Games/Sparring vs. Drilling For Maximizing Skill Development w/ Scott Sieveweight (SSOF Ep 63)

Scott Sieveweight1:26

So really, what ecological dynamics is saying, if I have to really boil it down, is that humans are very complex systems. Put two together in a fight, it's even more complex. And what we're really trying to do is just keep the training as much as possible within that kind of authentic, coupled, chaotic sphere, that space.

So what ecological advocates all advocate for is not splitting it apart and kind of getting rid of the old ways of traditional isolated training and making it more holistic.

James de Lacey3:01

Yeah, it sounds like from what you said there, it's almost like everything needs to be in context when you're training, in context.

Scott Sieveweight3:01

And extent, right? It's combat sport, so I mean we can't recreate fights every day. Although that might be effective, it's not very good for longevity, it's not very sustainable.

So, but that's in essence, right? And a lot of people say, well, you're just doing situational drilling. And while it's not just situational drilling, it's pretty close. We cut the game into slices and we just explore there and we play a lot from these same areas.

So that would be doing it somewhat of a disservice to say it's just situational sparring, but it's... if you want to say that, that's getting us a lot of the way there.

James de Lacey3:51

Nice. So I guess the question from that becomes... So there's one, I guess, prominent Jiu-Jitsu player—he doesn't compete anymore—Kit Dale. And he was 100% against drilling. He was like, never drills, nothing, only I guess roll, situational sparring and things like that.

Obviously that's taking one end of the spectrum, one extreme. And then there's obviously other people on the other end that are just drilling all the time and then maybe just fighting. So within that, do drills, I guess closed, non-contextual drills, some pad work or whatever, does that fit into your methodology of coaching and training and learning? And if so, or if not, where does it?

Scott Sieveweight4:24

So it doesn't really fit into what I'm doing. It's somewhat contradictory because, again, that's breaking down the sport and you're not keeping the learner embedded and embodied in the environment. So I don't see a lot of value in it.

However, I'm not so zealous that I'll say that there isn't some value. I do think there's motivational, psychological, physiological benefits of pad work and maybe drilling, especially from a motivational side for people to feel like they're achieving something.

But for the most part, when I have a group together, we don't put a great deal of value in all that stuff.

James de Lacey4:54

Interesting. Okay, so if someone's a ranked beginner coming in for the first time, do they also jump straight into these I guess situational style drills?

Scott Sieveweight4:54

Yeah, right away. So, again, this is often a common pushback: but you can't just let beginners go at it. And yeah, I agree with that. You can't just let them go at it, but you can let them go at it. It's a certain... Sorry, excuse me, I got an Uber alert.

Yeah. You can let them go at it to a certain extent with a small sliver of the game. And that's essentially where I think the crafting and delivering this approach from is: just finding the right kind of challenge point, finding the right appropriate level of the game for the learner, and then we just build on top of that.

So we're, as as a coach myself, we're just kind of designing the games, designing the environment. So it's very gamified. There's always a very clear task or objective for both sides and we play in that space. And as they progress, we make it a bit more complex. And then for newer people, we just bring it down a bit.

I love that. I'm trying to speak about, again, rather than get lost in all the words and the highfalutin and esoteric stuff, just really just talk about it on the brass tacks that coaches will understand right away.

James de Lacey6:12

Yeah. No, I really, really like that. So do you want to maybe provide maybe a some... an example, maybe from kickboxing, MMA, Jiu-Jitsu, of how you would regress that right down? Maybe just some basic situation or gamification that you would use with someone that came in.

I mean, it might be specific to the situation or the level of the person, but just a general example.

Scott Sieveweight6:43

Okay, so let's say, first of all, what are we trying to achieve for striking here? Let's take a striking example. So what am I trying to achieve for striking? For striking is to have my learners or my students or my teammates, whatever, in a position where they can receive and produce force effectively. So it'd be good base and learn to... I'm going to use the word 'read,' learn to pick up on the information that their partner, opponent's, giving them and start building relationships with that. Whether it be range, whether it be defensive measures, whether it be attacking measures.

