been thru classes at 4 schools. I prefer the TKD progressive curriculum because in the BJJ schools I often feel like I am learning something without having a proper foundation. Sparring is also an issue . Higher belts might "Let you work" or they might just shut you down. In Tk-D we had a premise that for sparring higher belts could not do any technique the lower belt did not know and their intensity should only be slightly higher than the lower belt. ,

There's a saying in BJJ, "Trust the process". The idea is that for the first year or two you're completely lost. I'm at a point now where I've seen most of the stuff, or at least where I have an idea of what to do in each position (even if it's just how I want to get to a different position that I understand better).

My opinion of the overall program, based on my experiences, is I think the TKD approach tends to be easier for newcomers and lower belts, but the BJJ approach allows more dynamics and creativity as you get more experienced. I feel most TKD schools never hit the point where you switch from rote technique to learning concepts and application. In comparison, some BJJ schools are even doing away with learning technique at all, and their entire curriculum is based around situational games (known as "ecological training").

I remember in my HKD class me and a fellow student -both 3rd degree in KKW TKD, him also 4th degree in ATA- were discussing our newest belt and the next bunch of memorized sequences to learn. His attitude was, "I don't want to learn more forms, I want to learn more application." Same thing I saw with our black belts in the TKD class. Some common elements:

• "I can learn the stuff for my next test, or I can improve what I already know, but I don't the time to do both."
• "I don't want to focus on anything from previous tests because I need to focus on learning the new stuff."
• "I don't have the bandwidth to learn my stuff for my test and also re-learn the stuff to become an instructor."

A lot of folks simply hit a plateau in how much they could memorize, and I feel the vast majority of students (aside from me and the other HKD student I mentioned) were so hyper-fixated on memorization and doing things "right" that they didn't dig deeper into the underlying concepts.

This is where I think TKD tends to fail its students. Too much focus on a rote curriculum that just keeps expanding and expanding, without enough opportunity to sit and let it breathe. Contrasted with BJJ which tends to just dump all the white belts in the deep end.

 

[drop bear127 3]

Dutch drills.

 

[drop bear127 3]

This is where I think TKD tends to fail its students. Too much focus on a rote curriculum that just keeps expanding and expanding, without enough opportunity to sit and let it breathe. Contrasted with BJJ which tends to just dump all the white belts in the deep end.

With BJJ a lot of that white belt stuff is also black belt stuff.

And because it is assessed through competition people will pick the easiest route to being good. Which is almost always good fundamentals.

Gordan Ryan's guard passing.

 

[skribs127 148]

With BJJ a lot of that white belt stuff is also black belt stuff.

And because it is assessed through competition people will pick the easiest route to being good. Which is almost always good fundamentals.

Gordan Ryan's guard passing.

I think one of the differences is that there's so many BJJ positions/situations, and very few in TKD (open stance vs. closed stance, near vs. far, that's about it). So there's a lot less to focus on in TKD.

There's also not necessarily a linear path for progression for a lot of the techniques in BJJ, compared to TKD. In TKD for example:

• Roundhouse kick -> jumping roundhouse kick, turning roundhouse kick -> tornado kick
• Side kick -> hook kick, spinning back kick -> spinning hook kick, jump spinning back kick -> jump spinning hook kick

There's a linear progression. It wouldn't make sense to teach white belts tornado kick and jump spinning hook kick, and then wait until they're a blue or red belt to teach them the regular roundhouse kick and side kick. But it does make sense to teach white belts take-downs, guard pulls, closed guard submissions, basic closed-guard sweep, how to open the guard, basic guard passes, half guard (and knee shield, deep half, etc.), open guard, gi-focused guards like lasso and spider guard, de la riva guard, side control, knee-on-belly, north-south, mount, back...

While principles from one apply to the other in BJJ, and for example learning butterfly guard can help you with X guard and butterfly half, those principles generally apply bidirectionally and you can learn the positions and techniques in any order. But in TKD, there's a more natural progression of learning basics that become more advanced.

 

[J. Pickard]

would be possible to teach TKD in this way. Only teach 1, 2, or 3 technique sequences per class... and focus on understanding of the technique and the concepts

I have actually experienced TKD classes like this (once while in Korea) but it was all at black belt level for the sport athletes in TKD. The Kyorugi team never did poomsae and for 90-ish minute classes would focus on a singular concept by drilling it multiple ways and would end with partner work to live drill it. The poomsae guys did similar just their partner work was usually to help hold a target or resistance band. The athletes in this case typically only focused on what their specialty in competition. It didn't matter if they were 1st poom or 4th dan, everyone practiced the same because it's applicable regardless of rank.

So I think it's possible but would be more difficult at colored belt levels than black belt level. As far as doing it for TKD as a whole, and not just for the sport side of it I'm not sure. Try it and let us know how it goes?

 

[Badhabits]

I think it's a good idea. Karate was probably taught in this vein " back in the day". Functionality over perfection of form. It's way a martial art ought to be taught IMO. Don't like the idea of doing away with forms though. Forms are a good way of conveying information in a physical format. Personally I'd love to deep dive into specific techniques for multiple classes/lengths of time in class.

