Holy crap, I'm a purple belt!

I still can't believe it - last weekend I became a Royce Gracie, Triangle jiu jitsu purple belt! It hasn't fully sunk in yet. (A few days ago, I absent-mindedly said "I'm just a blue belt" and had to be corrected by my training partner).

Not much has changed, really. I roll the same as I did a few weeks ago. I still get tapped by the same people. The old maxim is true - "A belt only covers 2 inches of your ass. It is up to you to cover the rest of it."

Getting promoted by my now black belt instructor Seth Shamp!

In my job as a speech language pathologist, we have a maxim of our own - "Don't teach to test." In other words, the point of therapy is to improve someone's functional communication, not to improve standardized test scores. When therapy is successful, improvement in assessments may be the end result, but it is never the goal. The goal is to help a patient communicate in the world.


I think the same is true in jiu jitsu. Going up in rank is a measure of progress like standardized test results. They both are a nice affirmation. But achieving rank should never be the point of training.  Pedro Valente has said “No one should train for a belt. You should train for the knowledge, you should train for all the amazing benefits that jiu jitsu brings to our lives.”

I train quite simply to get better at jiu jitsu. Sometimes I train with a narrower focus, such as to win a tournament or to learn and incorporate new techniques. But the overall goal is to be just a little bit better than the day before. Changes in color are few and far between in our art, so if they become our goal, we are destined for frustration and discouragement.

My training partners Brad McDonald and De McFadyen got promoted too!

Getting a purple belt has never been the point of my training. Still, it is something that I have wanted from early on. When I was new, I saw purple belts as serious bad-asses. Now I see them as folks who are in it for the long haul and are likely to keep training for life.

So, yeah, I am totally psyched to wear a new color and to have a chance to compete in new divisions. Purple is my favorite color and my belt now matches most of my wardrobe. I am also psyched as ever to keep training for the simple sake of learning jiu jitsu.

My jiu jitsu tree has a purple flower!

Mixed gender bout Emerson Falcao vs. Juliana Velasquez cancelled

Much ado about nothing. Here's the link. Shooto cancels fake 'man vs. woman' fight in Brazil

Thoughts?

Emerson Falcao vs. Juliana Velasquez - Shooto Brazil plans the first profesional, mixed-gender fight in MMA history

History has been set for Dec 20th - Juliana Velasquez  is set to fight Emerson Falcao in a professional MMA match, the first ever such male/female match-up in history. It is the stuff for headlines, for sure. But is it a good idea? In that I ask, is it a positive step for the sport in general and more specifically for women who compete?

I would argue that, no, it is not good for either. It is, however, sensational and attention-grabbing and a sure ways to attract viewers.

My gripes are the following:

- I want women to have the same opportunities to excel in sports as men do. As a feminist, I like and generally share the women can do anything men can do attitude. But as a life long, competitive athlete, I cannot deny that men and women's bodies are different. To deny that men and women have different physical characteristics and body compositions is to deny biology. I have blogged about this in the past in women competing in men's divisions.

Just looking at a picture of the two fighters, it is clear to me that this is not a fair physical match up. They are fighting at the same size, but the strength disparity here is pretty obvious.

Sure, there are plenty of women who can beat plenty of men in any given sport. I am way out of swimming shape, but could probably still beat 98% of the world's population of men in an endurance swimming event. I am strong and have good physical conditioning, but within that 98% of men there are bound to be those who are stronger than me, have better cardio, or have better muscular endurance than me. Yet, I would still beat them. What this means is that, despite differences in physical attributes, I would still be able to beat male swimmers whose technical skill level is lower than mine.

Which brings me to my next point...

- I am not interested in watching world-class female athletes compete against B level males. These might make for interesting match-ups, sure. But they don't do much to test the relative skill levels of the athletes involved. I would much rather watch the best women in the world compete against each other.

I am also not interested in watching elite female athletes of today compete against elite male athletes from a previous generation. I am thinking of the landmark tennis match in 1973 when #1 ranked Billie Jean King defeated the formerly #1 ranked Bobby Rigs. Billie Jean King was 29 years old, Bobby Rigs, 55. Bobby Rigs was behaving like a sexist douche, running his mouth about how inferior women's tennis was. Billie Jean King beat him and I'm glad she did. But I would rather watch the best female athletes from today compete against each other than to watch them compete against the best male athletes from our parents' generation.