We speak a lot... You know, I have to use some of the words here, but they talk a lot in ecological psychologies that we're surrounded by affordances, right? And affordances are just opportunities to act. So looking in a striking perspective, when is your opponent reachable? When are they punchable? When are they kickable, this kind of stuff?

And that's not immediately apparent for someone who's a novice. They don't pick up on that. They're not sensitive to that information yet. And I believe that's really what expertise is. Over time, we're getting more and more sensitive to these affordances and building relationships with them so we're able to exploit them.

So that brings us all the way back: does it make sense to me to show someone how to move out of context? Does it make sense to me to really even show them how to kick or punch out of context? Not really. Not really from the way I'm coming at it. There's a whole other discussion whether that can be used as a supplement offline.

But if that answers your question a little bit, I ask myself two things: what are we trying to, what are we actually trying to achieve by learning the sport? And then how can we make that a challenging little game for the learners to come in and start picking up that implicitly?

James de Lacey8:28

Gotcha. And how would you apply that within a grappling context?

Scott Sieveweight8:28

Yeah, with grappling, the same. So... Here's one thing: I think striking might be harder and more nuanced, but I think it's more simple to an extent, right? You can punch and you can kick, you can evade, you can intercept, you can land, right?

Grappling, so much more. We're upside down, we're side to side, whatever. There's a lot to develop up and from that space. So again, going back to what we said, like situational stuff, we'll just start off and we'll pick the most common areas of the game and we'll start building and designing little games off there.

A lot of the actual goal of what you're trying to do are already kind of... it's inherent in the game. You tell someone to stay on top, or you tell someone to hold the back, and...

We layer games onto this. So we don't see jiu-jitsu as a collection of techniques, we see it more perhaps as a series of strategies and tactics, and that's the space that we'll kind of put our students in.

James de Lacey9:22

I like that, because a lot of times you get taught maybe a technique or a chain of techniques, but then you go to apply them and then something else—your opponent does something different than when you were drilling it—and then suddenly your technique doesn't work anymore and you have no idea of where you're going to move next. Because all you did was drill that technique and then maybe the next progression after you got through a certain phase, but you never got through that phase in the first place.

Scott Sieveweight9:45

Well, that's an important thing about gaining expertise or developing expertise: you need that valid feedback, right? So you need that feedback in the moment. What do I mean by valid feedback? Feedback for me just means you're getting some kind of feedback on whether something worked or not. Did you succeed? Did you fail? Did you almost succeed? Did you only just fail and whatnot? But I think that has to be real and authentic for the most part.

I don't think we get that from drilling. I don't think we get it from a coach barking where your elbow should have been and where your foot should be. I think that happens over time when we're going live and there is a bit of resistance. There's a much higher prevalence of failure, which we manage through how we design the games, but the feedback is always somewhat highly valid and that's where I think the learning really occurs.

James de Lacey10:30

How much, I guess, verbal or even just actual coaching do you put into, say, some of these games for a beginner? As an example, you mentioned maybe a novice comes in, they don't know range, they don't know when there's an opening to be able to throw a punch and land. Are you still giving them feedback, maybe afterwards or during, like "these are the things to kind of look for," or are you just letting them figure it out themselves over the weeks?

Scott Sieveweight10:57

So again, a couple ways to answer that question. First of all, what do I expect to see in a session? I can't really measure whether anyone's learned anything in a session. It starts when I'm watching them over time and they're starting to be in the right place a bit more often than not. I don't always think that needs to be conscious or explicitly understood.

But for the sake of striking, they don't want to fall on their ass, so they're authentically and organically getting into these bladed, strong base positions, and they're starting to pick up on their partner's movement so they're in and out. And it looks clumsy, it looks clumsy and chaotic at the start and it looks awful, right? But fighting isn't scored on aesthetics.

