Many martial artists are teaching and
coaching their students in a very open way they are improvising and often they
don’t really have a plan for instance as I know Kron Gracie is teaching like that
and then our of course the other martial artists who are using a strict
curriculum and they are having a plan how do you feel about both approaches
and when do you use one approach or the other approach or is there one approach
better than the other how do you feel about these two approaches so structure
versus structure systems I think there’s a time and a place for both like most
things in life you know goals and rule sets dictate behavior and vice-versa so
I think obviously I have my personal preferences but it really depends what
you’re into so or what your goals are so specifically what I mean by that is if
I’m training one person then I’m interested in getting to know them and
rolling with them in as many possible scenarios in a in a scenario that will
simulate what they’ll be encountering very very specifically so so that’ll be
very organic it’ll be very improvised it’ll be very situational so in that
respect I can focus all my efforts on the person I can mimic as many stairs as
you can now if I’m teaching a class of 30 people then my my measure of success
changes because now I’m no longer measured by adoption rate of one person
but adoption rate of 30 people so there is a need to run some sort of a system conversely you know say you’re at the
workplace you know if you’re working with only one person you can develop
rapport and jokes etcetera etc but if you around 300 people 500 people a
thousand people you you just simply have to utilize time differently you have to
use different vehicles of communication etc etc so I think if you’re teaching
classes if you have multiple schools I think systems become really really
important and you can see that in the es or some of the 10 planet systems because
they’re producing or you know even Penn State for example you know with Jeff
Sanderson’s team and his coaches producing systems across Ari winners
across multiple weight classes cross multiple rule sets across multiple body
types so I think there’s a time in room for both so if your measure of success
is defined by one fighter then by all means improvise you know and do you and
do what works for you and if you run multiple people multiple schools that
schools then your success is different and you know there’s a need for for
systemic thinking personally you know I alternate between the two because as I
focused more on coaching I think systemic thinking is important because
it allows me to make people better faster but what I do enjoy personally is just
you know when I go and trade with people that I trained with closely or head out
to you – I’m trademark brewer he knows my game I know his wee-wee roll
there’s no word spoken we train we pick up the density we know each other’s game
order so many years and so we just kind of get to it improvise and talk about it
after and train the next day so those are some of my favorite times but seeing
my students succeed in an exploring roller game those are great – so I sort
of go between the two and I think there’s not really one persist the other
but they’re more so there’s a season for everything so as you transition your
competitive period to coaching career you enjoy the other one more as you
compete you enjoy one more so those are sort of my thoughts on those

Leave comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *.