Hey guys, I just wanted to get some feedback from everyone on how much stuff you cover in a single technique based class. Let's just put squad sessions, open mats, or private classes, etc. to the side for the moment. I'm talking about the kind of classes where you have a mix of people, beginners and not-so-beginners, and the instructor is telling you how to do stuff. How much stuff does he/she tell you how to do?
At my current main club, our instructor can sometimes cover a lot of different things in one session. I sometimes find it hard to follow it all. I wonder how well the beginners manage to take everything in. We did an anonymous web based survey to see how people found the classes, and a lot of people mentioned the pacing of the class being a problem. They weren't very specific, but I suspect that there is a bit of a hit from spending so much time explaining stuff and not enough actually doing it. That said, he's the coach and I assume he knows a bit more about coaching than I do.
When I think back to my last club, the way I remember it, we would cover a lot less stuff in a single class. Typically one newaza technique and two throws. Also, instead of giving the instruction in one big blast, the coach would give a broad outline of it, let you practice for a few minutes, and then she would give a more detailed explanation once everyone had tried it a few times and had a bit of an idea what was going on. The classes were a lot more consistent as well - I think I could have done everything outside of the instruction part blindfolded as it was the same every class. Like it was always the same warm up, then x minutes of doing newaza, y minutes of tachi, z of radori. My current place is much more random - we might do loads of newaza one day, or loads of nagikomi, or whatever.
Sometimes I go training BJJ in an SBG place nearby, and occasionally at a Drysdale affiliate. In both those places I think they teach one or two main things per class with a follow up technique. I quite like this, it's easy to digest - though I do feel that our need to do both stand up grappling an ground based stuff means we have to cover more each class, or risk people feeling they are missing out on stuff.
Then there is my coach's buddy who runs one of the most competitive judo clubs in the country. I go there, and I don't even really notice that he is actually coaching anything in particular. He just kind of tells everyone to go off and practice some stuff, and then he might come over and correct you a bit, or the person who your training with and who is liable to have higher rank than the coaches in most clubs will give you some instruction. You learn a lot, but spend very little time stood around listening to someone teaching. Also, he teaches ****-all newaza. Maybe a few rounds of newaza randori, but no instruction at all.
I'm not really sure where I'm going with this post, but anyway - how much ground do you cover in a typical class? How much depth does your instructor go into?
At my current main club, our instructor can sometimes cover a lot of different things in one session. I sometimes find it hard to follow it all. I wonder how well the beginners manage to take everything in. We did an anonymous web based survey to see how people found the classes, and a lot of people mentioned the pacing of the class being a problem. They weren't very specific, but I suspect that there is a bit of a hit from spending so much time explaining stuff and not enough actually doing it. That said, he's the coach and I assume he knows a bit more about coaching than I do.
When I think back to my last club, the way I remember it, we would cover a lot less stuff in a single class. Typically one newaza technique and two throws. Also, instead of giving the instruction in one big blast, the coach would give a broad outline of it, let you practice for a few minutes, and then she would give a more detailed explanation once everyone had tried it a few times and had a bit of an idea what was going on. The classes were a lot more consistent as well - I think I could have done everything outside of the instruction part blindfolded as it was the same every class. Like it was always the same warm up, then x minutes of doing newaza, y minutes of tachi, z of radori. My current place is much more random - we might do loads of newaza one day, or loads of nagikomi, or whatever.
Sometimes I go training BJJ in an SBG place nearby, and occasionally at a Drysdale affiliate. In both those places I think they teach one or two main things per class with a follow up technique. I quite like this, it's easy to digest - though I do feel that our need to do both stand up grappling an ground based stuff means we have to cover more each class, or risk people feeling they are missing out on stuff.
Then there is my coach's buddy who runs one of the most competitive judo clubs in the country. I go there, and I don't even really notice that he is actually coaching anything in particular. He just kind of tells everyone to go off and practice some stuff, and then he might come over and correct you a bit, or the person who your training with and who is liable to have higher rank than the coaches in most clubs will give you some instruction. You learn a lot, but spend very little time stood around listening to someone teaching. Also, he teaches ****-all newaza. Maybe a few rounds of newaza randori, but no instruction at all.
I'm not really sure where I'm going with this post, but anyway - how much ground do you cover in a typical class? How much depth does your instructor go into?