What do we expect from newer players, newer beginners? That's a feature, it's not a bug that the body seizes up. The body's trying to figure out, so it's trying to use every single—it's locking all these muscles and joints, and this is where we get this kind of clumsiness, this clunkiness. They call it like the degrees of freedom problem. And over time as they get more fluid, you'll see this come from almost any skill or movement, it starts to become more fluent and fluid and look more, as I say, aesthetically pleasing.

So I don't worry about that early on—how they look or how they're managing it. If the task or the goal, whether it being a striking would be to tag them with a punch or a kick in the belly button or in the front leg, the stuff kind of unfolds and takes care of itself.

James de Lacey12:36

Okay. And I'm going to take maybe some of the questions that people listening to this might have, and that might be: okay, they go into this, they run this approach, but they're not punching properly, striking properly, maybe they're not doing whatever technique is in the grappling properly, and therefore they're picking up bad habits going into as they progress down. Is that something that you see happen at all? Is that something that you're worried about at all, or does that iron itself out over time?

Scott Sieveweight13:02

Yes, I think it irons itself out over time. But I would throw the question—and I'm not trying to be evasive—but first of all, what does that mean, the correct technique? And lastly, what is a bad habit? Okay, I know what bad habits are, but we go back again to the validity of feedback.

I don't worry about bad habits because they'll kind of get ironed out in the wash as long as we're doing enough sparring, as long as we're doing a lot of live interaction where you're constantly testing things. These bad habits, likely if they do appear, they're going to get identified a little quicker through the live play and exchanges.

Now, this is interesting, right? Because when we're doing MMA, if we maybe perhaps just stick to just striking for that session and there's no threat of takedown, well not necessarily a bad habit, but you're going to find a strategy and a solution that works for striking that might not be optimal when you had takedowns. So these are ways we have to identify where we guide the learners and the what-ifs and trying to make it as holistic as possible.

I think we still do that in my gym. We'll separate the grappling because some people just want to grapple, some people just want to strike, and we still kind of break it apart a bit more than I'd like. But I think you should try and take the whole game in context.

Now what we say about the striking and doing it this way: because we don't encourage hard sparring and we don't encourage head contact when novices are just learning, the punches, the so-called correct techniques, they do take time because they're not the focus of the activities. The focus of the activities is distance management and picking up on affordances.

So the technical strikes or the technical movements, I think there's a good argument to be made that they take longer to come. But again, what is an ideal punch? For me, the ideal punch is the one that lands in the moment for that very, very specific and unique instance. That's what I really—

James de Lacey15:19

Some things will work better than others. That's why I really like this approach. And I think people, they tend to only get the stimulus from when they're doing hard sparring, hard rolling, and that's the only time they have it. The rest of the time spent, people only—the only real feedback, live feedback they get is when they go into hard sparring maybe once a week to really put it into context.

And that's why I really like this, because you can do your technical sparring and technical drills and have that feedback and be able to always react. The whole idea of agility, right? Where people will run through ladders and do all sorts of weird [expletive], but they won't actually stand in front of someone and react to whatever is happening in front of them that will actually transfer to their game, versus some flashing lights and then, "Oh, I improved my reaction time on the flashing lights," but what's that going to do?

Scott Sieveweight16:08

Well, there's so much of that, right? The flashing lights and the floor markers and stuff. And again, it doesn't take—it's a little bit of laziness. I get it, this is what we're seeing. I was a copy and paste coach for years, so I get it. But when we understand that agility is very much information-driven and specific to the actual very context, and it doesn't—that stuff doesn't—it starts to make less and less sense. So footwork and agility again will take care of itself over time if you design the practice appropriately and push people into different spaces.

