If I were coaching a different sport, my comments and ideas would be considered mainstream. After all, what is so controversial about practicing the way you are expected to perform, or working on the defensive as well as offensive parts of the game, or finding a way to prevent giving up points to your opponent? What soccer, football, baseball or basketball coach would consider these notions outrageous or controversial? Not a one to be sure.

‘Controversial’ has a negative connotation. Being a contrarian and outside-the-box thinker, whenever I hear the word used in conjunction with someone’s name or ideas, I run to it, not away from it. I’m compelled to find out what the fuss is about before passing judgement. Unfortunately, most people simply buy into the label without doing their own due diligence. In effect, the misuse of ‘controversial’ prevents us from making rational decisions because of that negative connotation and our cultural baggage.

Back in the early 1970s when I was still a brown belt, I remember the commotion that Phil Porter’s coaching ideas produced within the traditional Judo community. It was like a raging fire. Porter was a proponent of the ‘controversial, eccentric and crazy’ British coach Geof Gleeson. Listening to my teammates talk about Porter and his ‘crazy, controversial’ ideas made me want to learn more about this character’s ideas. Fortunately for me, Bill Montgomery, a player who had been around Gleeson and Porter, blew into San Diego one day. He and I soon started talking about alternative methods. Within the year, I was sold on the new Judo training. Bill and I still talk on a weekly basis about our model of instruction. We were empowered by Gleeson to think outside the box, and we do our best to empower others to stretch their minds. The road is however littered with many obstacles, and the going has been slow and rough.

The problem with Judo is that we are a traditional sport with narrow-minded people who are still stuck with an instructional model that has not evolved much in the last 128 years. Any new idea will therefore become blasphemous, heretical, crazy, outrageous, and the ubiquitous controversial. It will be fought tooth and nail without even a semblance of trying to understand it. We have Judo neophytes on the Judo Forum and the Judo-List making negative comments about ideas they have no concept of. They have been brainwashed, and are not skeptical enough to question Judo culture. They form a unending, long line of players who regurgitate hook, line and sinker what the previous generation regurgitated from the generation that came before it. Monkey see and hear, monkey do.

‘Controversial’ is used in other sports, but mostly for coaches who throw chairs across basketball courts, like Bobby Knight, or for coaches who punch opposing players from the sideline, like Woody Hays. Coaches who devise new offensive or defensive schemes, or new training methods that change the game are labeled revolutionary, visionary, innovative, and creative. They are honorably considered geniuses, modernizers, pioneers, founders and fathers, and are inducted into their respective Hall Of Fame. Their sports improve, grow and become more exciting. In contrast, we try our best to marginalize and ignore those who can advance our sport.

I have no idea why we judoplayers fear new ideas so much. I do know that attacking new ideas out of hand is not good for the sport. We are a sick sport in need of a serious infusion of life. Gleeson’s ideas are no longer new. They’ve been around for over fifty years, and they shouldn’t be controversial. Some of us have stood on Gleeson’s shoulders and become his advocates. Some of us have carried his message even further, which is what he would have wanted. Unfortunately, paraphrasing the Japanese proverb, we get hammered down if only because we stand out. Instead, we should find ways to celebrate and elevate new ideas, instead of depreciating and denigrating them.

The problem with stretching man’s mind, especially in a highly traditional sport like Judo, is that it’s fraught with opposition. Recently, I had the pleasure of conducting a USJA Coach Education Course for twenty-two coaches from Southern California. Several had shown up because they had heard that I was controversial! Much to their credit, they came to see and hear for themselves, rather than rely on the words of people who have never had an intelligent conversation with me.

John Locke was correct when he said, “New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed without any other reason, but because they are not already common.” While I am considered controversial in Judo, my courses are based on the latest research, and I would be considered mainstream in other fields.

Course attendees were warned ahead of time to come with an open mind. During the course, I ask coaches to question, be skeptical, think outside the box, step outside their comfort zone, expand the definition of words and concepts, and come to conclusions based on intellectual reasoning, rather than the preconceived notions and traditional baggage we come with.

