The Power of "Why?" - Reason from Essential Truths

Disclaimer: posted from iPhone- 

https://blog.percolate.com/2014/05/first-principles-elon-musk-problem-solving/

I've mentioned previously my minor obsession with Elon Musk.

   

Reasoning in reverse or backwards in some regard is not a new idea per se. 

As it applies to JiuJitsu, I'll liken it to Sakuraba or Masakazu Imanari: pass the guard? Why? I can attack the legs. There's an interview by Scramble ( I think) where they ask Imanari why he loves leg locks and the like and he laughs and sheepishly says he wasn't very good at guard passing. It's a "duh" moment but it's sort of brilliant in its own "duh" or obvious way. In the long run he's become so dangerous at attacking the legs that it completely takes guys out of their game when facing him even, often in MMA. He does something which feels counter-intuitive to a trained Jiu-Jitsu practitioner. He doesn't do what's expected in that sense. 

But furthermore, it breaks down more deeply into fundamental and what's called "atomic componenets": Pass the guard? Why? More importantly, why pass guard when I can attack the legs? If the purpose of JiuJitsu is to submit the opponent, and I can do so without multi-part/protracted guard passing battle, especially in the realm of MMA or submission grappling (ADCC or EBI rule sets) then why pass the guard indeed?

I find this reasoning of interest as I'm a devoted guard passer and open guard player. I'm as interested if not moreso in the "why?" behind a high level competitor as opposed to the "how" he/she might do something. Example: I'd be far more interested in hearing at length why the Miyaos prefer getting to the back as opposed to a back take instructional series with x or y number of moves or techniques. Is it they feel the most dominant finishing position? If so, why? Is it the safest control position regardless of opponent size? 

Sweep the foot, you must 

Why not just go directly to the back? I spent most of last year training with Sean Spangler, a black belt under Drysdale. He has a front headlock series whereby if/when he gets to your back or if you turtle or move to escape the Darce, he controls the head/arm with this lasso type Gable grip he does (he has a ton more set-ups, I'm generalizing here). Rather than traditional JiuJitsu whereby you control the hips and/or pass to mount or get hooks and back control; once he gets ahold of your head your options become exceedingly limited. I've seen him control, frustrate, or finish a ton of guys this way in training and in competion, gi and nogi. In rolling with him it feels super counter-intuitive and like he's violating the order of operations in JiuJitsu, akin to a team that plays the full court press in basketball and wears down their opposition by not playing to the gentlemen's agreement of high offense/minimal defense. 

It's kind of like, why pull guard? Why not fight for a takedown? Why pull guard rather than seek a takedown? In sport Jiu-Jitsu, off your back you have more options to sweep or submit rather than on top where much of your options begin after passing the guard (minus dropping back on an ankle lock, toe hold, jumping to a guillotine perhaps). To be on top and sit back on the ankle lock or toe hold also means conceding two points if/when the formerly bottom player escapes the submission attempt. The rabbit hole runs deep when you begin asking "Why?" and considering your goals in winning, how to win, and the nature of the rule set governing the contest. 

At its core though, it's the same kind of reverse problem solving: why control the back or seek the position of the back and spend time/energy fighting to take the back if I can simply control the head and therefore the body and have a series of submission options more directly? Again, if the purpose is to submit, why then seek a further step away or a position a further step away to then begin my submission attempts? 

I'd liken it to using the submission attempt as a position of sorts: like jumping to the armbar at the start of a match rather than 1) takedown 2) pass guard 3) achieve mount 4) spin off to mounted armbar. 

All of the above stems from "why?" Why seek to submit? Why seek to control position? Why seek to submit potentially at the expense of position? What is the purpose of JiuJitsu? To what purpose do we seek to control position rather than seek to submit? What is the purpose of position or submission? How are they different? How does one serve the other? How can seeking one at the expense of another change the content of the interaction between the two grapplers? Where do we spend our pennies in the piggy bank that is limited training time each day? 

"Reason from Essential Truths," Competition, Specialization, et al....

I often hear the words of Elon Musk in my head saying, "reason from essential truths."

He was discussing why he decided to invent a car battery out of the materials he did and he said that his process was to look at the materials and chemicals and raw components that were cheapest and then engineer from that end of the problem.

Rather than say, looking at how car batteries have traditionally been made and improving on the slight improvements of others in this constant cycle of slight improvements.  He then noted that the prices of the materials would change in respond to changes in demand and he noted the fluid nature of supply, demand, and innovation.

He also reasons that  if you enter a crowded field you must either do the same thing as many others but much, much, much better, OR you can approach the problem from an entirely different angle and think along the lines of the old adage "outside the box."

I competed (poorly) this past weekend due to personal issues, lack of focus, a lack of focus on peaking at the right time, and my realization that if I'm going to compete every single month or more this year, not every tournament can feel like it's "do or die". Some tournaments will have to be off days. Some days will have to be trial and error where I let my game unconsciously unfold and simply try to do what I've been doing while rolling as of late, not just my tried and true previously winning formula.

It's also the realization that I can doggedly figure out a way to win at purple belt now, or develop skills I've reasoned are necessary at the brown belt and black belt level and long term.

