It is very common when coming up with a gameplan for a grappling competition for us to immediately gravitate towards techniques that “work” for us, in the literal sense, right off the bat. This can sometimes lead to a practitioner becoming a self-professed specialist due to their preference for those chosen techniques, and they develop a strong competition gameplan based on the ability to replicate that subset of moves repeatedly against numerous opponents.
Initially this could potentially be the strongest pathway to progression as you consistently pressure test your A-game and develop a keen sense of the necessary adaptations and variables that take place within that subset of moves. You find more efficient entries to your area of expertise and rely on the fact that you simply have more time and knowledge in that area than your opponent, so once it is achieved, they will always be at a deficit and/or on the defensive. I believe that many grappling competitors and coaches alike will tell you that developing a rigid gameplan may be the single strongest overall strategy for competition success.
Of course, there may be a time where you hit a point of diminishing returns as your opponents have the ability to scout your preferred strategy and make adjustments or plans pre match, and if your scope of refined techniques is too narrow, you will be taken out of your comfort zone and exploited. This plays out in many combat sports of course though it is certainly quite common in grappling arts due to the demanding nature of a tournament structure. The thinking being that clear and fast submissions or finishes are preferable over drawn out and long battles against energy draining opponents. Very sound reasoning.
The question becomes, how do we begin to make that transition from being narrow in our approach, to attaining a broader understanding of our knowledge of the game? Or is that transition necessary at all, if we had viewed the game differently from the outset?
Another way to look at this is, if at the beginning, we didn’t focus on specific strategies or techniques, but rather take a more conceptual and well-rounded approach to learning, with the goal of becoming an adaptable grappler able to identify and negotiate well in any area of the game. Certainly, due to the prolific podium appearances we see at the elite IBJJF World Championship level, there is something to be said for that high level, adaptable grappling from a competitive standpoint as well, as opposed to a structured gameplan, as it can also lead to consistent competition victories.
Which is better, a competition gameplan or adaptable grappling?
This question has been asked for quite some time, and I honestly believe the answer comes down to the individual, their approach to learning, personality, and their goals in the sport. It is quite obvious that both approaches “work” in the sense that the desired outcomes can be achieved. So really the question is, what type of grappler do you want to be?
There is the cerebral approach of Gordon Ryan in the ruthless pursuit of efficiency and employing strategies specific to his opponents and current ruleset. Then there is the Ruotolo brothers approach of employing all of their technique in every match they have, in any rule set, challenging their opponent’s versatility, depth of knowledge, consistency and determination.
Each an ADCC and IBJJF World Champion, All highly effective and evolutionary styles. In the end, grappling has, and always will, afford us the ability to bring ourselves to the art and employ an approach that is unique and completely our own if we so choose. This is something I know that so many of us appreciate about the art of grappling and it is within this philosophy of self-expression and betterment that our collective contribution to the evolution of grappling is found.
My advice would be as follows:
When starting out in grappling at the truly fundamental level before a competition gameplan even crosses your mind, come in to the sport with the mindset of not only understanding what the positions and submissions are, but what the underlying objectives are for any given situation. Pass the guard, take the back, achieve the mount; These types of fundamental objectives can allow you to learn and create from a broader perspective, whilst still keeping intact your individual creative approach.
Along with this, learn to control your breathing. Doing this will help disguise your intentions when attempting difficult movements whilst at the same time conserving energy to give to an actual threat, as opposed to base uncomfortability.
Lastly, learn to develop and use strong closed frames. After many years in the art, the first lesson I now choose to teach a day one student is understanding their zone of control and how to use effective closed frames to protect it. This curtails the “big push / big pull” response of trying to get your opponent away from you, or hold them close to you, clinging or clawing for life, and replaces that instinct with a composed and measurable framing system that allows for more sophisticated rolling interactions right from the get go.
If you learn a singular technique as your first lesson like a Kimura and constantly going for that kimura non stop, you end up having your partners block and counter it to leave you walking out of class thinking “well… kimura’s don’t work…”. Instead, you have an opportunity by employing closed frames to immediately contest the inevitable offence from your training partners, leaving them thinking “wow, that new guys/girls guard is oddly hard to pass…”. Which would you prefer?
From the more advanced practitioner’s perspective, it certainly is an advantageous skill to learn how to “slow down” when rolling to be able to engage in meaningful rolling scenarios with any rank or size of training partner. However, that can sometimes be misleading as if you literally slow yourself to a point where you are impacting your natural movement, this can be as counterproductive as attempting to finish every roll by submission as quickly as possible.
My advice in this scenario is to think smooth and think ahead. Present your training partners with simple dilemmas and allow them to choose a path leading to a subset of outcomes that are in your control. At this stage you can act smoothly upon the outcome which removes the urgency and persistence from your own movements, whilst at the same time allowing you to amass a great deal of relevant data in the process.
There will of course be many variables, shifts of focus and targeted techniques along the way, though if you keep a few learning tactics up your sleeve, you will inevitably find your way back once again to that overriding goal of progress that we all strive to achieve.
For more of our opinion pieces on various topics, visit our opinion piece archives.