As I have mentioned in previous writings, the focus on coach education should be on pedagogy, the art of teaching Judo. My courses thus start with understanding how skills are developed- there is an equation for that- followed by a dozen principles of learning. These used to be common fare in the USJA coaching courses but they have dropped out in favor of things that are not readily useful to most of our coaches. I have no idea how you can teach Judo effectively, or any sport for that matter, without knowing the elements of skill acquisition and the principles of learning. Once you do have this information, you’re on the way to becoming a better coach because you’ll be equipped to recognize and eliminate irrelevant training

Next, we tackle different methods of training to combat the substandard uchi komi-randori model. Coaches are introduced to backward and forward shaping, bridge and open project method, blocked-varied-random practice, whole-part method, and technique- situation- and games-based drill training. In addition, coaches are shown how to develop warm-up drills to make this class period more fun and relevant.

A significant part of every course I run is designed to make coaches understand that to become the best coach possible you must read. I provide a list of recommended readings, and throughout the course mention key points from some of those works. I reinforce the importance of reading by pointing out that most branches of our military have professional reading programs, and that most great sports coaches and industrial leaders are voracious readers.

Typically, few of the course attendees have ever read any of the books that I recommend. Let’s face it, most Americans don’t read, and coaches are no exception. One of the attendees, who is a big reader, told me that she had read several of the works I recommended, but had not thought to apply their lessons to Judo! In light of that comment, I understand better why people think I’m crazy to recommend books on military leadership. Apparently, it’s hard to think outside the box and to recognize the parallels between Judo and other fields.

American coaches continue to be ignorant of Geof Gleeson, the father of modern Judo coaching and a prolific author. Not only have our coaches not read his books, far too many have not heard of him at all. I find this deplorable. His main books, Judo for the West, Anatomy of Judo, and Judo Inside Out should be mandatory reading. You don’t have to agree with everything Gleeson proposes, but if you do read his books, you’ll get a completely different approach to Judo. And this should help you become skeptical of the training model we adopted lock, stock and barrel from the Japanese.

Definitions and labels continue to be obstacles in understanding one another and accepting new ideas. One of the questions I pose coaches is, “How many of you think that a brand new student should randori during his first lesson?” The brave immediately raise their hands, the fence-straddlers look around and wait to see what everyone else does, and the close-minded sit there shaking their heads muttering to themselves, “No way, Jose, that’s crazy!”

Once coaches are reminded of the purpose of randori and are shown how to create “randori-like” drills and situations, then it’s not so hard to admit that, yes, beginners can do randori during their first session on the mat. All you have to do is stretch that mind and think outside the box.

Ukemi is another one of those words that seem to be held in captivity by a narrow-minded definition. Few coaches seem to be able or willing to teach throws before a student has spent days and weeks mastering ukemi using the traditional “mat-bashing” method. As with the case of randori, beginners can learn how to throw on day one without ukemi training. It’s simply a matter of redefining ukemi.

One of the drills I use to point out our myopic view of training is the following: A is sitting on her butt with legs stretched in front, B kneels to A’s side, pushes her backwards and pins her. (See photo below) When coaches are asked what was taught in this simple drill, everyone quickly says that a pin was taught. With some prodding, they recognize two other elements: a throw (a precursor to O soto gari) and a transition (to the previously recognized pin.) Almost all of them miss the fourth element- the ukemi! Why? Because there was no “mat-bashing” thus it wasn’t recognized as ukemi training.

I’m not the only “nut” who thinks there’s something wrong with the way we teach ukemi. Here’s what Anton Geesink, the 1964 Olympic gold medalist, says in his book Judo:

I have often observed that ukemi-waza is being taught as an independent technique…I personally don’t pay much attention to the falling techniques. By this I mean to say that ukemi-waza is not an important part of judo. It is, but the training of ukemi-waza needs to be functional. For me it is impossible to train ukemi-waza in a solo way. If I am in charge, the falling is only trained as a logical conclusion off a throw.

Often, the last words in what I perceive to be a futile effort to justify substandard and irrelevant training methods are, “But the Japanese use these methods, and they work for them!” Rather than tell you why they appear to work for the Japanese- this may be one of my next blog entries- I’ll leave you with some words of wisdom from British philosopher Bertrand Russell:

The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.

