Ideal Situation Theory

**perfectsplit** · Posted On: 6/23/2011 6:59pm

A theory/concept I have is what I call the “Ideal Situation”. That theory is as follows: For any given technique, there is a specific set of combat circumstances which are most favorable for using the technique in question. Those set of circumstances form he “Ideal Situation” for that given technique.

For example, the ideal situation to apply the basic jije-gatame armbar from the mount is when tori has very good control from his mount and uke attempts to escape by pushing tori off and stretching his arms out. This set of circumstances is the most favorable set of circumstances in which to use basic jije-gatame.

Another example would be as follows: When tori is in the guard on bottom and uke puts his head down low while sticking one arm outside tori’s guard and one arm deep inside tori’s guard, this is theoretically the ideal situation in which to apply the triangle choke.

When a student is learning a new move and is trying to integrate it into his existing game, it is best to try using the move in the ideal situation, because that will maximize its chances for success. After the student has had many successes using the move in the ideal situation, he has increased his proficiency with the move and then becomes able to start applying the move in non-ideal situations, or less-ideal situations. For example, he may be able to start executing jije-gatame from the mount even when his opponent keeps his arms tucked in, without sticking out his arms.

I believe that when a teacher teaches a new move, he should also teach the theoretical ideal situation for that move as well. For example, he might teach the bridging escape from side mount by saying, “This is a good move when your opponent (in sidemount on top) has his head down low, brings his knees together, and raises his butt up high.” And also point out situations which do not favor the move. “This is not a good move when your opponent has both hands on the near side and he brings his hips down low and heavy”.

Saulo Riberio once told his seminar students, “Some moves in jiu-jitsu only work when your opponent moves a certain way.”

And my old teacher (who was a former Mundial champ) once said, “Jiu-jitsu is 90% reaction.”

I believe that what they were saying support my theory.

**Petter** · Posted On: 6/23/2011 7:28pm

Originally Posted by perfectsplit

For example, the ideal situation to apply the basic jije-gatame

Juji-gatame

armbar from the mount is when tori has very good control from his mount and uke attempts to escape by pushing tori off and stretching his arms out. This set of circumstances is the most favorable set of circumstances in which to use basic jije-gatame.

That’s how I usually see it introduced, though personally I find I have more luck setting it up when I move to technical mount on someone trying to turn away.

Another example would be as follows: When tori is in the guard on bottom and uke puts his head down low while sticking one arm outside tori’s guard and one arm deep inside tori’s guard, this is theoretically the ideal situation in which to apply the triangle choke.

It sounds like a rather unrealistic set of circumstances unless your training partners are all very fond of the Gracie Gift. I prefer a setup like the one we often do as a warmup drill: Partner’s in your guard; you grab both wrists, push one through, triangle; reset and go for the other side. It’s IMO a bit more realistic, and if you want to talk about Platonic ideals, it will also get you used to the idea that the ideal situation is something you may need to create, not something your opponent is going to hand you on a silver platter.

In fact, I’m not sure that teaching a technique without also teaching at least one reasonably realistic setup is all that useful. There’s my idea: Don’t teach it starting with the assumption of an Ideal Situation; instead teach it starting with a realistic situation (albeit a realistic situation where the technique is useful!), and include a setup if necessary. Don’t teach people that they should kimura from guard only after the opponent places his hand on the mat, instead teach them right away how to provoke that action.

I believe that when a teacher teaches a new move, he should also teach the theoretical ideal situation for that move as well. For example, he might teach the bridging escape from side mount by saying, “This is a good move when your opponent (in sidemount on top) has his head down low, brings his knees together, and raises his butt up high.” And also point out situations which do not favor the move. “This is not a good move when your opponent has both hands on the near side and he brings his hips down low and heavy”.

This doesn’t require you to invent some “theoretical ideal”. Obviously it may be a good idea to present a good situation to use the technique, and to provide caveats for circumstances that are likely to render it ineffective, but a single theoretical idea? Why?

Saulo Riberio once told his seminar students, “Some moves in jiu-jitsu only work when your opponent moves a certain way.”

And my old teacher (who was a former Mundial champ) once said, “Jiu-jitsu is 90% reaction.”

I believe that what they were saying support my theory.

I don’t. I believe that both of those things support my theory…that is, the rather obvious fact that you have to learn to be sensitive to what your opponent is doing and respond appropriately. But this cannot rely on some set of Platonic ideals of situations, because your opponent won’t give them to you—rather, responding opportunistically requires you to be ready to find entries into techniques from highly unpredictable transitions. I also believe that the only way to gain this sensitivity is rolling, rolling, rolling—it’s all about live mat hours.

**Syphilis** · Posted On: 6/27/2011 6:49am

Your teacher should tell you when to apply the moves you're practicing. That's part of teaching. I don't really understand where you're going from that starting point. It's like you return to the basic assumption.

Of course some moves only work in certain situations. Can't do a halfguard sweep when you're not in half guard.

I felt like I just got worse replying to this thread :(

**Hiro Protagonist** · Posted On: 6/27/2011 7:12am

YMAS please.

**BKR** · Posted On: 6/27/2011 10:58am

Originally Posted by perfectsplit

A theory/concept I have is what I call the “Ideal Situation”. That theory is as follows: For any given technique, there is a specific set of combat circumstances which are most favorable for using the technique in question. Those set of circumstances form he “Ideal Situation” for that given technique.

For example, the ideal situation to apply the basic jije-gatame armbar from the mount is when tori has very good control from his mount and uke attempts to escape by pushing tori off and stretching his arms out. This set of circumstances is the most favorable set of circumstances in which to use basic jije-gatame.

Another example would be as follows: When tori is in the guard on bottom and uke puts his head down low while sticking one arm outside tori’s guard and one arm deep inside tori’s guard, this is theoretically the ideal situation in which to apply the triangle choke.

When a student is learning a new move and is trying to integrate it into his existing game, it is best to try using the move in the ideal situation, because that will maximize its chances for success. After the student has had many successes using the move in the ideal situation, he has increased his proficiency with the move and then becomes able to start applying the move in non-ideal situations, or less-ideal situations. For example, he may be able to start executing jije-gatame from the mount even when his opponent keeps his arms tucked in, without sticking out his arms.

I believe that when a teacher teaches a new move, he should also teach the theoretical ideal situation for that move as well. For example, he might teach the bridging escape from side mount by saying, “This is a good move when your opponent (in sidemount on top) has his head down low, brings his knees together, and raises his butt up high.” And also point out situations which do not favor the move. “This is not a good move when your opponent has both hands on the near side and he brings his hips down low and heavy”.

Saulo Riberio once told his seminar students, “Some moves in jiu-jitsu only work when your opponent moves a certain way.”

And my old teacher (who was a former Mundial champ) once said, “Jiu-jitsu is 90% reaction.”

I believe that what they were saying support my theory.

That's nice, now WTF does it mean? You realize there are many "ideal" situations to choose from? For example, in Judo, we often find the "ideal" time to apply JuJi Gatame to be after a throw or failed throw.

There are a couple of things involved in learning "techniques". First of all, the mechanics of the thing, then, application. The faster one can move to application and still do the mechanics correctly, the better. So one teaches techniques etc. progressively from simple to complex, safer to more dangerous/slow to fast,etc.

So, simple technique (are any of them really simple?), simple application-----.complex application so forth and so on.

And don't forget basic movements/postures shrimping etc.

Ben