Judo Inside Out

I recently revisited an old friend, Geof Gleeson’s 1983 “Judo Inside Out”, one of the most interesting works I’ve ever read concerning martial theory.  Mr Gleeson is a Psychologist and a Judo coach.

Martial theory is something which is rarely discussed outside of referring to the Bubishi, or listening to a coaches admonitions (and often ignoring them in combat).

Mr. Gleeson, even though discussing Judo, brings some very interesting insight to consider to karate skills, too.

Especially his discussion on Technique and Skill  (page 20 and 21).

“First, I must make some attempt to define and differentiate skill and technique.  As a start may I offer a definition of technique: it is the use of the body and its bits and pieces (arms, legs and head) to transmit force to the opponent, in order to bring about some predetermined effect, i.e. make him fall down, pin him to the ground or break his arm.  In order to appreciate and understand the function of  technique, it is best learnt in the simplest of circumstances, i.e. in a non-varying situation, standing or lying still.  Skill is the application and therefore the adaptation of technique to an ever-differing situation; it is implicit that maximum consistency of success is desirable when learning the necessary modifications.”

“In training technique and skill must be learnt; the questions to be asked are when and how are they to be taught?  There is no finite answer, it will depend on the nature of the learning group. However, what is important is to realize that there is no sacrosanct order of presentation.  Technique does not have to proceed skill (as it always has done in the judo world); a simplified form of skill can be taught first ,followed by technique.  Not every group need be taught the same way: the aspirations of individuals should decide the form of teaching as it does the style of learning.”

How does a technique become a skill?

“In judo competition each individual is trying to impose his skill upon the other, with the intention of winning (as specified by the rules). For this to happen each competitor must be able to assess what the opposition has, both in sense of attack and defense, and how that will integrate with his own strengths and weaknesses.  Most judo text-books, if they attempt to describe how this is to be done, would give the analysis from the hit-man’s point of view.  I want to adopt the opposite approach; I want to make the analysis from the targets point of view. I choose this approach for the following reasons.

1.      An efficient fighter always assumes he is the weaker in skills (not the weaker in determination to win). It may not be true, but in this way he will not underestimate the opposition.

2.      Accepting an inferior – but temporary – relationship makes the necessity of correct analysis more pressing and essential to get right.

3.      Being weaker than the opposition is a common relationship often found in any fighter’s career, yet seldom discussed. For some strange reason it is always suggested that the fighter should assume he is the better man when working out tactics. I say strange because in any championship there is only one winner, the rest are losers, so there must be a lot more ‘weaker-relationships’ than ‘stronger-relationships’.”

“Because by definition skill is the adaptation to an ever-changing set of circumstances, it is impossible to describe any specific skill in general terms……..”

Change Judo to Karate, and judo competition for karate competition or  more importantly, life threatening situation, and I believe Mr. Gleeson is saying something very important to consider.

Our discussions of application analysis (or ‘bunkai’) only begin to address the technique involved. The acquisition of skill to sell that technique is also a great component to consider.  So are many other of his thoughts.