Complexity vs simplicity

**DKJr** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 1:07am

Originally Posted by rangerdavy

I'm a blue belt in the Pedro Sauer association, and I have seen both mentalities in the black belts, though the basics approach is favored by a majority. The often cited Roger Gracie submissions are a great illustration of a basic attack winning at the top levels of competition.

I am hesitant to comment on building my own game in a complex/simple way, because I realize that I have little idea how big the sea is. Based on my [limited] perspective, I would say that I favor the simple approach, because I see high level practitioners using those techniques on each other with great success.

Roger is an anomaly. Seriously why look for exceptions rather than what the trend is. Black belts in my weight decision have dynamic games. Now if you were to say, what kind of grappling game you would want for mma. Then that's a different question.

Also I want to pull my hair out when people say Rogers game is basic. His half guard is not "basic". Neither is his passing.

**265lbsfist** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 1:19am

I might be speaking from my bias as a UltraHW where very dynamic games are rare. At lower weight classes you see much more active games. But do you really see that much higher diversity of techniques employed by a single competitor?

**DKJr** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 1:28am

Originally Posted by 265lbsfist

I might be speaking from my bias as a UltraHW where very dynamic games are rare. At lower weight classes you see much more active games. But do you really see that much higher diversity of techniques employed by a single competitor?

You see the innovators who have mastered a new variation or tweaked a position/transition rule for awhile until people catch up. For example Mendes bros, 2005-2009 Cobrinha, marcelo is an example of a person who keeps tweaking and changing so as I stay ontop.

How many people could tell you what the Berimbolo was last year? Or how many were using the legs drag pass or the kod? Nobody but like 3 guys.

How many people gave a damn about the n/s choke or had high percentage guillotines until Marcelo started using them over and over?

Diversity of techniques wasn't the question, it was simple v basic. If you meant overall arsenal vs skilled in certain moves absolutely skilled at certain moves. The lightweights just are skilled at a few unique moves/positions.

**DKJr** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 1:33am

Oops I don't think I answered your question at all. I answered the question I saw not the one you asked.

Variety in moves at the highest levels no. Everyone does pretty similar stuff, sweep, pass, take the back.

**danno** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 8:59am

i think if you find you have a talent for a certain technique, you should take advantage of that and hone it. but at the same time, you should eliminate your weaknesses. always search for the weakest link and fix it. it's not either/or, it's a matter of finding balance. that's my opinion anyway.

roger has highly developed fundamentals. it's not really simple like the word "basic" implies (though roger himself describes his games as basic), that kind of skill takes many years to develop. just because he beats the best with a technique you learned on your first day doesn't mean what he does is simple or easy.

**Diesel_tke** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 9:46am

I think the question is a little flawed. I think that a person needs to develop a good solid base first before a complex game will work. That's why you see low level guys with good fundamentals winning.

With higher level guys, it isn't that they are using a basic vs complex game; it's that they have evolved the basic game and made it more complex. If they needed to, they could fall back to basics if they need to.

But some people are going to excel at certain areas. Those will look like basic games, but they aren't. They are just using their better areas. They too could fall back to other stuff if they wanted.

Tk;dr: just focus on basics. The rest comes naturally with time on the mat.

***jnp*** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 11:00am

In my opinion, you have to continue to develop both your A, B and C game as you progress. I trained with a small back belt all the time up until a year ago. As we both progressed through the ranks in years past his A game upped my defense (far too slow and painfully for my taste). As my defense against his A game got better, his A game got better too.

Over time he began to switch off between attacking, using A, B and C. Initially I could deal with A, but not B. Then I could deal with Attack A and B, but not C. Then I could fend off A, B and C for longer until he overcame my defense. Finally, he would fire off the attacks in random order. No longer could I expect A, then B, then C. Even worse, sometimes there would be an attack D or even an E.

Being able to chain submission attacks typically requires an A, B and C attack options. I think this is an invaluable skill to have when facing another high level grappler.

So yes, taking time to develop attacks other than your go to choice does take away training time from your A attack, but if that's all you got (simplifying a bit here) how will you fare against the guy who has amazing defense against your A attack?

Edit: Also, what Danno said.

**danno** · Posted On: 3/04/2012 9:23pm

i have a blue belt who is really, really good at a certain reversal from under side control. to the point where he has scarcely developed any other skills from this position. he was a blue when i first started teaching him and he actually used to catch me with this technique while rolling, as i've never come across anyone who is so good at it.

now that it doesn't work on me any more, he's pretty helpless from there. right now he has no B,C,D to speak of. so i've banned him from using that reversal at all, and he has to start under side control with the lower belts. once he fixes this weakness, he can start using the technique again.

**Vorpal** · Posted On: 3/05/2012 9:55am

Originally Posted by danno

i have a blue belt who is really, really good at a certain reversal from under side control. to the point where he has scarcely developed any other skills from this position. he was a blue when i first started teaching him and he actually used to catch me with this technique while rolling, as i've never come across anyone who is so good at it.

now that it doesn't work on me any more, he's pretty helpless from there. right now he has no B,C,D to speak of. so i've banned him from using that reversal at all, and he has to start under side control with the lower belts. once he fixes this weakness, he can start using the technique again.

^^^This is what I look for in an instructor.