Why I coach the way I do.

Are You Building Robots or Problem-Solvers? Why I Chose Ecological Dynamics Over Traditional Drills

As a coach, my single most important job is to help my students learn. For decades, in sports and martial arts, the "right" way to do this was clear: rote drilling.

You know what this looks like. "Line up. Ten repetitions of this move. Now ten more. Now switch partners. Ten more."

It’s the model of coaching we all grew up with. It’s built on the idea that there is one "perfect" technique, and the coach's job is to transmit that perfect technique to the student through mass repetition. The student is an empty hard drive, and the coach uploads the data.

I used this method for a long time. But eventually, I had to confront a frustrating question: Why did my students’ beautifully drilled techniques so often fall apart under the pressure of live competition?

The answer is that traditional drilling, while well-intentioned, is fundamentally flawed. It builds "brittle" skills that shatter the moment they encounter the chaotic, unpredictable reality of a real game or match.

That's why I made a fundamental shift in my coaching philosophy. I moved away from rote drilling and embraced an approach rooted in Ecological Dynamics (EcoD), often called the Constraints-Led Approach (CLA).

It’s not just a new set of drills; it's a completely different way of understanding learning itself. And it creates athletes who are not just robotic replicators, but adaptable, creative problem-solvers.

The "Traditional" Model: Building a Library of Moves

Traditional rote drilling is reductionist. It breaks a complex sport down into its smallest possible parts. A student drills a single move in isolation, completely removed from the context of the game.

• The Goal: To achieve "muscle memory" and make the technique "automatic."
• The Coach's Role: To be the expert and dictator. The coach demonstrates the "correct" way and spends the session correcting every deviation.
• The Problem: This approach separates perception from action. The student is taught to "do the move" without ever learning when or why to do it. They learn a solution without ever understanding the problem it’s meant to solve.

Think about it: in a real match, you never get to perform a technique in a clean, predictable, or compliant environment. Your opponent is actively trying to stop you. You’re tired. The score is a factor.

Traditional drilling ignores all of this crucial context. It’s like practicing a speech one word at a time in an empty room and then being shocked when you can't deliver it on a noisy, crowded stage while being heckled.

The Ecological Dynamics (EcoD) Model: Designing a Landscape of Problems

Ecological Dynamics flips the script. It’s a systems-based approach. It argues that learning isn't a linear upload, but a messy, non-linear process of discovery.

In this model, skill isn't a "thing" you have (like a file on a hard drive); it's an emergent relationship between three factors:

1. The Individual (or Organism): This is the athlete—their height, weight, strength, fatigue level, anxiety, and current skill.
2. The Environment: This is the physical and social setting. The mat surface, the noise of the crowd, the opponent's strategy, the rules of the competition.
3. The Task: This is the specific goal the athlete is trying to achieve. (e.g., "pass the guard," "score a point," "defend the goal.")

The interaction of these three factors creates a unique problem that the athlete must solve. The coach's job changes completely.

Instead of being a dictator, the coach becomes an architect of a learning environment.

We don't give students the answers. We design challenging problems (games and scenarios) and then constrain them to guide them toward discovering effective solutions for themselves. This is the Constraints-Led Approach (CLA).

The Real Difference: Repetition vs. Discovery

So, what does this look like in practice?

A traditional coach might say: "Today, we will drill the armbar from guard. 100 repetitions. Your partner will be compliant."

• Result: The student gets very good at doing an armbar on a compliant partner who isn't resisting. This skill is brittle.

An EcoD/CLA coach might say: "Okay, we're starting in the guard. The person on the bottom wins if they get any submission. The person on top wins if they pass.

Task Constraint: The person on top is not allowed to use their left hand."

• Result: The top person is forced to find new ways to pass. The bottom person quickly discovers that the top person's left side is weak. Their brain naturally starts perceiving opportunities for attacks on that side—like the armbar.

The student discovers the armbar as a solution to a problem.

This is the key. They haven't just learned a move; they have learned perception-action coupling. They have learned to see the opportunity and act on it simultaneously. They are building an adaptable skill that is already baked into a live, chaotic context.

Why Is This Better?

This shift from repetition to discovery is, in my experience, far superior for long-term athlete development.

1. It Builds Adaptability: CLA athletes are used to chaos. By constantly changing the constraints (the rules of the game, the starting position, the goal), we force them to adapt. They don't have one "perfect" solution; they have a whole toolbox of solutions they can adjust on the fly.
2. It Trains the "When" and "Why," Not Just the "How": A traditionally drilled athlete knows how to do a move. An EcoD-trained athlete knows when to do it and why it works. They are more "functionally" skilled because their skills are tied directly to the cues from their opponent and the environment.
3. It Creates Problem-Solvers: Rote drilling encourages athletes to turn their brains off and just follow instructions. This creates "robots" who look great in practice but freeze in competition. CLA demands athletes to be active, thinking problem-solvers in every single rep. We are training their decision-making as much as their bodies.
4. It's More Engaging: Let's be honest: traditional drilling is boring. "Gamified" learning through CLA is fun. It's challenging. It taps into our natural desire to play and solve puzzles. This increases motivation, sharpens focus, and keeps athletes coming back.

It's a shift from asking, "Am I doing this technique exactly like my coach?" to "Am I successfully solving the problem?"

That fundamental change in perspective is everything. It's the difference between preparing an athlete for a predictable drill and preparing them for the beautiful, unpredictable chaos of real competition.