James de Lacey16:33

It's interesting as well, like a lot of people will say they don't want to start maybe at home. Say they're looking to get into a martial art, they're not going to start at home by themselves for what I mentioned around, say, for example, bad habits and things. But it seems like a lot of these games someone could do with a partner and start themselves and not have to worry so much about that, even, say, without a coach, if they have the right designed, I guess, situational drills they could start themselves at home.

Scott Sieveweight16:59

Oh, I absolutely think they can start themselves at home if they get—I mean, is a coach helpful as a guide and design practice and find the appropriate level of challenge? I think that's where, for me, that's where the skill and what I'm trying to do as a coach comes in. It's not from micromanaging people's—we're speaking about, could a couple of guys get some mats in the garage and open YouTube and go for it? I think absolutely they can.

In fact, I think coaches can be more of a rate limiter as anything when—

They're constantly interfering and getting in the way and, as I say, micromanaging their students' movements and what they're expecting from the students. My expectations for beginners are extremely low, but at the same time I don't treat them like they're stroke victims. We're working with able-bodied athletes; they can pick that stuff up rather quickly.

So while I don't expect anything too much from them, I also know that as human bodies we're incredibly capable of wonderful things and learning at a rapid pace.

James de Lacey18:15

No, let's try and make this as practical as possible. There might be someone training at their martial arts gym—maybe they're generally just doing a lot of drills, pad work, heavy bag, drilling armbars and shrimping and whatnot—but they don't get as much time maybe being in front of someone, technical sparring, whatever it is. What are some situational games that they can do at home, maybe with a partner to work on? I know there's probably a lot depending on what you want to work on, but maybe just some general games that you like to go to normally for striking and grappling and things like that.

Scott Sieveweight18:45

Okay, so again I'm not trying to evade the question. Here's the thing: I will give an example of games, I just want to qualify this too, though. I think we're in an industry now that it's very much 'my technique's better than your technique' or 'I can explain this technique better than you can explain your technique.'

The whole concept of nonlinearity and ecological approaches—we don't really know if we do such and such, this will be the result of this. There is an inherent chaos in, as I said, nonlinear whole thing. So what we're doing is we're trying to find features, or call it invariance—we're trying to find key features of that either strategy or the tactic, and we'll start playing games to promote that.

Let me—from a grappling perspective, let's take a standing entanglement, right? So to be dominant in a standing clinch and entanglement, generally speaking you need to win the grip fighting for the inside space. You need to control the center mass and you're constantly trying to off-balance your partner.

And if we can play games like that just starting out—which might be, we do that a lot in our beginners class. We might, because we don't want to introduce takedowns too early because they're not quite comfortable, they're not quite confident, they're not quite sure where to put the body in space—so we'll start scaling up from there.

But it might be a simple over-under and they're going to jostle for position. So instead of that classic pummeling warm-up you see people doing, it's not a big jump from that, but they're going to start with over-under and they're going to fight to get the body lock. So all of a sudden you start to see them redistributing their weight, you see them fighting the grips, fighting natural levers and stuff. This all comes out organically every single time I do it.

And we'll build on games like that, and then over time you're going to scale up where you might ultimately get to just full-on wrestling or whatever, or full-on clinching. But you just pick the key concepts—the key invariants there don't really change. So it's just a space we push your learners into. I don't know if that quite answered your question in the game, so again, just knowing a game wouldn't—for me it's just like knowing a technique. It doesn't mean that much in and of itself.

For striking, what I like to do is a lot of lefty versus righty, because it encourages my students and my team to explore both stances. But I think it's also good for distance management, winning that front hand battle. I'm a big advocate of long guards in MMA, in controlling that space in front of you. So games like that, we just play a little game of tag, or you might have only your lead hand and your rear leg. And depending again on where the students are at, we'll add things and we'll subtract things.

It's really not that more difficult than that. And what happens over time with the games, once you get a game that you think is producing good results, you vary that game. Or if you think it's been a colossal disaster, you just scrap that and go into something else.

