Craig Jones says next NoGi Meta is Wrestling (Aggressive Butt Scooting)

[GordoBarraBJJ]

Meta? Lot of fan boys using these terms these days.. smh lol.

I came to say this . . . Meta.

 

[GordoBarraBJJ]

^^^^^^^^Aggressive Butt Scooting^^^^^^^^^^

 

[DatCutman]

Analyzing current practices/trends/patterns is just a way to try and eke out an advantage for less skilled grapplers, but it works. Hell, I'd argue Keenan Cornelius/Craig Jones have made a career out of it. We can't all be as good as Roger/Marcelo who just shut shit down instinctively, and for the non-Roger/Marcelos of the world, they have to rely on other skills (analysis, strategy, game planning, etc.). Even if you find use of the word "Meta" cringey, there's no denying it has helped lesser folks get further along than they would have otherwise.

 

[mataleaos]

Analyzing current practices/trends/patterns is just a way to try and eke out an advantage for less skilled grapplers, but it works. Hell, I'd argue Keenan Cornelius/Craig Jones have made a career out of it. We can't all be as good as Roger/Marcelo who just shut shit down instinctively, and for the non-Roger/Marcelos of the world, they have to rely on other skills (analysis, strategy, game planning, etc.). Even if you find use of the word "Meta" cringey, there's no denying it has helped lesser folks get further along than they would have otherwise.

I don’t disagree with that in the least. I hope no one would argue against that. I’m a hobbyist and I like looking at trends too. And I don’t even find it as cringey as some of the ppl recently replying. I was just saying that I think a small portion of hobbyists end up spinning their wheels by basing their personal training on whatever the current meta is. It’s not a large percentage of people but I think most of us know a few that are always drilling only what’s hot at the moment among the upper 1%.

Not to go too far down the rabbit home but I think it starts from a good place. We hear good sayings like “techniques and strategies that work at the high level usually work at lower levels.” That’s a good thing to keep in mind yet some take it too far and only work on whatever the current meta game is.

That’s all I was saying =)

 

[yetanother]

Most of the meta talk is bullshit. Firstly it's often an over simplification as often a lot (or most) guys are still doing things that aren't hyped up. Secondly the meta at the lower level tournaments is different.
Using stuff that works on the top level is a good choice. It's even more important when teaching stuff. Things that where used to reliably win titles are often so much better than opportunistic, crazy or outdated stuff.

 

[mataleaos]

Using stuff that works on the top level is a good choice. It's even more important when teaching stuff. Things that where used to reliably win titles are often so much better than opportunistic, crazy or outdated stuff.

Totally

 

[DatCutman]

I don’t disagree with that in the least. I hope no one would argue against that. I’m a hobbyist and I like looking at trends too. And I don’t even find it as cringey as some of the ppl recently replying. I was just saying that I think a small portion of hobbyists end up spinning their wheels by basing their personal training on whatever the current meta is. It’s not a large percentage of people but I think most of us know a few that are always drilling only what’s hot at the moment among the upper 1%.

Not to go too far down the rabbit home but I think it starts from a good place. We hear good sayings like “techniques and strategies that work at the high level usually work at lower levels.” That’s a good thing to keep in mind yet some take it too far and only work on whatever the current meta game is.

That’s all I was saying =)

I wasn't replying to you, but more so the "Meta is a new thing and is cringey as fuck" replies. However, I think the concept of Meta goes a little deeper than popularity (I go into a wildly long discussion below on what "meta" constitutes, both in its definition, and application in other endeavors).

For example, I think we'd all agree there's very little point in teaching the Guillotine the same as we did in 2002, with a low elbow, hammer and pestle grip, trying to pull full guard. A meta-analysis would conclude that, while this is sufficient to get taps, there is a more effective way of completing the submission (i.e., the marcelotine/high elbow guillotine).

Most of the meta talk is bullshit. Firstly it's often an over simplification as often a lot (or most) guys are still doing things that aren't hyped up.