"Dumbing down" a male athlete by age or technique in order to provide a more even match-up against a female is insulting.

- This is a pretty clear publicity stunt. It is going to attract an audience for the mere fact that a man and woman will be hitting each other. To most folks, it just sounds wrong...which is why they are going to watch. For a sport already described by some as "human cock fighting," this mixed gender bout will add another layer of shock. But it is sensationalism that detracts from the legitimacy of the sport.

Can training MMA actually help one's jiu jitsu?

I've dabbled in MMA classes in the past, for a month or so at time, but just for fun and without any commitment or intention to fight. What's held me back was 2 things - 1) fear and a well developed sense of self-preservation 2) concern that time spent training MMA would detract from my jiu jitsu.

Tournament jiu jitsu is my bag. It is something that I can compete in for a long time and be successful at. A desire to win is what drives me to get to the gym early to drill and to stay late to get in a few extra rolls while others are mopping. Self-defense jiu jitu techniques are important to me as well. They are what give me the tools to stay safe when I walk into a creepy house at work, for example. Self defense techniques will empower me for the rest of my life and are part of a legacy that I want to help pass on to others. There are only so many hours to train in a given week, and I don't want to do anything that would slow my progress in either of these areas.

But MMA is a young person's sport and I am not getting any younger. If I ever want to compete in MMA, even in the vague bucket list sense, it is now or never. I think that I can put fear and self-preservation aside for a period of time - but I am certainly not willing to sacrifice my jiu jitsu progress.

But in giving MMA training a more serious try, I made a surprising discovery - MMA has been the best thing in the word for my jiu jitsu. I'm not saying this is true for everybody.  But for me, my body type, and my set of skills, it is proving to be the case.

My rationale is the following:

- I am now sucking less at scrambles. I've been an endurance athlete all my life, but fast-twitched, explosive movements are my downfall. In jiu jitsu, I've basically conceded that I will lose scrambles against fast people, so I've worked on tightening my game to minimize the occurrence of these scrambles. In MMA, I train with people who are much faster than me and without the fiction of a gi to slow everything down. Only here, losing scrambles does not result in tapping, but more often results in physical pain. Being of sound mental state, physical pain is something that I try to avoid. So MMA training has pushed me into a fight-or-flight state that has made faring better in scrambles a physical necessity. Sure, there are days at jiu jitsu now when I am too fatigued and beat up to roll worth a damn. But on a whole, I am finding that I am actually rolling better now that I am more scrambly. 

- MMA has forced me to develop takedowns. My strategy in jiu jitsu tournaments has typically been "try to bully my opponent into pulling guard and if that doesn't work, pull guard before she can take me down." It's worked ok because I have similar skill levels at guard playing and guard passing. But this strategy is bitchassness. I know that as I progress in jiu jitsu, not having a strategy to take the match to the ground on my terms is something that would impede my progress.

Say no to guard pulling

- MMA has forced me to use jiu jitsu in a way that is more realistic for self-defense. MMA and self defense are different beings. Jiu jitsu self defense is about surviving and escaping, while MMA is about dominating and winning a fight. Still, training some MMA has shed light on some sporty jiu jitsu habits that I have developed that would be devastating in a self-defense situation. Falling to my butt and playing deep half guard work for me in tournaments, but are suicide in MMA and self defense. MMA has also reinforced the importance of standing in base - instead on fighting on bottom from a losing position, why not stand up and fight again from a neutral spot?     

I will never compete in MMA on a high level. I still have too much of that pesky self preservation instinct and frankly, I'm too old. But if training MMA can actually make me better at jiu jitsu, my true love?! I'll take it! 

"Choking: A Dangerous Weapon?"