James de Lacey21:54

And by varying games, for example in that striking context, it might be only jabbing or only right hand, or you can only do certain movements, or changing the tempo. All these things would fill in that variation.

Scott Sieveweight22:19

Yeah, or you can do things to elicit footwork and lateral movement. You can do things to elicit combinations by saying 'I want you to move up and down the body if you can.' You split the body into the top, middle, bottom—see if you can move up and down the layers. That tends to promote and facilitate combinations appearing, and redirection and feints and fakes and all that.

So yeah, personally for me that's my endeavor now. I go in and I'll have some ideas of games, and then if the games seem to be really good and they're well received and I think they're working...

So the last thing I'll say about games is I think each coach has to—I have people reaching out to me all the time asking me what the game is to play, and to be honest I don't know. I just have some ideas and you'll pick it up over time. The important thing is not to expect too much and just see if you keep someone in a space long enough, and you start to see it appear within sparring or performance. That's some kind of validation or feedback that what you're actually doing is working, and it's transferring.

James de Lacey23:27

Within sparring itself, how often are you varying maybe hard sparring with some of these different constraints you're using?

Scott Sieveweight23:27

Well, I have a young team at the moment and I'm quite the Poiana when it comes to head trauma. I know you spoke with Gary Smiley Turner, so he bums me out every time I listen to him, right?

But again, it seems like I get on this conversation all the time when I'm on these discussions. But most of these kids are going to be hobbyists. Even the ones who do have lofty aspirations probably won't make it to the big, big, big leagues—we have to be honest. So I don't think there's a reasonable amount of head trauma you can take, but if they're going to fight and they'll bring it into it, it's important to be somewhat authentic and somewhat real.

But to answer your question, I actually—we actually don't do any hard sparring. Now when I mean hard sparring, we're not going hard to the head. What I'd rather do is put them into amateur matches, amateur competition, and get the feel for that. It's tough going hard because you have to switch it on and switch it off, and then teammates going against teammates and stuff, and then maybe they can't train.

If you're telling me a gym—which again, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm not really making a judgment on that—but if you say you're sparring hard once a week, for me that's probably a mild to—a mild concussion at least once a week, which is worrying. Because a lot of people now—Gary would say if Gary was to look at our practices, he'd probably say even the light stuff we do, because we do a lot of sparring, right?

So even the light head contact is going to have a cumulative effect, and I think he's probably right. I don't know how to balance it other than not do it at all. I know Gary, I think he does kickboxing now and stuff and he doesn't do any head contact. Well that's fair enough, but it flies kind of in the face of what we're trying to do, which is be real and authentic and representative.

So it's a balance. And some guys I'll let off leash a little more and some I'll protect a little more. But for us at our gym, it's just been creating that culture—they all respect the head shots, they respect each other as training partners. And I can put one of my heavyweight guys or one of my newer girls, and there's a lot of control and trust there with each other.

James de Lacey25:37

Yeah, that's really good. And I guess head contact is unavoidable at some point if you're going to fight, right? Like it's just part of the game unfortunately. But yeah, I like the idea, even with the sparring, it's light head contact. I guess around that 50% head contact is nice.

So if someone is—you mentioned obviously for someone who wants to fight, instead of doing hard sparring they might do some kind of amateur bout. How are you preparing them leading into that then, as a—

Still doing a lot of light sparring and then they have to make that jump in intensity for that fight just to get a feel for it? Or is there some way that you're ramping up that intensity of those sparring sessions?

Scott Sieveweight26:28

I don't know I have such a good answer for that. I mean, as you said, when we can get people we can trust and whatnot, I put my team through Pancrase first so that's non-head contact MMA, so it's full force, as hard as they can hit. It's just not to the head. I think that can help. I still don't think it's perfect, it's a perfect solution.

Now a lot of my team are just going in—we've only been open three years so we've been developing them slow—and they're starting to come into the MMA. I don't know if I have a great answer for that one.