I think it's too reductionist to state that the "Meta" is only just whatever the current fad is though. "Meta" is used to indicate a concept which is an abstraction behind another concept, used to complete or add to the latter; put another way, to look at the thing itself, from an outside perspective. It doesn't "just" mean what the newest coolest fad is, though that can be a part of it. It doesn't just mean what you're most likely to encounter. It doesn't just mean best practices, evolutions of techniques or strategy, gamesmanship, etc. It means all of those things.

For example, in the world of vidya games, they refer to knowing the "meta" as the "Most Efficient Tactic Available" within whatever the context is. This is useful to know 1) What you should do (i.e., best practices); 2) What an opponent will likely do (which you can then prepare for). What makes this process interesting is that if a counter to the Meta is successful, it can then too become part of the Meta, which feeds back into the analysis, and continues on and on. It's like watching ripples spread out across a pond, or real-time evolution. However, we shouldn't conclude that the definition of "meta" is limited to this. It is, ultimately, any abstractions about BJJ derived from BJJ. For example, without consideration of "meta's", we could not say that DLR is a competition viable guard and worth teaching to new students; all we could do is explain that something is biomechanically efficient, though we would have no knowledge of the practicality. It's common sense, you'd say; but it is still within the definition of "Meta".

At the risk of sounding like a dick, this is by and large the difference between "sportive" or "combat" martial arts, and bullshit TMA's. Many of them have (though not all, of course) biomechanically sound principles. It certainly makes sense in some kind of context. However, without a sparring/combative element, you lose the ability to look at the art/training/whatever from a higher or "outside" perspective, and start to live in your own bubble.

You can look at what works for the vast majority of people, and conclude based on this "meta" analysis that yes, something is not only biomechanically possible, but also practically viable. I would go a step further and say that this is the specialty of BJJ itself (whose fundamental game plan of take down, guard pass, establish control, submit, was a meta analysis of best practices), though it was also essentially the formation process of Judo.

Secondly the meta at the lower level tournaments is different.

Agreed in some parts; you are correct that the tactics employed at low level tournaments and the frequency of their use is different from higher level tournaments. However, the implication is this invalidates the concept of what the "Meta" is, when in fact it justifies it. We're confusing concepts of frequency of use, and the concept of the "Most Effective Tactics Available." BOTH are "meta" concepts; however, I would argue that it's precisely because the Metas are different constitute why it is a low level tournament.

Using stuff that works on the top level is a good choice. It's even more important when teaching stuff. Things that where used to reliably win titles are often so much better than opportunistic, crazy or outdated stuff.

This statement is 100% right; but can only be made after you've conducted a meta analysis (and, arguably, continue to conduct, to know when something is outdated).

The ultimate point I'm getting at is we're all doing this shit all the time. I didn't expect all the other jiu jitsu grandpas to get annoyed at the word "meta" (I first heard the term as it relates to Metacognition, the study of thinking, so it made sense in its application to BJJ immediately to me), when they've been either conducting meta analyses or benefiting from meta analyses their whole grappling career.

 

[mataleaos]

I wasn't replying to you, but more so the "Meta is a new thing and is cringey as fuck" replies. However, I think the concept of Meta goes a little deeper than popularity (I go into a wildly long discussion below on what "meta" constitutes, both in its definition, and application in other endeavors).

For example, I think we'd all agree there's very little point in teaching the Guillotine the same as we did in 2002, with a low elbow, hammer and pestle grip, trying to pull full guard. A meta-analysis would conclude that, while this is sufficient to get taps, there is a more effective way of completing the submission (i.e., the marcelotine/high elbow guillotine).



I think it's too reductionist to state that the "Meta" is only just whatever the current fad is though. "Meta" is used to indicate a concept which is an abstraction behind another concept, used to complete or add to the latter; put another way, to look at the thing itself, from an outside perspective. It doesn't "just" mean what the newest coolest fad is, though that can be a part of it. It doesn't just mean what you're most likely to encounter. It doesn't just mean best practices, evolutions of techniques or strategy, gamesmanship, etc. It means all of those things.