 

[skribs127 148]

I have actually experienced TKD classes like this (once while in Korea) but it was all at black belt level for the sport athletes in TKD. The Kyorugi team never did poomsae and for 90-ish minute classes would focus on a singular concept by drilling it multiple ways and would end with partner work to live drill it. The poomsae guys did similar just their partner work was usually to help hold a target or resistance band. The athletes in this case typically only focused on what their specialty in competition. It didn't matter if they were 1st poom or 4th dan, everyone practiced the same because it's applicable regardless of rank.

So I think it's possible but would be more difficult at colored belt levels than black belt level. As far as doing it for TKD as a whole, and not just for the sport side of it I'm not sure. Try it and let us know how it goes?

Was that just for those team practices, or was that for regular training as well?

For example, we ran our sparring classes this way, but those weren't the core curriculum. It was an elective bonus class.

 

[philwhite54 10]

I do most of what you suggested. I define training themes that I focus on each week. We may do basics if there is extra time however this formula keeps things fresh. I also do in class belts and strips based off attendance and effort. I never liked belt testing. Having to wait until a set date to test is silly. Especially for black belts where it could be 6 months. When you are ready you should be promoted. Not before, not after. You just have to make sure the message and expectations are clear so people know why they have to wait or why they got promoted.

 

[Earl Weiss124 24]

There's a saying in BJJ, "Trust the process". The idea is that for the first year or two you're completely lost. I'm at a point now where I've seen most of the stuff, or at least where I have an idea of what to do in each position (even if it's just how I want to get to a different position that I understand better).

I was speaking to a coach about what I heard with beginners rolling with higher belts and the idea is just prevent the submission. I do this but after a while, get board, try something and often get submitted. His comment was yes, things may develop more slowly at first but it's better for the long term development. My comment was Long term - heck I don't know if I have along term.

 

[skribs127 148]

I was speaking to a coach about what I heard with beginners rolling with higher belts and the idea is just prevent the submission. I do this but after a while, get board, try something and often get submitted. His comment was yes, things may develop more slowly at first but it's better for the long term development. My comment was Long term - heck I don't know if I have along term.

Have you watched any of Rick Ellis' videos? He runs the channel The Art of Skill, and a lot of his content lately has been on "BJJ over 40".

I think I was about a year and a half in (training 6 days per week) before I really managed to find my game against even the newer white belts. It doesn't help that I'm much smaller and less athletic than most of the folks in the gym. Now I'm able to manhandle guys who outweigh me by 100 pounds.

 

[Earl Weiss124 24]

Have you watched any of Rick Ellis' videos? He runs the channel The Art of Skill, and a lot of his content lately has been on "BJJ over 40".

I think I was about a year and a half in (training 6 days per week) before I really managed to find my game against even the newer white belts. It doesn't help that I'm much smaller and less athletic than most of the folks in the gym. Now I'm able to manhandle guys who outweigh me by 100 pounds.

I will check it out.

 

[skribs127 148]

@Earl Weiss I had a conversation a while ago with my Professor that I think applies to you. He said how impressed he is that I would be such high-level in one martial art, and choose to start over as a white belt in another. He didn't think he could put on a white belt and start Taekwondo. It takes a very special martial artist to do so. And this applies to you even more than it does to me, because you've been doing TKD longer and have higher merits than I do.

 

[skribs127 148]

@Earl Weiss another conversation I had with him and another coach (I think he was a brown belt at the time, but is a black belt now), which may help you. I am younger than you, but I'm also by far the smallest guy at my gym (and this was even more true when I was a white belt).

I asked about getting smashed in positions where I should be safe. For example, when I have someone in my closed guard, they should not be able to submit me. Yet, I keep getting caught in an Americana from closed guard.

My Professor added, "And cross-collar chokes?" He was right. He and the coach explained to me that as you get better, you learn techniques that help you close the size or athleticism gap. But as a white belt, you don't really have those techniques yet, and so size and athleticism tend to be all you have.

---
I'll also add, based on my 3 years of experience so far, that people coming from a TKD background also tend to be more passive in rolls. If you're in an odd position, you wait to see what you should do. Where most of the guys coming in without that formal training background are more likely to be the type of white belt that gets into an odd position and they just grab stuff and shove, pull, toss, whatever in order to succeed. And that tends to lead to more success early on, especially against white belts that don't have a feel for the defenses yet.
---

Anyway, my Professor continued by telling me the story of a purple belt he used to teach. This purple belt would cross-collar choke everyone from inside their closed guard. He kept telling the purple belt, "If you do that in a competition at the purple belt level, they're going to grab your arm and catch you in an armbar." And you know what happened? He went to a competition and he did that. And you know what happened? He tapped everyone and took gold. So my professor stopped telling him not to cross-collar folks in that position.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf127 1]

Admittedly these are small classes of anywhere from 1-6 people depending on the class or day, who are all lower belt, but what I've been doing is very similar to your BJJ method but for a more traditional martial art approach. And I've seen it done successfully in my old muay thai classes, which were larger.