While I expect that all coaches who attend my courses will come, see, understand and be enlightened, the reality is that for many no amount of research, proof or education will sway them to change. They show up with blinders, and leave with blinders. Those of us who are vested in coach education keep plodding away nonetheless, one coach at a time. We are inspired by those who rush back to their clubs to try the “new stuff” they learned. We are inspired by the coaches who admit that they can use the concepts they learned in a Judo coaching course for their job or for another sport. And we are inspired by the coaches who months later tell us they have made drastic changes to their programs, and wonder why they hadn’t done it sooner.

As a Judo educator, I constantly try to point out the disconnect between what the experts tell us to do- the demonstration- with what they actually do in competition- the performance. Geof Gleeson, the author of Judo for The West and Anatomy of Judo, may have been one of the first to recognize and publicly address this disconnect. He pointed out the Japanese tell us one thing then proceed to do something else. This disconnect has nothing to do with variations of technique, and all to do with the systematic alteration of basic technique in order to teach principles, so we are told.

My favorite target is O soto gari because the disconnect couldn’t be any greater than with this technique. See for yourself. Watch the great Yasuhiro Yamashita demonstrate his famous O soto gari in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeoRYZaGGRk&feature=related. Then watch him annihilate his opponents in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuAkl4ia73Y&feature=related. Why demonstrate, and more importantly, why practice O soto gari one way for thousands of repetitions over countless hours if you are going to perform it in an entirely different fashion during the game of Judo?

Following the 2009 U.S. Open, there was an international training camp featuring the great Isao Okano, 1964 Olympic champion. The camp was well-attended for a change; some 120 players for the first day, and an impressive 60 players on the second day. In addition to Okano, clinicians for this event were world champion Mike Swain, Olympic medalist Kevin Asano, and two younger Japanese competitors. This camp would present more examples of irrelevant training.

As I sat and watched from the sidelines, I caught a glimpse of Tokuzo Takahashi, the winner of the 100kg division, demonstrate his Uchi mata. First, players had to practice the high pull like they were trying to hang clothes on a clothesline that was higher than shoulder height. Then the forearm had to be like this, the hand had to turn this way, the thumb had to be pointing that way, and on and on. Because Takahashi plays out of Los Angeles, I was familiar with his Uchi mata, and I knew that most of what he was demonstrating would not be present in his actual performance of the technique. So, I pointed this out to a former student of mine who was showing interest in starting up a club in his hometown.  Sure enough, when Takahashi participated in the randori sessions after the teaching session my former student was able to tell me, “Coach, you’re right!” Almost all of the fundamental, biomechanical principles had changed between the demonstration and the performance. This was beyond a mere technical variation. Why?

Mike Swain was up next. He proceeded to tell us that in spite of his being known for his Tai otoshi, he actually scored more with his O uchi gari. So first, players had to practice the “uchi komi” version of O uchi gari! Wow, I had just learned a new term and a new concept! Again, the forearm was here, the pinky was there, blah, blah, blah. Then Mike showed the version that actually works and scores. But why the “uchi komi” version, so biomechanically different from anything that works? Why the irrelevant practice? Why, why, why?

The final clinician to demonstrate the disconnect between demonstration and performance was a young Japanese competitor who had won the All-Japan Weight Division Championships at 60kg. He demonstrated his Morote seoi nage with the classical “hang your clothes on the clothesline” high pull, followed by “pull your opponent to you.” In the randori session, he showed the real thing. You guessed it: the biomechanics were different! No high pull, no pull the opponent to you but rather the more effective move into and under your opponent, and pull the opponent straight over, not up. This was clearly not a technical variation, but another example of the disconnect between performance and demonstration, reality and fantasy.

I have made similar comments on YouTube about this disconnect, and have been ridiculed by the “experts,” mostly mudansha ranked players with limited Judo experience, who regurgitate everything they hear without being skeptical and questioning what really goes on in Judo. In some way, I understand how it might be difficult to question what a world champion tells you. But question is what we must do if we are to improve Judo performance, especially in Judo-poor nations.

So, go to the videotapes and see for yourself. Analyze what is going on during the game of Judo. See if that corresponds with the way you practice the game. Ask yourself if other sports have an “uchi komi” version of techniques. Ask yourself if other sports practice skills one way only to radically depart from that way once in competition? Do they alter techniques in order to convey principles, or do they teach principles while practicing techniques the way they will be performed? To come to the correct conclusion about Judo training you must understand the difference between basic techniques, variations of basic techniques, and biomechanical irrelevance. Once you understand that, you too will see the disconnect.