How to Map the Constraints-led Approach (CLA) to Taekwondo

It looks like we've broken containment--here's some pointers to help prevent confusion while TKD coaches get more educated on, and experiment with, CLA.

It seems to me like CLA has broken containment from BJJ and MMA!

I was told anywhere from “this is never happening” to “it’s going to be a huge uphill battle.” (I did not believe it was impossible, but I knew this would be really difficult before I started writing and recording.)

I stumbled across this post in the wild and almost could not believe it:

First, I want to say that I’m delighted to find this in the wild. Absolutely thrilled. In no way is my writing in this post meant to criticize Perform Taekwondo. I applaud them for being one of the first few through the wall.

That said, there are a couple remarks in this slide post I’d like to push the needle on in a constructive way, as well as praise with some hardy agreements!

Everything I write here is to ask constructive questions, get ahead of potential future confusion, and provide a resource for taekwondo coaches interested in exploring ecological learning through the constraints-led approach.

This article will interact with the Instagram post first, then address the question of how to map CLA to taekwondo.

Is Messy-looking Training a Problem?

From slide 3:

The problem with CLA is that it looks messy and hard to control. Parents often think their child isn't really improving... but it needs to be like this. The rules should be flexible and game-like.

Of course, I wholeheartedly agree with that last sentence! I am refreshed and born anew finally hearing this from a taekwondo creator.

As for the prior statements…

There’s a lot to be said here, but I think this is an oversimplification. There are ways to use alive training and still find improvement, but this problem can be resolved mostly by very good upfront communication with parents and athletes.

It is also solved by keeping sparring separate from the rest of taekwondo training. It’s a terrible idea to try and squeeze sparring, poomsae, self-defense, and everything else into one class block.

"Tracked" Programs for Sparring and Forms

That said, I’ve been putting a lot of thought into how to measure improvement in kyorugi (sport TKD sparring) beyond just free sparring. I believe this will come in the form of “mini-games” that focus more on key skills that are consistent leading indicators of sport TKD performance.

This will require a lot more research and testing, but it can be done, and I’m going to help us taekwondo coaches get there.

More to come.

Does Drilling Help Sparring at All?

From slide 4:

While drilling provides structure and the feeling that the child is really progressing, it has its own flaws. With drilling, you see results quickly, but are you really developing what you need? Do you want to be a champion in beautiful technique and target hitting, or in fighting?

This is a great point.

Drilling is easy to control and that looks good to parents and coaches. Getting better at drilling tends to happen fast and in a linear manner—but is this actually improving the skills you need to succeed in sparring?

I believe the answer is no.

Sparring is an open skill, and open skills demand more than what a taekwondoin would call “good technique.” It demands you manage an unstable, ever-changing environment, moment-to-moment.

That is, you have to read an unscripted and uncooperative opponent, make quick movement decisions as actions emerge, and time it all together. When you practice paddle drills or scripted sequences or noodle drills, the authentic distancing, limb movement, and timing elements are erased. Perfect technique cannot fix an inability to read and time your tactics in sparring.

There is No Perfect Technique

And yet these are the most critical factors in taekwondo sparring success, in my opinion!

Bravo.

Is Drilling Good for Anything?

From slide 5:

So we really can't say it's this or that. Like everything else, they're just tools. I would use drilling to provide some basic input, but focus on CLA since it builds a versatile athlete who can solve problems on their own.

There’s more to unpack here than meets the eye.

First, yes, drilling is good for conditioning: strength and power development (bags, thai pads, barbells, plyometrics, etc.), flexibility/mobility aids (paddles for external height targeting, etc.), and related strength and conditioning functions. Perform Taekwondo is primarily a strength and conditioning profile, so I have a hunch they will agree with this.

Remember that conditioning is separate from skill work. Drills for conditioning generally should not be part of skill sessions, which is what taekwondo sparring classes are.

Second, I want to challenge the author about what he means by basic input. Why is basic input—whatever it is—necessary or additive at all if he agrees it’s not building the skills necessary?

If a student needs more confidence or self-efficacy, for example, this can be built via methods such as task simplification—that is, through skill level-appropriate game design.

Scalable Live Training: How (and Why) to Safely Conduct 100% Live Training from Day 1

And if he’s willing to put up with messy training, what is actually gained by doing sterile drills at the beginning of training when live training starts to gain students so much even from day 1?