For example, in the world of vidya games, they refer to knowing the "meta" as the "Most Efficient Tactic Available" within whatever the context is. This is useful to know 1) What you should do (i.e., best practices); 2) What an opponent will likely do (which you can then prepare for). What makes this process interesting is that if a counter to the Meta is successful, it can then too become part of the Meta, which feeds back into the analysis, and continues on and on. It's like watching ripples spread out across a pond, or real-time evolution. However, we shouldn't conclude that the definition of "meta" is limited to this. It is, ultimately, any abstractions about BJJ derived from BJJ. For example, without consideration of "meta's", we could not say that DLR is a competition viable guard and worth teaching to new students; all we could do is explain that something is biomechanically efficient, though we would have no knowledge of the practicality. It's common sense, you'd say; but it is still within the definition of "Meta".

At the risk of sounding like a dick, this is by and large the difference between "sportive" or "combat" martial arts, and bullshit TMA's. Many of them have (though not all, of course) biomechanically sound principles. It certainly makes sense in some kind of context. However, without a sparring/combative element, you lose the ability to look at the art/training/whatever from a higher or "outside" perspective, and start to live in your own bubble.

You can look at what works for the vast majority of people, and conclude based on this "meta" analysis that yes, something is not only biomechanically possible, but also practically viable. I would go a step further and say that this is the specialty of BJJ itself (whose fundamental game plan of take down, guard pass, establish control, submit, was a meta analysis of best practices), though it was also essentially the formation process of Judo.



Agreed in some parts; you are correct that the tactics employed at low level tournaments and the frequency of their use is different from higher level tournaments. However, the implication is this invalidates the concept of what the "Meta" is, when in fact it justifies it. We're confusing concepts of frequency of use, and the concept of the "Most Effective Tactics Available." BOTH are "meta" concepts; however, I would argue that it's precisely because the Metas are different constitute why it is a low level tournament.



This statement is 100% right; but can only be made after you've conducted a meta analysis (and, arguably, continue to conduct, to know when something is outdated).

The ultimate point I'm getting at is we're all doing this shit all the time. I didn't expect all the other jiu jitsu grandpas to get annoyed at the word "meta" (I first heard the term as it relates to Metacognition, the study of thinking, so it made sense in its application to BJJ immediately to me), when they've been either conducting meta analyses or benefiting from meta analyses their whole grappling career.

Very very good post. I learned some things. I have some thoughts and questions I'll drop later on. Thanks for taking the time to write that up!

 

[yetanother]

This statement is 100% right; but can only be made after you've conducted a meta analysis (and, arguably, continue to conduct, to know when something is outdated).
.

I'm not saying that the concept of a "game of games" (also called a meta game) is bullshit.
It's that a lot of claims about the current meta game are silly (most extreme example is ignoring the various rulesets distinction and claiming we are somehow in a leg lock meta in the gi).

 

[mataleaos]

Speaking of Craig Jones here is a trailer for his new instructional

 

[DatCutman]

I'm not saying that the concept of a "game of games" (also called a meta game) is bullshit.
It's that a lot of claims about the current meta game are silly (most extreme example is ignoring the various rulesets distinction and claiming we are somehow in a leg lock meta in the gi).

Ah, yea, I misunderstood then. You're right on that!

 

[asian-glow]

I think a small portion of hobbyists end up spinning their wheels by basing their personal training on whatever the current meta is.

Damn this one cut me deep. I've been working on BJJ Scout's Z-guard a la Craig Jones for the past few weeks. You even included a Craig Jones leg attack trailer later on.

I also never seriously considered that most of the meta game that happens at the upper level may not even apply to me.

 

[Cappy Goodtime]

I wasn't replying to you, but more so the "Meta is a new thing and is cringey as fuck" replies. However, I think the concept of Meta goes a little deeper than popularity (I go into a wildly long discussion below on what "meta" constitutes, both in its definition, and application in other endeavors).

