Ryan Hall doesn't believe in guard or shrimping...

[TastyLumpia]

BJJ as a sport isn't really new. It in America may be relatively new, but BJJ has been around for decades in other places. It wasn't that much longer that judo because an Olympic sport. Even wrestling has gone through major changes. It is evolving quickly, but so does judo and wrestling. Everything comes in cycles it seems.

I can vouch that few good guys, whom I've rolled with, have a good top game. And Ryan is not garbage. lolz

I'd say wrestling evolving, but I've heard lots of conflicting information from coaches about top-level programs and how they're training incorrectly.

I'v also heard direct quotes from multiple high-level (including former Olympians) coaches that American wrestlers are abysmally poor in terms of tie-up technique and setting up shots compared to some of their international counterparts.

It's pretty much common knowledge that the biggest advantage American wrestlers have in international competition is size and conditioning. Our technique is not the best, but good enough, so we continue to medal. Not as much as say the #1 Russians, but 2nd place and a long history of tradition may make us more stubborn than useful. Shooting for legs on the outside may work on the highest level, but that's because you have a speed and strength advantage over your opponent. People wonder why NCAA champs don't do so well in freestyle (when there's obviously stylistic differences) then you get a guy like Henry Cejudo who started training freestyle straight out of HS and look how well he did.


Sometimes, it takes just one team or one person (such as Ryan Hall) in this case, to get things going in the right direction. Even then, most people who've been successful doing what they're doing might not want to listen.

 

[JRT6]

I think it was a good article. Shrimping to escape side control is very hard to pull off against experienced players and I personally believe in getting the hell off the ground when on the bottom.

 

[Galahad]

Damn, I really wanna know what he does besides shrimping.

 

[fiftysvn]

This was a pretty good interview . . . now I'm really curious what he teaches at his school.

 

[FWTG]

lol...so how does he escape side ect from the bottom as he obviously doesnt shrimp as its "garbage"? :icon_conf

 

[Dark_Phoenix]

From my own experience (which granted isn't nearly as extensive as Hall's), I've found the same things to be true.

It always struck me as basic common sense that you want to be on top, yet tons of players are comfortable being off their back. Way too comfortable. I think this has a lot to do with the BJJ mentality "smaller man beating bigger man with technique". Sure, you can play on bottom against someone who's not as skilled as you, but if you're equally skilled, he'll have a mechanical advantage, then you'll either have to rely on tricks or surprise, neither of which are really reliable. The problem is there rarely is equal skill levels, and even at the highest level people can compensate with unorthodox technique or tricky flexibility.

The other thing is how sweeps are taught in isolation. As exposure it might work, but to actually explain the technique in terms of "leg goes here and push" is completely ignoring the basis of what makes a sweep work; off-balancing to get positional advantage.

Im going to pose a simple question to you.

If someone is more comfortable being on the bottom, and finds its a more successful position for them, why would they want to force themselves to be a top player, because "other people say its the best place to be"?

Playing bottom position is a tactic, and one that takes a lot of skill to master. Saying that everyone should be looking for top position regardless of their style is like saying the NFL shouldnt have defensive lines as they are pointless, and because the offensive players are the ones that win you games by scoring points. (Excuse the bad example, i tried to think of a sport example which would make the most sense to most people on the board, therefore a US example). Or in an Ice Hockey match, pulling your goalie from the start because you want more players taking shots.

In short, different players play different positions, its the way it is now, and its the way it will stay.
Thats the great thing about BJJ, everyones style is different, and if you chose to you could become lethal from a "defensive" position. You never know whats coming and you never know how 100% of your opponents will react.

 

[knoxpk]

Im going to pose a simple question to you.

If someone is more comfortable being on the bottom, and finds its a more successful position for them, why would they want to force themselves to be a top player, because "other people say its the best place to be"?

Playing bottom position is a tactic, and one that takes a lot of skill to master. Saying that everyone should be looking for top position regardless of their style is like saying the NFL shouldnt have defensive lines as they are pointless, and because the offensive players are the ones that win you games by scoring points. (Excuse the bad example, i tried to think of a sport example which would make the most sense to most people on the board, therefore a US example). Or in an Ice Hockey match, pulling your goalie from the start because you want more players taking shots.

In short, different players play different positions, its the way it is now, and its the way it will stay.
Thats the great thing about BJJ, everyones style is different, and if you chose to you could become lethal from a "defensive" position. You never know whats coming and you never know how 100% of your opponents will react.