Women's Health Magazine's "Domestic Terror," by Meghan Rabbit presents some pretty staggering statistics. According to their stats, 1 in 4 women has been victim to severe physical violence by an intimate partner and almost 1 in 2 has experienced psychological aggression. Clearly, this is all sorts of fucked up. (It wasn't addressed in the article, but this issue certainly is not exclusive to women. Plenty of men have wound up in relationships with abusive partners as well). Domestic violence is horrible for victims of both sexes and the problem is more widespread than I thought.

Most of the article chronicled one woman's story of suffering, surviving, and ultimately escaping an escalating cycle of abuse. It was a captivating story, for sure. But what really grabbed my attention was the blurb at the end of the article, entitled "Choking - A Dangerous Weapon." According to the blurb, choking in domestic violence cases "is one of the strongest predictors that a victim is at risk for more serious violence, including a major assault or even homicide."

In jiu jitsu, choking each other on the mats is harmless. We can tap out at anytime and it is generally within our power not to go unconscious. If we are stubborn and refuse to tap, our partners are trained to release us as soon as we go to sleep. I tap really early to joint locks, but I try longer to fight through chokes, even to the point of feeling light-headed, since the effects are fleeting and not damaging to my body. I've never been put to sleep before, but I have put others to sleep and it no big deal.

Trying not to tap!!

Violently choking someone with attempt to harm or intimidate is obviously a different story. According to the article, "even one episode can lead to long term neurological problems, such as difficulty concentrating, memory problems, or even seizures." Or worse, it can be deadly.

 

Choking someone can be harmless in one setting or it can be devastating in another. Since it can have serious consequences, there are folks who want to make sure it carries a serious punishment. While choking someone is often charged as a misdemeanor in court, "some 30 states are trying to make it a felony instead by classifying it as 'second degree strangulation,' given prosecutors another tool with which to charge abusers with a more serious crime." In North Carolina, the state where I live, choking is indeed a felony. I have mixed feelings about this. As a feminist, a decent human being, and an overall disliker of bad guys, I am glad that abusers in my state can be put away for longer periods of time.  But as a jiu jitsu practitioner, this makes me nervous. Choking someone out is something that is safe and taken lightly in my world, but it is serious in the eyes of the law.

I don't carry a gun, a knife, a taser, or a can of pepper spray in my purse. Jiu jitsu is my weapon of self defense. Jiu jitsu is what I rely on to keep me safe. It is a weapon that I hope I never have to use, but one that I am training to use without hesitation should I ever need it.

I hope that I never have to defend myself against a rapist, but if I do, I would be thankful to have drilled thousands of triangles, allowing me to throw them quickly, fluidly, and without much conscious thought, should I ever be held down that way. If my safety depended on it, I believe that I could triangle an attacker without hesitation. But what then? Would the onus be on me to prove that this was a self defense situation? The #1 defense of rapists is to claim that the assault was consensual. If people believed his story, would I be the one under suspicion? Could I become the felon?

I may sound paranoid here, but an MMA fighter in my community was sentenced to a long prison term for using his training to defend himself against a much larger attacker, in a pretty clear cut self defense situation. The case did not involve choking, but it proves to me that juries do not understand MMA or jiu jitsu. They understand guns and will let you "stand your ground" and flat out shoot an adversary. But to use nonlethal martial arts training to subdue an attacker? That just might get you arrested.

Self defense is not always clear cut to onlookers. What about a highschooler who has been a victim of chronic bullying, who finally stands up to her tormentor? What about a concerned party-goer who observes a belligerent drunk threatening his girlfriend? Jiu jiu prepares its practitioners to deal with these scenarios. If they choke out one of these assailants it is not "strangulation" the way jurists may see it, but a use of nonlethal force that results in no lasting damage. It is perhaps the gentlest way to subdue an attacker. It is disconcerting to think that it also carries the severest of penalties. In light of the article, I appreciate that anti-choking laws make a lot of women safer, but as a martial artist, they make me feel more vulnerable.

 

Jiu jitsu math - why it doesn't always work

I'm not much of a numbers person, but I remember a few things from high school algebra. In the math world, if a>b and b>c, then we also know that a>c -  every time.

So in the jiu jitsu world, if player a beats player b, and player b beats player c, then logically, player a should also beat player c. Right? Right?! This is jiu jitsu math 101.