My essential truths are that I want: 
1) a very difficult combination of open guards for my opponents to pass
2) a pressure, swarming guard passing style that works both at weight and against bigger opponents
3) a very small set of submission for which I hunt in key positions that follow my preferred sweeps and/or guard passes, and a precise set of sequential submissions in the closed guard

At blue belt, after knee surgery, I developed a gameplan that won me 3-6 or even 7 matches in a day that looked nearly identical: pull half guard, deep half guard sweep, over/under pass, knee on belly, lapel choke.

At purple I began developing more versatility in my open guard because with the exception of DLR or perhaps Spider-guard, or Bernardo Faria at HW doing deep half to his single leg transition, I've seen guys like the Miyaos and Gianni Grippo falter at black belt because what worked at brown belt was not versatile or varied enough to work against craftier black belts (well, that or their application of it against more experience black belts was not highly developed enough to trump that edge in strength, experience, et cetera).

This may or may not be the case. I'm a purple belt....what honestly can I say with certainty?
What I must do, however, is believe in my process and the work I've done and will continue to do.
Innovators are un-handicapped by the nature of expert failure, or by being so deeply entrenched in the hierarchy or system of which they find themselves a part.
Malcolm Gladwell has a great talk about the qualities of innovators which is that they are curious/passionate, deliberate in their willingness to dedicate hours and hours in pursuit of their goal/passion, and most importantly they persist in the face of doubt/ridicule/criticism on the part of the established experts and/or peer(s) in their area. 

Off Topic:
I've competed in some submission only superfights as of late (still hate the term "Superfight") and it has encouraged me to more aggressively hunt for the submission whilst rolling, something that can be subtly forgotten when you focus so much on position before submission and controlling your partner/opponent et cetera. This Friday I'm competing up in weight (as is normally the case when I take superfights, and it's a 3 round format with some changes to the traditional scoring in the hopes of making the match more entertaining.
--
There's a time to doggedly pursue one pass, one sweep, one position, et cetera.
There's also a time to play, to experiment, try things out without expectation of "winning" or "failing." The key then is choosing the right mix or combination.
Everyone trains hard
Everyone diets.
Everyone rolls.
Et cetera.

The secret sauce then is that intangible mystery ingredient when it comes down to where you spend your hours and minutes and seconds.
It's why Kron Gracie who grew up with Rickson and a fundamental treasure trove of Jiu-Jitsu access can beat Otavio Sousa in submission only 20 minute match at Metamoris and ADCC champion in his weight class, but Otavio Sousa is 2x world champion at black belt with a 10 minute time limit in their weight class in the Gi.

It's how Lucas Lepri can win his black belt world championships in the Gi something like 7 years apart and still be relevant in the sport Jiu-Jitsu world as a competitor.

Happy training and such.
      ---

Winning, Losing, & Positive Disintegration

The picture above, with Leandro winning the Worlds: at one point, Michael Langhi hadn't lost in like 2-3 years. Lucas Lepri won the Mundials at black belt all the way back in 2007 and again this past year in 2014. Leandro is the current top dog, and now has gone up to middleweight and trumped Otavio Sousa but he presses on, trying to win the absolute and making it all the way to the final of the Pan Ams Absolute against Bernardo Faria. 

My point is that each of those 3 guys has had moments at the top of the podium. Each of them were "the guy" at one point. But it's always in flux. It's always in a state of movement. 

This post really resonated with me. Richard Branson, like Elon Musk, is a guy I follow and listen to quite a bit. It's interesting to see how the mind of someone like that works.

The long ride to a tournament in Chicago......
an even longer ride back if you don't perform well

They reason from essential truths and see not obstacles or the "why not" but ask simply "why" .

 "'8. Richard Branson: “When most people think about taking a risk they associate it with negative connotations, when really they should view it as a positive opportunity. Believe in yourself and back yourself to come out on top. Whether that means studying a course to enable a change of direction, taking up an entry level position on a career ladder you want to be a part of, or starting your own business — you’ll never know if you don’t give it a try.'"

This brings me to the concept of "positive disintegration": "Dabrowski's theoretical framework views psychological tension and anxiety as necessary for growth."

It's been a tough year at purple belt as I've mentioned on here several times. I've yet to win my division but I have a box of 2nd and 3rd place medals and even had days where I didn't win a match.

This past weekend thought recovering from being sick, I competed and managed to almost medal in the absolute. For me, knowing I was under the weather and the like, I was happy with my performance. I have to believe that I keep grinding and doing the right things and that I'll get "lucky" but "luck" is just the result of beating on your craft for hours and hours and hours.

I always remember Caio Terra saying how terrible he was at blue belt and that his instructor gave him his blue belt out of pity.....and Keenan Cornelius saying that he was at purple belt for a couple years before he really won anything of note and he had gotten so frustrated that he didn't even think of winning anymore, just that he would fight so hard in losing that his opponent would lose their next match after beating him due to exhaustion.

I could lose every match I ever have at purple belt and the only person who will care is the past version of myself whose ego cared about losing in a moment in time which will have then passed out of existence. It's not a way to rationalize losing to protect my ego, but rather an attempt at maintaining perspective.

Cobrinha had never been submitted at black belt in competition in his weight class. He had only been submitted by Rodolfo in NoGi at the Abu Dhabi Pro in the Absolute if I'm not mistaken. Cobrinha was fighting so hard to avoid Mendes' passing him after a Berimbolo Rafa got the arm. There was a time when Rafa was the brown belt coming up and Cobrinha was the multi-time black belt world champion who dominated everyone in his weight class. Eventually Rafa got him.