Interesting thread.

 

[TastyLumpia]

Im going to pose a simple question to you.

If someone is more comfortable being on the bottom, and finds its a more successful position for them, why would they want to force themselves to be a top player, because "other people say its the best place to be"?

Assuming he's correct from a theoretical standpoint, you may be correct that the wide variety of personal skills and body types will naturally lead players to gravitate to certain positions. Certain individuals may be good at specific bottom techniques, but I think what's he saying is in the long-run, being on top > being on bottom. It's simple physics. It's technique + gravity > technique. Think of it like this. If you went up against a mirror version of yourself, and his top game skill was comparable to your bottom game skill, he'd probably be able to shut you down because he's at a mechanically advantaged position from being on top. He wins unless he makes a big error, or you pull out some surprise technique.

Playing bottom position is a tactic, and one that takes a lot of skill to master. Saying that everyone should be looking for top position regardless of their style is like saying the NFL shouldnt have defensive lines as they are pointless, and because the offensive players are the ones that win you games by scoring points. (Excuse the bad example, i tried to think of a sport example which would make the most sense to most people on the board, therefore a US example). Or in an Ice Hockey match, pulling your goalie from the start because you want more players taking shots.

This is about offense versus defense, and I don't think anyone in their right mind would completely neglect offense in the form your examples present. Hall's argument is about the best offensive strategy. Pulling guard is essentially initiating offense where you're at a mechanically disadvantaged position.

In short, different players play different positions, its the way it is now, and its the way it will stay.
Thats the great thing about BJJ, everyones style is different, and if you chose to you could become lethal from a "defensive" position. You never know whats coming and you never know how 100% of your opponents will react.

Yes, people will continue to play the way the play, but is it the optimal strategy? If you read the article carefully, Hall articulates the point that much of what he advocates against may work in many cases, but it isn't ideal. Hall himself built a career on wins using a tricky and unorthodox inverted guard.

And "you never know what's coming" is exactly why he advocates breaking BJJ down to its fundamental principles, so you'll have a generalized understanding that is applicable to a wide range of situations. Rather than learn many techniques, you learn the principles and apply those general principles to specific situations. Really, this is an abstracted way of learning that used in many disciplines. It's the same as learning mathematical concepts to be able to derive formulas rather than memorizing specific formulas for specific situations.

 

[TastyLumpia]

But I think Hall is ignoring one really fundamental and widespread tournament strategy:

Pull guard, stall, sweep then stall until the end of the match to win by 2.

I can't remember how many matches that this has been an effective, but boring, gameplan.

 

[knoxpk]

Assuming he's correct from a theoretical standpoint, you may be correct that the wide variety of personal skills and body types will naturally lead players to gravitate to certain positions. Certain individuals may be good at specific bottom techniques, but I think what's he saying is in the long-run, being on top > being on bottom. It's simple physics. It's technique + gravity > technique. Think of it like this. If you went up against a mirror version of yourself, and his top game skill was comparable to your bottom game skill, he'd probably be able to shut you down because he's at a mechanically advantaged position from being on top. He wins unless he makes a big error, or you pull out some surprise technique.



This is about offense versus defense, and I don't think anyone in their right mind would completely neglect offense in the form your examples present. Hall's argument is about the best offensive strategy. Pulling guard is essentially initiating offense where you're at a mechanically disadvantaged position.



Yes, people will continue to play the way the play, but is it the optimal strategy? If you read the article carefully, Hall articulates the point that much of what he advocates against may work in many cases, but it isn't ideal. Hall himself built a career on wins using a tricky and unorthodox inverted guard.

And "you never know what's coming" is exactly why he advocates breaking BJJ down to its fundamental principles, so you'll have a generalized understanding that is applicable to a wide range of situations. Rather than learn many techniques, you learn the principles and apply those general principles to specific situations. Really, this is an abstracted way of learning that used in many disciplines. It's the same as learning mathematical concepts to be able to derive formulas rather than memorizing specific formulas for specific situations.

Thats why I am curious to why we dont see MORE BJJ guys with better takedowns. Now I will admit I see many more guys that DO have better takedowns, but in the grand scheme of things I think if we were to pool all the practicioners of all the grappling systems (competetive ones that is) I am guessing (just a guess) that BJJ has the least focus on the actual takedown and more focus on the mat.

