Do you dig the reap?

I recently posted on a well-known MMA and grappling forum concerning the “reaping the knee” rule that we see in many high-profile grappling tournaments.  In some new professional tournaments, we note that reaping is often, in fact, legal.  Reaping the knee is when pressure is caused on the knee due to torque from a specific outer-leg entanglement, often resulting from leg-lock attempts or the use of one-leg X guard.  When the outer leg crosses over the hip of the person being ankle-locked, it is generally seen as “reaping”.  One of the major problems with this rule is that it is highly subjective, often leading to disqualifications in tournaments when there is, in fact, no torque at all on the knee.  The results from the thread were somewhat shocking to me, being that most people wanted to see the rule abolished or reformed; regardless, we see the rule getting progressively stricter and being the cause of many, many DQs over the course of many large tournaments.

            Most people seemed to reason that the rule should stay in place for lower belt levels – we, as a community, would be subjecting white, blue and possibly purple belts to a lot of danger if we were to legalize reaping at these levels; however, when we get to brown and black belts, we begin to see kneebars and toeholds.  Should brown and black belts really be subjected to rules that limit their attacks by so much?  Are brown and black belts not knowledgeable enough to defend themselves from injury from a position that is likely no more dangerous than a toe-hold in the first place?  Any sport that encourages bending joints in the opposite direction from where they should go is inherently going to risk injury to its practitioners – it’s par for the course.

            Another argument I feel is even better, should you not like the idea of reaping still, is that banning the position promotes nothing more than its ignorance.  Judo currently bans leglocks of all kinds, and as such a judoka is more likely to get caught in a straight ankle lock assuming they have not practiced its defense.  We can say the same for BJJ practitioners that haven’t learned how to defend against reaping.  Resisting against a reap could certainly damage one’s knee, but giving up the position will not.  It is a reasonable concession that one has to make, especially at the brown and black belt levels, seeing as they are roughly the equivalent of “professional”.

            A way I like to view reaping is to lump it in with other positional moves rather than with submissions.  Reaping is not entrapping – if one is trapped by their opponent when getting their knee reaped, then it is no longer what I would consider reaping, but a submission instead.  The legitimacy of these submissions would be another issue.  Turning with a reap should allow the pressure to come off of the knee and allow the practitioner to get out of the position unscathed.  I believe that people are getting caught in reaps from ignorance of the position.  People are trying to find ways to stay away from 50/50 guard for different reasons, but the idea of defending against the position is essentially the same.  Keeping reaping illegal is discouraging “risky” positions (based on the rules) such as one-leg X guard from being prominent in competition, thus essentially halting the growth of jiu-jitsu as an all-encompassing grappling martial art.  This is incredibly unfortunate for our community.

To play devil’s advocate, is it worth it to risk knee injury in young competitors for the sake of having a position made legal?  I believe that it is, considering that knee reaping still happens quite often in competition and training itself.  The risk will not be much different than it already is in this martial art.  The risk of injury in a martial art designed to incapacitate an opponent will always be present, and I believe rules should only be made to prevent the most dangerous of injuries – neck cranks and spinal locks can be considered too risky to mess with.  It is one thing to see a person with a knee injury and a completely different issue to see one with a broken neck, paralyzed or dead.

What are your thoughts?  This is a very controversial issue that could use the input of practitioners all across the board.  If enough people feel strongly one way or the other, we could see the status of this rule change in the future.  Leave your comments below.

Sport? Art?

There is a reason why I often refer to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu as an art rather than a sport – I believe the sport aspect is one particular facet of BJJ, but it’s not the only reason people train.  Many people train BJJ just for the fun of it, or for discipline, and never intend to compete in a tournament setting.  Even John Danaher is known for never having competed in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, yet he is known as one of the best teachers in the world.  When I call Jiu-Jitsu an art, it allows me to talk about it a little bit differently than I would with football, baseball or wrestling.  The whole sport vs. art thing has now recently come under fire with specific events, such as Andre Galvao vs. Ryron Gracie at Metamoris, and the general trend toward using new guards in sport jiu-jitsu that many “old-school” jiu-jitsu practitioners are very against.  One of the main arguments is that true Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu doesn’t use new inverted guards, 50/50 guard or much of the De La Riva guard because they do not transfer well to self-defense situations.  I personally reject this idea.  There is also a segment of people that claim that these new positions and concepts are the future of jiu-jitsu and are to be practiced in order to win competitions.  For the most part, I reject this idea as well, though I will preface my position by saying that I don’t believe it is my business to tell people how they should practice jiu-jitsu – that’s up to everyone else to decide.

            The art of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu was, of course, based off of self-defense tactics.  The basic closed guard is essentially one of the most important concepts to learn, and it seems as if most people understand this.  In terms of strategy, this is where things go…awry.  Pulling guard in a street fight would certainly be dangerous and risky in most situations, but of course I’m sure someone, somewhere has done it and been okay.  Pulling guard in MMA is often risky as well, though less often so because of mats and not having to worry about your opponent’s homeboys coming in and stomping on your face – we see some very high-level jiu-jitsu practitioners pulling guard in MMA with great results, and I believe that is their prerogative if they want to do this.  We have seen these new “trendy” guards such as deep-half guard actually used very well in MMA to sweep under certain conditions.  Is it right to say that it’s not pure jiu-jitsu?  Is it right to somehow qualify it and say that it’s not okay to use it?  It’s possible that one day we’ll see someone get berimbolo’d in a high-level MMA fight by a De La Riva-crazy, buttflopping jiu-jitsu practitioner turned MMA fighter that just has some higher understanding of the position.  We have seen twisters and gogoplatas in MMA, so to say that those techniques don’t work in a fight is just entirely false.  The techniques clearly work and still utilize leverage and superior positioning, which is essentially the mission of jiu-jitsu.  To say that they are to not be practiced because we feel that they are not good for self defense is short-sighted – sticking to these old ideas without taking the painful years it may require to use these techniques in competition and apply them to other situations is antithetical to the original mission of BJJ.  If we had stuck to caveman-esque ideas in the first place, we’d all just be lifting weights and throwing haymakers still.