James de Lacey26:52

No, it's all good.

Scott Sieveweight26:52

Now, it's not to say that we don't have harder sparring coming up to a fight. But I haven't yet been able to justify putting my guys in a cage and go whole hog just yet. Now, if we continue down this line and it appears that we're not able to get in the cage and that there's a big mismatch between the way we're sparring and the way the fight is, I think that's maybe something I'll have to revisit. So at the moment I'm saying okay, I'm just going to play it cautiously, put them in and see how it goes.

I know for myself I only had a few—like eight amateur fights in total between the three disciplines—and it took me five or six fights to really start settling down. And I see that. One thing I do want to—when anyone talks about fighting or this is one of my big frustrations, James—is especially striking coaches. Most coaches mean well, but sometimes, do you actually watch fighting?

James de Lacey27:44

Do you actually watch fighting?

Scott Sieveweight27:44

Because even at the highest level, it's nothing that fancy. I watch a lot. One at the moment, I love the kickboxing and the Muay Thai on ONE. It's singles—like strikes, single strikes, doubles, and triples for the most part. And then when they sense that blood, then they'll let it go.

But a lot of the stuff that I'm seeing on pads and the routines and the fluffy—the stepovers and the lateral movement and that—I think there's a huge disconnect there. I just don't see that really in fighting. Now occasionally, you'll see it. But then talking about the amateur levels, well that's just like bum fight after bum fight, to be honest.

And it is. So whether—again, like, if it's not showing up—if the stuff you're drilling is not showing up in the fights, and even at the highest level of fights it's not really showing up because it's more—it's pretty simple—then what's the answer? Are we not drilling enough? Or is perhaps the answer that there's really not a great deal of transfer?

James de Lacey29:08

Do you feel there's some value in learning maybe some of those fancier combinations or even fancier techniques just to have them in the toolbox? Or is it more just, hey, just the situation, you figure out how to land, et cetera, et cetera—you don't need to do all the other stuff?

Scott Sieveweight29:08

So this is disagreement between the ecological people. The really kind of hard-nosed ecological advocates would say no, you never strip the context away. I tend to be a little bit more on the middle. There's a lot of these techniques—spinning wheel kicks, all this kind of stuff, axe kicks—that we just can't work on our partners. The same thing with the way we spar, right? We're not really sitting down on our punches trying to knock each other out. So where will that power develop?

Yeah, that then sneaks in the opportunity. We can use pads and bags. So you asked about putting tools in your toolbox—I think the more tools you have in your toolbox the better, but just be nice that you know how to use the tools and when to use them.

James de Lacey30:00

It's interesting that you mentioned about the—okay, for power development and stuff, okay, you might have the pads and heavy bag. It's almost like the situational stuff that you're doing, the games, all those drills, those are there for technical development. You're learning the game, developing agility, reaction, all that kind of stuff. And then the actual pads and heavy bag is almost like conditioning, developing power just to kind of transfer or give you that taste of being able to, as you mentioned, sit on those punches or actually throw things at full power.

Scott Sieveweight30:24

No, I agree, and I think it is a conditioning tool. I think what happens when we say, okay, well, you have the space to be able to practice your techniques and then start putting them into context—well, again, that's the whole ecological approach kind of dismisses that.

My—so I'm not a—not just because I'm sick of getting inflamed elbows and whatnot and I don't want that—I don't hold pads really for my team. But they'll jump off to the side and do pad work and play around and use it as conditioning tools. So I just keep telling, it's a supplement, not a substitute.

James de Lacey30:49

And it's often used as, as you mentioned, as almost like the main part of sessions, right? That would be like a typical session. Maybe, I guess, a common way—maybe dive into how your session is structured versus maybe a traditional session in that aspect.

Scott Sieveweight31:16

So I think we're a bit—I think that can be a bit unfair to traditional system because I think it's kind of a mismatch. And when you—again, I didn't want to get worded today—but when you see things through an ecological lens, that we're always engaged dynamically with our environment and what we're trying to achieve, I don't think—I think even the traditional, the so-called traditional approach, is still ecological.