For example, I think we'd all agree there's very little point in teaching the Guillotine the same as we did in 2002, with a low elbow, hammer and pestle grip, trying to pull full guard. A meta-analysis would conclude that, while this is sufficient to get taps, there is a more effective way of completing the submission (i.e., the marcelotine/high elbow guillotine).



I think it's too reductionist to state that the "Meta" is only just whatever the current fad is though. "Meta" is used to indicate a concept which is an abstraction behind another concept, used to complete or add to the latter; put another way, to look at the thing itself, from an outside perspective. It doesn't "just" mean what the newest coolest fad is, though that can be a part of it. It doesn't just mean what you're most likely to encounter. It doesn't just mean best practices, evolutions of techniques or strategy, gamesmanship, etc. It means all of those things.

For example, in the world of vidya games, they refer to knowing the "meta" as the "Most Efficient Tactic Available" within whatever the context is. This is useful to know 1) What you should do (i.e., best practices); 2) What an opponent will likely do (which you can then prepare for). What makes this process interesting is that if a counter to the Meta is successful, it can then too become part of the Meta, which feeds back into the analysis, and continues on and on. It's like watching ripples spread out across a pond, or real-time evolution. However, we shouldn't conclude that the definition of "meta" is limited to this. It is, ultimately, any abstractions about BJJ derived from BJJ. For example, without consideration of "meta's", we could not say that DLR is a competition viable guard and worth teaching to new students; all we could do is explain that something is biomechanically efficient, though we would have no knowledge of the practicality. It's common sense, you'd say; but it is still within the definition of "Meta".

At the risk of sounding like a dick, this is by and large the difference between "sportive" or "combat" martial arts, and bullshit TMA's. Many of them have (though not all, of course) biomechanically sound principles. It certainly makes sense in some kind of context. However, without a sparring/combative element, you lose the ability to look at the art/training/whatever from a higher or "outside" perspective, and start to live in your own bubble.

You can look at what works for the vast majority of people, and conclude based on this "meta" analysis that yes, something is not only biomechanically possible, but also practically viable. I would go a step further and say that this is the specialty of BJJ itself (whose fundamental game plan of take down, guard pass, establish control, submit, was a meta analysis of best practices), though it was also essentially the formation process of Judo.



Agreed in some parts; you are correct that the tactics employed at low level tournaments and the frequency of their use is different from higher level tournaments. However, the implication is this invalidates the concept of what the "Meta" is, when in fact it justifies it. We're confusing concepts of frequency of use, and the concept of the "Most Effective Tactics Available." BOTH are "meta" concepts; however, I would argue that it's precisely because the Metas are different constitute why it is a low level tournament.



This statement is 100% right; but can only be made after you've conducted a meta analysis (and, arguably, continue to conduct, to know when something is outdated).

The ultimate point I'm getting at is we're all doing this shit all the time. I didn't expect all the other jiu jitsu grandpas to get annoyed at the word "meta" (I first heard the term as it relates to Metacognition, the study of thinking, so it made sense in its application to BJJ immediately to me), when they've been either conducting meta analyses or benefiting from meta analyses their whole grappling career.

Meta-meta post.

 

[mataleaos]

Damn this one cut me deep. I've been working on BJJ Scout's Z-guard a la Craig Jones for the past few weeks. You even included a Craig Jones leg attack trailer later on.

I also never seriously considered that most of the meta game that happens at the upper level may not even apply to me.

Lol I do it too! I just meant people that only train that and never anything else, or people that only train stuff that’s current and can’t even shrimp properly. I know you and you know your shit. I’m actually working z guard too now. I don’t have a distance half guard game at all.

 

[Dirty Holt]

Meta game is a term that hipsters use to describe positional rules and positional strategy. It has been a thing in wrestling since there were cavemen. Its inefficient nomenclature. Ask a thousand wrestlers what "meta-game" is and maybe ten would know. All 1000 would know what positional strategy is.

 

[DatCutman]

Meta game is a term that hipsters use to describe positional rules and positional strategy. It has been a thing in wrestling since there were cavemen. Its inefficient nomenclature. Ask a thousand wrestlers what "meta-game" is and maybe ten would know. All 1000 would know what positional strategy is.