            Who is to say what can be considered art and what can be considered sportive?  We all have different interpretations and different senses of what works for us and what doesn’t work in terms of grappling.  Perhaps this is a reflection of my incredibly lax nature on how I treat people in general, but I think it’s most fair to give people the opportunity to develop a game that works for them rather than limit their skillset to moves that are “pure jiu-jitsu”.  The idea that Ryron’s breed of jiu-jitsu is somehow superior to Andre Galvao’s jiu-jitsu essentially break down when we see Ryron fail to submit him under a submission-only ruleset that would, hypothetically, favor Ryron.  The point being made here is that even “point fighters” that compete largely in point competitions are placing themselves into better positions in which they can achieve a submission – that doesn’t invalidate their grappling ability. 

Andre Galvao and Ryron Gracie are both high-level practitioners with their own styles of jiu-jitsu that should be respected, and neither one is pure or not-pure.  The largest reason I reject the stance of very sport-oriented individuals is mostly personal preference.  I don’t believe BJJ is only to be practiced for winning tournaments – a medal is just something that hangs around my neck if I win, and not the ultimate end goal.  There are always places to improve – if I do win a match in a tournament by points, I’d like to win it by submission next time.  If I win by submission, I’d like to win faster the next time.  This is my mindset, and I’m sure many people share it, though many do not.  Many see a win as a win – it’s all up to personal choice.  I feel as if the best way for our great jiu-jitsu community to come together is to drop the classifications and stereotypes and egos and to simply accept one another’s personal goals for what they are.  There is no reason to badmouth someone who works from 50/50 – if you don’t like it, then figure out a way to improve yourself and defeat it, not bring someone else down.

  If you have a differing opinion, leave your comments at the bottom!

What's so special about BJJ?

Dedication is something that not everybody has – wanting something badly enough is enough of a reason for one to keep pushing, keep trying and ignoring all of the bumps that might be encountered along the way.  Since I started Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, this is one thing that stayed somewhat constant.  There are days that I look at myself in the mirror and feel more proud than ever, and there are days when I look in the mirror and see someone completely foreign and strange.

            One of the biggest conflicts I’ve had is when people disapprove or put me down for what I like to do.  Nobody is truly immune to this in any area of life.  I’m sure successful actors, athletes, professors and doctors have all hit major points of self-reflection along the paving of their career and questioned whether or not they were doing the right thing for themselves.  I’ve hit this moment quite a bit in BJJ, and I know I will continue to as well.  BJJ has tested me both physically and mentally; it has expanded to all facets of my life.

A little background on myself:  My name is Dean Lewis and I am a blue belt under Rosendo Diaz.  I began my training at 15 years old and have been hooked ever since.  Looking back, my life would not be anything like it is now had I never taken the step to train.  I would not be as healthy as I am, neither mentally nor physically.  Jiu-Jitsu has motivated me to eat clean, reject anything that might harm my body, raised my confidence and allowed me to think more clearly under stressful situations.  Overall I am a much happier person than when I started as an anxious, scrawny, 85-pound boy.  Since then I have become what I consider a much more confident person that can find peace within my own body, and a person that knows that I have yet to reach my own potential – I know for a fact that Jiu-Jitsu can change lives.  I have seen people lose hundreds of pounds, I have seen people use Jiu-Jitsu to develop better life habits, and I have seen (and continue to see) people use Jiu-Jitsu to give them something to strive for and to set goals.

What is it that makes Jiu-Jitsu so different than other physical activities?  I believe it’s the combination of the culture of the sport - being descended from traditional martial arts has left Jiu-Jitsu with a stigma against “egos” and a focus on developing practitioners as people – and the fact that Jiu-Jitsu is a rough-and-tough combat sport.  The focus of Jiu-Jitsu may be to make combat easier, but there is still nothing easy about getting your ass kicked on the mats.  It’s an activity that everyone can take up, but not everyone is willing to take up.  It takes a special person to get on the mats each day, sweat, get bumps and bruises, yet continue to try and improve. 

It took me about a year until things started to even fall into place – I would have quit anything else within a couple months, but there was something that continuously drew me to class.  I saw an issue, which was that I was a small kid that was far, far behind everyone, not only in strength and size, but in technique as well.  I cannot sit and think that someone out there could possibly know more about BJJ than I do, or somehow could understand how my body is moving better than I could.  I continue to view Jiu-Jitsu in this way, and this is what drives me to continue training.  For some, it may be the drive to lose weight.  For some, it may be the drive to become more confident in their bodies in order to defend themselves from bullies and predators.  For some people, it’s the race to the #1 spot on the podium at tournaments.  This is what makes Jiu-Jitsu an art, and it’s what makes Jiu-Jitsu such a beautiful thing to partake in.  The art has added much to my life, and I intend to contribute back to it as best as I can.