Basically, we start class, do about 15 minutes of warmup/stretching. Then another 5-10 minutes of footwork drills. 5-10 minutes of 'sparring' (they're lower belts so I've been having them do essentially continuous no-minds to lead into sparring), 5 minutes at the end of breathing, followed by bowing out, so in total there's approximately 20-30 minutes focused on techniques.

That said, for those 20-30 minutes I choose a theme to focus on, and focus on 1-2 techniques within that theme. For instance, last class we were focusing on punching and flowing between straight to curved punches, so the way the class went was the first technique was jab-cross-duck&hook to the body, hook to the face. The second one was similar but focusing on hook to uppercut.

Breaking down the technique and focusing one punch/movement at a time, then slowly piecing them together helps teach the fundamentals of each move, and helps them feel like they're learning something bigger at the end. If you go through it too quickly, that just means extra reps, and if it takes too long, either steal time from sparring, or let it end halfway through a longer tech if needed. Not here, but at the muay thai gym that did the same, everyone could drill the same things - and it's easy to incorporate some extra tricks or adjust the combination slightly for the people that have been training longer as well.

 

[wab25]

Maybe even have rank progress similar to BJJ: there's no test, you just get a stripe or a belt when the Master determines you're ready based on mat hours, time-in-grade, progress, ability, attitude, etc. This style would likely do away with forms (because long-term memorization of specific sequences would not be the goal or method) and focus on understanding of the technique and the concepts.

Those two things are not linked. You can do away with formal testing and just award a rank when the student is ready... but that does not mean that you must do away with forms. Part of a student being ready for the next rank would be how well they know the forms. This could include their knowledge of those concepts. The point is, whether you do formal tests and whether you do forms are independent. You can change one without changing the other... or change both...

I remember in my HKD class me and a fellow student -both 3rd degree in KKW TKD, him also 4th degree in ATA- were discussing our newest belt and the next bunch of memorized sequences to learn. His attitude was, "I don't want to learn more forms, I want to learn more application." Same thing I saw with our black belts in the TKD class. Some common elements:

• "I can learn the stuff for my next test, or I can improve what I already know, but I don't the time to do both."
• "I don't want to focus on anything from previous tests because I need to focus on learning the new stuff."
• "I don't have the bandwidth to learn my stuff for my test and also re-learn the stuff to become an instructor."

A lot of folks simply hit a plateau in how much they could memorize, and I feel the vast majority of students (aside from me and the other HKD student I mentioned) were so hyper-fixated on memorization and doing things "right" that they didn't dig deeper into the underlying concepts.

This is not a problem with TKD. This is a problem with the school, the teacher and or the student. Folks are too focused on how fast they can rank up, instead of focusing on understanding what they are doing. Just because tests are offered every 6 months, does not mean that you need to test every 6 months. Instead of being focused on ranking up, folks should be focused on understanding.... this focus on ranking up can come from the school or the instructor... but ultimately, it is the student who buys into this focus. I have told all my instructors, I am not here for rank, I am here to learn. Many have asked how I felt about testing, and most of the time, I tell them I am not ready, I do not feel I understand things yet, to the point where I feel comfortable. This is exactly why my rank is what it is, despite the years I have in the arts.

The point here is that your school can focus on what you want it to focus on. It is your choice. And the area of focus does not have to be determined by whether you lead with TKD or with BJJ. Both arts can be taught with any focus you like.....

 

[J. Pickard]

Was that just for those team practices, or was that for regular training as well?

For example, we ran our sparring classes this way, but those weren't the core curriculum. It was an elective bonus class.

Hmm, not sure since I was just visiting those dojang. I know that for the few days I was there, all of the black belt classes were hyper focused on one aspect. There were some black belts that switched it up so Monday they would just do poomsae but tuesday they would do kyorugi.

 

[Haruhiko]

Hmm, not sure since I was just visiting those dojang. I know that for the few days I was there, all of the black belt classes were hyper focused on one aspect. There were some black belts that switched it up so Monday they would just do poomsae but tuesday they would do kyorugi.

From my experience, it's a fight team thing. Very very regimented, especially when hosting guest nations.

 

[punisher73]

BJJ is going to vary widely based on the instructor. I have trained with a couple instructors who has a very systematic approach that allows beginning students to build and understand positioning and some basic things from there. I have also trained with BJJ instructors who might show a couple of techniques and students practice them for a little bit (maybe 10-15 minutes), but then the rest of the class (around 45 minutes) is just "rolling" and the higher belts had ZERO interest in helping out lower students and just used it as a way to see how fast they could tap them.

One way to do both is break up into groups and focus on something that they need for their rank. Whether it is learning new technique or a form/kata section. After spending time on the group specifics, arrange partner drills to hone those techniques in application. Sparring can be done at the end with a specific purpose/goal in mind to reinforce what needs to be learned.

IMHO, class time should be spent on partner drills/sparring to learn to apply it against a resisting opponent (with varying degrees based on learning and skill). Practicing forms and techniques should be for home training where a partner is not needed.