I mean that's more of an issue as to whether you view language as "prescriptive" or "descriptive" in its development (though I would still argue you're only focusing in on the "best practices" aspect of meta-analyses). I think Ben Askren is the shining example of someone taking advantage of a "meta". I don't remember where (so feel free to disregard if you want), but I recall Ben saying in an interview that his initial attraction to, and continued subsequent developments of, Funk techniques revolved around what was essentially an analysis of the Meta (ranging not only from best practices, but to uncommon or undeveloped practices, as well as the functioning of the rules and gamesmanship). He noticed no one spent time on mat skills (at least, not as frequently as other skills), and made specific strategic choices to spend a large volume of time there in training, and to take the fight there. As stated earlier, exploiting "metas" is a way for less gifted athletes to succeed, and I think that compared to his contemporaries (A few matches where askren had love handles come to mind) there's no disagreement his athleticism was lacking. Countermeasures were developed, which he in turn responded to as he continued to develop his concepts, until it eventually became a new best practice/layer of defense.

Askren's taste for Meta exploitation is echoed in interviews he's conducted regarding MMA, where he viewed wrestling as a "trump card" to the skill sets of the average MMA fighter (again, resulting from his meta-analysis).

Wrestling has been around longer and has a narrower scope, so it's closer to being a solved game. But even then, you still have people who can exploit the meta. Compare this to BJJ (where you have not only two sub systems for with cloth grabbing and without, but also varying rulesets), where there is still a wider expanse of unexplored territory, and the concept of the meta is even more appropriate.

Ultimately though I think you guys just hate the people who say "Meta" more so than the term itself.

 

[Uchi Mata]

Meta game is a term that hipsters use to describe positional rules and positional strategy. It has been a thing in wrestling since there were cavemen. Its inefficient nomenclature. Ask a thousand wrestlers what "meta-game" is and maybe ten would know. All 1000 would know what positional strategy is.

I don't know that it's that useless. The term makes sense in BJJ because it's such a young sport and genuinely novel strategies and tactics do pop up and change the game every few years. Wrestling is a much older sport with far less ongoing technical innovation and less variation in the strategies people employ to win matches. You take something like the emergence of leg locking at the highest levels over the last few years, that has completely changed how people approach the no-gi game. If you're ignorant of leg locking you won't win at the highest level. 10 years ago it wouldn't have mattered if you could defend a heel hook or not. I think it goes beyond having different ways to approach a specific, known position which is what I take 'positional strategies' to mean. Over time BJJ will end up exactly like wrestling insofar as the technical repertoire will become fairly static with innovation occurring mostly at the margins, and strategies will end up being just different ways to use known methods to approach a given position. 'Metagame' won't make much sense at that point because the different ways you can play will effectively be baked into everyone's style already.

I do agree though that like @DatCutman said above, it's definitely annoying the way people talk about meta games in BJJ like it's this deep thread of analysis.

 

[grapplejuice]

The best no gi players already play guard like they're wrestling. That mentality makes it much easier to exploit weaknesses at every angle.

Anecdote: I remember @Zankou, many moons ago, recommending to think of butterfly as wrestling from your butt. Best advice ever.

I'm a wrestling coach. And when I bring my kids to jiu jitsu, I tell them to start from butterfly guard and wrestle from their butt. Singles, high C, and if they engage in a clinch 2on1s, arm drags, and lateral drops

 

[nefti]

Is this new? So many no gi sweeps are basically wrestling

 

[Gandhi]

In an interview on Flograppling, Craig Jones says the at one time once you got to the leg lock position, it was over but competitors are getting more difficult to finish. He says wrestling style off their butts will be the new NoGi Meta. They're going to be playing a more aggressive Sit Up guard.

Opinions?

Seated guard combined with shin/instep guard = sweep, go for the legs / SLX/X, go for the takedown.

I am a relative noob, but I love this stuff and agree 100%!!!!