What I think they're doing is they're spending a lot of time robbing context or trying to develop in the context—it's not real or not going to transfer very well. In most gyms, most traditional gyms, they'll do their technical work, they'll have their situational work, and they'll do their sparring. And so to say that there's a true contrast between the two approaches, I think a little false. I think there's a strong overlap between them.

What we're trying to do is just say, well, parse out what's probably likely effective and what works the most and then just try and cram as much as that as we can into the learning hour. Our classes are quite short. So again, and then there's so many other variables, isn't there, James? How often you're training, how motivated you are, what kind of—how so-called coachable you are—are you actually trying to come in and work on your weaknesses and stuff? So there's a whole list of other things have to come together.

But so when I hear the traditional model, it's not so much that it's completely odds of an ecological model. I think there's great parts of the traditional model and it clearly works. I mean, you get tremendous fighters coming out with that system. Why we used to start poking fun—maybe the jiu-jitsu purist that will spend 15 minutes shrimping up and down—I mean, for me that's absurd.

It's just absurd. Because it makes no sense to me. What does it do? It bores [expletive] out of everyone. No one wants to do that. I mean, if someone says they like drilling or they like shrimping, okay, I mean, if you do, fair enough. And maybe there's a ritualistic aspect to it that comes in and switches you on. But why waste everyone's time?

James de Lacey33:08

And all coaches all rationalize, well, it's a fundamental movement, you need this, you need the shrimping movement, you'll never be able to get outside side pin or whatever. I don't buy all that. I think it's horse [expletive] for the most part.

Scott Sieveweight33:32

I agree with you. I mean, that's 15 minutes wasted of an hour class doing that. And you can shrimp well—it's 50 minutes, but that's 25%. And you can shrimp perfectly in those drills, but you have someone on you in side control and then they're moving around and you shrimp and try to get on your side, but they've got their hands in different places, they've got their body weight in different places. And you're trying to get that shrimp going—doesn't always work.

James de Lacey33:55

And that's something I am seeing less of that. Whether it was just algorithms or was sensitive to it—every time you open any kind of Instagram, you would see all that nonsense. But I'm seeing less and less of it. So I think a lot of the more progressive gyms that are doing well, moving towards a bit more gameness and liveliness. Again, right back to the start, we're saying it's situational—it's just situational sparring. Well, no, but kind of nice.

All right, I think we'll finish this one here. We had a few technical difficulties through this. I'm going to edit it all together and make sure hopefully it sounds all right. But if people want to find you, Scott, where can they do that?

Scott Sieveweight34:46

So, and by the way, I came across your podcast a month or so ago when I—because I'm always taking my head out of my ass and looking—what if Gary's—Gary Turner has been on any podcast now occasionally, so that's—

How I came across him, that's how I came across John McKee. So good stuff, I see you pumping out that content. I run my own training podcast, the Primal MMA Training Podcast, which again I like to get other coaches like yourself, academics and whatnot.

But you can hit up the gym on Primal MKE on Instagram. Give us a follow if you want or reach out, tell me I'm full of [expletive] or ask me questions, whatever. I like talking with coaches.

I'm definitely trying... Again, I think part of the earlier when I was trying to communicate this stuff, I'd try and use fluffier words than were necessary to get my point across, and that's been an epic [expletive] disaster. So I'm just going to try and speak like a coach speaks, and as I say, I feel I've got a decent grasp of what I'm trying to do.

So I can answer questions, but yeah, I'm always up for pushback.

James de Lacey36:03

Perfect. I'll link those up in the description too when this goes up. But thanks for coming on, Scott. I appreciate it.

Scott Sieveweight36:03

No worries, and appreciate you. Keep up the good fight. Bye.

James de Lacey36:03

Cheers.