Only it doesn't always work. Now, if I had to place a bet and I had no other information to go on, I would still side with jiu jitsu math. In the above scenario, I would pick player a to beat player c. But there is a decent chance I'd be wrong. Among competitors of the same skill level, I would expect this math to fail about 25% of the time. That makes this a pretty lousy jiu jistu theorem.

Indeed, I've lost several matches that I expected to win based on  jiu jitsu math. And every time, I have found myself dazed and surprised. It makes no sense! Just ask my algebra teacher, Mr. Scata -  a>c! Except every now and then, c beats a.

So why does jiu jitsu math fail? There are a couple of reasons.

- Randomness and chance play a role in jiu jitsu matches. According to some smart math people at MIT, there are more possible outcomes to a game of chess than there are known atoms in the universe. So as a form of kinesthetic chess, a given jiu jitsu match can go about a gazillion different ways - at least when the 2 individuals are close in size and ability. Now, if I were to compete against Gabi Garcia 100 times, I would most definitely lose to her 100 times. But there are plenty of other people with whom I would expect to go 50/50, 60/40, 25/75, or some other split. Just because you beat someone once, doesn't mean you will beat them every time. Conversely, just because someone beats you once, doesn't mean you won't get her next time.

- People match up with each other differently. Some people do ok handling big, strong folks but have trouble against faster scrambly people. Some people do great when they can get on top, but get smashed on bottom. Depending of your style, success in a tournament can be dependent on the attributes and style of your opponent.

- Familiarity plays a role. I tend to drill and train with the same people a lot - so much so that we get to know each other's moves. Some folks who know me well know exactly what I am going for and can shut me down before I even start. And sometimes I can do the same to them. How you perform against folks who you are super familiar with cannot accurately predict how you will perform relative to each other when rolling with new folks.

What about you? Have you ever underestimated an opponent due to jiu jitsu math? Or have you ever defied the laws of jiu jistu math and defeated someone you weren't "supposed to?"
 

.

Gracie Brothers' response to the Llyod Irving rape case

So evidently this video is several months old and I am more out of the loop than I realized. I came across it as I was reading up on the rape case in wake of the accused rapists' shocking acquittal. But this is the first time I have watched it and I have to say it is an AMAZING clip. I frequently watch videos of submission highlights, played to aggressive music to get me pumped up before a tournament. But I have to say, this has gotten me just as fired up about jiu jitsu as any highlights reel out there.

It is a fairly long video, but it is absolutely worth watching all the way through.

I am taking several messages away from it:

 - The culture of a gym can influence people to be more or less aggressive. Schools have the power to either calm people down or amplify aggressive tendencies. "If ultimately dominating and defeating someone is the best thing and where you get the most praise...that's what's going to be your tendency...to look around and say 'who can I abuse. Who can I technically victimize on the mat'?" There is always going to be someone out there who is better than you. It is more useful and more important to train with people who you can consistently learn from than those who you can consistently smash.

- We have an obligation to serve and help the less powerful. "There is someone who has more knowledge, more technique, more strength, more power...that person has an obligation to the student they are training with and to the school as a whole to build this {less powerful} person up...to serve this person." Training needs to be productive for both parties.

- On a similar note, training jiu jitsu should give practitioners more confidence to step in and intervene when someone is being victimized, bullied or just plain needs help.

-"The nature of martial arts in general is that of combat, that of aggression, that of overcoming adversity and fighting someone...if left alone this can morph into a violent dragon of aggression." Creating a positive environment takes constant work and does not happen by itself.

- Rolling respectfully with your partner and rolling hard are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to roll hard and fight for submissions, while still valuing your partner's safety, comfort, and right to learn. 

My one gripe about the video is that it implies that jiu jitsu was the "dangerous weapon" that the assailants used to rape the victim. Certainly, jiu jitsu can be harmful and deadly if put in the wrong hands and used to bully people instead of to defend oneself. It certainly could be used as an instrument of rape. But that's not what happened here. The assailants were the victim's teammates, but they did not subdue her by using jiu jitsu techniques. Rather, they took advantage of the victim's trust. Instead of helping her, they preyed upon her when she was most vulnerable.