I mean if a sweep is an upside down takedown then a takedown is just a standing sweep.

So in theory even though a takedown is hard work it would seem, based on THIS discussion, that it would be more efficient to go ahead and score the takedown and work from there rather than put yourself at a mechanical disadvantage (as prior post states) and try to get on top.

 

[AboveThisFire]

ryan hall's garbage. yeah he wins, but he doesn't do jiu jitsu. i dont know what the fuck it is (wrapping your hand up with layers upon layers of tape and heel hooking people) but its not jiu jitsu.

No.

 

[Bruce Calavera]

Damn it, I just went to a Ryan Hall seminar and had I read this interview before hand I would have asked him about escaping side control.

 

[Tiger_vs_Mantis]

I wonder how old Ryan Hall is. He looks relatively young.

I know that after close to 3 years of BJJ training that I am probably a good example of what Ryan thinks is wrong with BJJ. I am WAY too comfortable on the bottom, and it works against me because when my guard game gets stuffed, I get passed and I typically lose from there.

I am trying to be more aggressive with my clinch game, trying to be less willing to pull guard. But here's the thing: I am 38 years old and 135 pounds. My lower back is not what it used to be and my body does not recover from injury the way it used to. Nearly everyone at the gym is heavier than I am. Pulling guard is a technique I am comfortable with for a very good reason: I am trying to avoid injury!! Meeting heavier opponents in a clinch game can stress my back badly. Takedowns are a huge potential source for injury, so I rarely practice them. Sure, I'd love to be on top and ride a guy, and when I get the opportunity I do my best. But getting on top in the first place can be a huge challenge for someone who is wary of explosive power, whether using it or having it used on him.

Isn't this the beauty of BJJ? By recognizing my limitations it opened up another universe of possibilities: I can't fight too aggressively for top position, but by redefining the bottom position as a perfectly acceptable alternative it still allows me to pursue a combat/grappling sport. If I approached grappling as a pure wrestler and eschewed the bottom as a possibility then I would have very few options. BJJ posits another possibility: I can avoid injury, ease into guard or half guard, and still win a grappling contest. I know it's not enough to win on a high competition level, but that's where the vast majority of BJJ practitioners are and will forever be.

 

[gannas]

This is pretty much what our instructor preaches to us. Fight to get on top! Being a smaller guy myself, the fight is much easier when I get top position and its easier to maintain top than to hold guard or lay under someone in side control if the other person is bigger, stronger and more atheletic. It also takes less energy..

Also to his comments about basic fundamental BJJ, well thats a no brainer. Thats why stuff like RG wont work at higher levels or against skilled players. If you rely on one gimmicky or non gimmicky move to win, when skilled person defeats your one move you are toast.

 

[Mikey Triangles]

Wow, the TS really didn't understand the article and completely took everything out of context. I agree with everything Ryan said in this article, and have made many similar observations in my own game.

There was one quote in the article that kind of bothered me though:

"What Hall has replaced the shrimp with is what he calls a “trade secret,” a result of high-level, intense analysis that he’s not willing to give away, much in the same way that Roger Gracie is not willing to give away what makes his moves so effective"


^^^^^^

come on... you'd expect this type of stuff from traditionalists and the Gracies. I hope it's just build up talk to sell his next DVD set or something. I personally don't believe in selfishly keeping secret techniques to give yourself an edge; if everyone did this the sport wouldn't be able to evolve... at least not as quickly. though I do think top guys with innovative "secrets" do deserve to make some money off them, so like I said I hope this is just a marketing tactic for a DVD Set/private lessons.

I mean eventually when you do something in competition on camera enough times people will start to figure out what you're doing, and maybe possibly even make it better because they thought of something you didn't once they saw it, and this could lead to a whole slew of things to further the sport... why cripple that?

 

[Belatucadros]

Wow, the TS really didn't understand the article and completely took everything out of context. I agree with everything Ryan said in this article, and have made many similar observations in my own game.

There was one quote in the article that kind of bothered me though:

"What Hall has replaced the shrimp with is what he calls a

 

[redaxe]

dub post whoops

 

[redaxe]

"So, be like Roger Gracie; that

 

[brollikk]

hes not "going to basics". He is developing a very complex game that works against elite opponents. When you really understand the mechanics of any move at a high level, there is nothing "basic" about them.