I’m of course speaking by experience here. But more importantly, Combat Learning has documented several cases where coaches have successfully raised up striking athletes with zero scripted/cooperative training methods:

• Scott Sievewright, kickboxers and MMA fighters

• Emil Fitoussy, Thai boxers

• Adam Singer, kickboxers and MMA fighters

• Adam Haniver, boxers

• Pedro Sierra, kickboxers and MMA fighters

• Geno Guevara, taekwondoin and kickboxers

• Bryan Coston & Seneca Savoie, HEMA swordplay competitors

• Zach Smith, sport taekwondo competitors (forthcoming)

And many more than this…and growing.

Repetition Without Repetition: Striking Case Studies

Mapping CLA to Taekwondo

To map CLA to taekwondo, you have to understand two distinctions:

• Skill work vs Conditioning work, and

• Closed skills vs Open skills

I have already addressed these in quite a bit of detail elsewhere, but I’ll summarize it here and link to the relevant posts for further reading.

Skill vs Conditioning Work: How Skill Practice Interacts with Sport-specific S&C

In my original Scalable Live Training (SLT) essay, I summarized the difference between skill and conditioning work this way:

In SLT, we believe in a separation of sport-specific training into two buckets that do not mix together: (a) conditioning and (b) skill work.

Conditioning is about improving the body’s base capacity to perform along athletic metrics: strength, explosivity, flexibility, endurance, and expression of power. It includes everything from general strength training to sport-specific cardiovascular and functional strength exercise programs. It is supplemental to skill work in terms of the overall training program.

From an SLT perspective, conditioning includes:

• Weight training

• Sport-specific kettlebell routines

• Mobility drills

• Stretching

• Pad work

• Bag work

Skill work is training in the sport itself. It’s practicing the perceptual and tactical skills necessary to become skilled at the activity itself – targeting, positioning, footwork, blocking, throwing, scoring, etc.

You will notice that pad work is included in conditioning and not skill work. Because you’re using strikes, footwork, and even blocks, it seems like you’re doing skill work. But this is deceptive:

Pad work is not skill work because the information presented in pad work does not truly match the sport being trained. If the information from your opponent’s body is critically important to your own ability to move skillfully, that means pad work is out.

That’s because the shoulders and other key sources of information are moving in ways conducive to holding pads and therefore are mismatched with what moves you should use if it were for the sake of winning a fight.

In addition to producing junk information, nearly all forms of pad work are missing the two most key features of any martial art/combat sport (unscripted and uncooperative) and thus produce minimal transfer of skill learning. We will consider those features in more detail in a later section.

It’s important that the two types of work stay separate because training time is not infinite for most – and neither is energy. There is research that shows that brutal warmups and combined conditioning/skill work sessions can fatigue the brain, impede skill learning, and even potentially lead to greater chance of injury.

In other words, conditioning and skill work are both taxing on the perceptual system and so should not be blended into the same sessions on those grounds. Total dedication should be given to one or the other and never both at the same time.

Closed vs Open Skills: Different Classes for Different Skill Types

The basic premise is that poomsae class is for poomsae training and sparring class is for sparring training, and the two should not be mixed.

In my 5th degree black belt thesis, I summarized the rationale for a skill-based structure this way:

The exploration of current motor learning theory in the context of taekwondo training offers valuable insights into how student learning experiences and athlete development pipelines can be optimized.

Motor skills are classified into closed and open skills. This construct provides a foundation for tailoring training methodologies to specific skill demands.

The distinction between poomsae and kyorugi as separate sports with distinct skill sets underscores the importance of specialized training tracks.

Poomsae, being more of a closed skill, benefits from focused formal exercises and flexibility training; while kyorugi, being an open skill, necessitates live sparring for dynamic decision-making practice.

Implementing sport-specific tracks ensures that training time is dedicated to exercises that directly contribute to skill development in each discipline. The Constraints-led Approach (CLA), specifically, provides taekwondo practitioners with the tools to design more effective training programs and engage in more effective coaching behaviors.

To understand more implications of this program structure, read the entire paper linked above.

You can also check out the article below to learn more about how motor control dictates the best way to train a skill type.

How do we actually control our movements? [How We Learn to Move, Chapter 3 Companion]

Conclusion

Overall, I understand that Perform Taekwondo is walking a delicate line between radical departure from traditional training methodology and maintaining their authority among masters who are sensitive to change.

I think they do a good job of balancing, but in the process, it leaves weaseling room for taekwondo coaches to reaffirm outmoded thinking about skill rather than challenge themselves to change their thinking. In this article, I endeavored to push the limits and close the space on that wiggle room.