 

[Jimmy Cerra]

Wow, the TS really didn't understand the article and completely took everything out of context. I agree with everything Ryan said in this article, and have made many similar observations in my own game.

There was one quote in the article that kind of bothered me though:

"What Hall has replaced the shrimp with is what he calls a “trade secret,” a result of high-level, intense analysis that he’s not willing to give away, much in the same way that Roger Gracie is not willing to give away what makes his moves so effective"


^^^^^^

come on... you'd expect this type of stuff from traditionalists and the Gracies. I hope it's just build up talk to sell his next DVD set or something. I personally don't believe in selfishly keeping secret techniques to give yourself an edge; if everyone did this the sport wouldn't be able to evolve... at least not as quickly. though I do think top guys with innovative "secrets" do deserve to make some money off them, so like I said I hope this is just a marketing tactic for a DVD Set/private lessons.

I mean eventually when you do something in competition on camera enough times people will start to figure out what you're doing, and maybe possibly even make it better because they thought of something you didn't once they saw it, and this could lead to a whole slew of things to further the sport... why cripple that?

I think the interviewer misunderstood. Hall said that the movement is not taught correctly, and the correct move is kind of like a "trade secret" among the elite. He believes those like Roger Gracie do something different in their basics techniques that the mainstream don't teach. He is trying to figure it out slowly. However, explaining the shrimp would probably take too much time for their interview. Here's what was actually said:

M: What kind of movements do you mean? Obviously people work on things like shrimping and sit-outs-

R: At this point…I don’t think that the shrimp is a real move.

M: <i>I start to smile and laugh at this point, thinking that he&#8217;s joking.<i>

R: I&#8217;m dead serious. I can explain it to you for sure. The shrimp is not a legitimate move. The way that people first&#8230; I&#8217;ll use this as one example, and hopefully you&#8217;ll have an idea of where I&#8217;m coming from. And to be honest, there&#8217;s a certain level of trade-secrets kind of thing. The reason I don&#8217;t shrimp is not that it&#8217;s garbage or that it doesn&#8217;t ever work, but there are problems with the way it&#8217;s taught. Say for instance you have side control, and I manage to get an underhook, and I start shrimping away from you. When I&#8217;m initially in side control, I&#8217;m kind of glued to you and as a result, I&#8217;m relatively stable. My feet are wide. My hips are back. When I shrimp, I put my feet together and I scoot and my profile goes from this to this, for a moment, and then I reset.

and

What is the right move, then? It&#8217;s when everyone knows it&#8217;s coming, and it&#8217;s not a trick, and there&#8217;s not even any sort of flash to it. It&#8217;s funny: the best way that you know that Roger may not be being entirely honest when he&#8217;s asked what makes him so successful is that he&#8217;ll tell you, &#8216;I&#8217;m just doing the same thing as everyone else.&#8217; &#8216;Roger, why won&#8217;t you put out an instructional DVD?&#8217; &#8216;I just use basics.&#8217; &#8216;I see&#8230;so that&#8217;s why everyone mounts and x-chokes their opponents into oblivion every time?&#8217; I would argue that there are things that aren&#8217;t visually apparent that are very, very different between what he does and what the rest of us do&#8230; In my mind it&#8217;s not even a questions at this point. There is a small, small handful of people doing this, and it&#8217;s not some sort magic. I truly believe that they know something that other people don&#8217;t that they&#8217;re not particularly willing to share. I&#8217;ve been trying to figure it out for the last couple years, and I feel like I&#8217;m starting to make progress little by little. I&#8217;ve gone from not being able to pass the guard to that being the absolute strongest part of my game and the cross choke from mount being my number one finish.

and

M: I&#8217;m pretty much out of questions at this point, but I know one thing that people reading this will want to know is about the shrimp, what you&#8217;ve replaced that with.

R: I can show you, but I can&#8217;t tell you. It would take like a page to explain it, and it probably wouldn&#8217;t translate into text very well.

P.S. Most BJJ clubs are recreational clubs, and the players there are not trying for world titles. You would have a different story among the more elite clubs, knopix. They don't train takedowns for the same reason judoka or wrestlers train them, so they might not care about takedowns in a match or do them as much. But they are still practiced a lot. Would you expect a freestyle wrestler to be as good as a greco guy at upperbody throws? But wouldn't you expect him to at least be competent at them?