Game Planning

Game Planning is a medium complexity BJJ principle applicable at the Intermediate level. Develop over Intermediate to Expert.

Principle ID: Application Level: Intermediate Complexity: Medium Development Timeline: Intermediate to Expert

What is Game Planning?

Game Planning represents the strategic framework for developing comprehensive pre-match strategies that optimize technique selection, energy allocation, and tactical approaches based on your strengths, opponent characteristics, rule set parameters, and match objectives. Unlike spontaneous reactive rolling, game planning involves systematic analysis and preparation that creates coherent strategic approaches to matches, training rounds, and competition scenarios. This concept encompasses the analytical processes, self-assessment frameworks, opponent evaluation methods, and tactical decision-making structures required to construct effective match strategies before engagement begins. Game planning serves as both an offensive blueprint that guides your proactive approach and a defensive framework that prepares responses to likely opponent strategies. The ability to construct and execute effective game plans often determines whether a practitioner fights with coordinated strategy or simply reacts to circumstances, making it one of the most essential conceptual elements for competition success and accelerated development.

Core Components

• Game plans should be built around your highest-percentage positions and techniques rather than aspirational skills
• Effective game plans identify 2-3 primary pathways to victory based on realistic assessment of abilities
• Plans must account for likely opponent strategies and include specific counters to their strengths
• Energy allocation should be planned in advance based on match duration and rule set
• Successful game plans have clear decision points where you choose between alternative branches
• Competition game plans should optimize for rule set specifics (points, advantages, penalties)
• Plans require contingencies for when primary approaches are defended or countered
• Game planning includes mental preparation and visualization of planned sequences
• Effective plans balance offensive initiative with defensive preparedness

Component Skills

Self-Assessment and Strengths Analysis: The ability to objectively evaluate your technical repertoire, identifying which positions, transitions, and submissions you execute most reliably under pressure. This includes honest analysis of competition results, training performance, and technical proficiency across different scenarios to determine your actual high-percentage game rather than techniques you merely practice.

Opponent Analysis and Pattern Recognition: The systematic study of opponent tendencies through video analysis, reputation research, and observation of previous matches to identify technical preferences, positional comfort zones, defensive weaknesses, and strategic patterns. This skill involves extracting actionable intelligence that can be exploited through deliberate tactical approaches.

Rule Set Optimization: Understanding how different competition rule sets (IBJJF, ADCC, submission-only, etc.) reward different strategies, and tailoring game plans to maximize advantages while minimizing penalties within specific regulatory frameworks. This includes knowledge of point values, time limits, legal techniques, and strategic implications of rule variations.

Energy Management Strategy: Planning energy expenditure across match duration by identifying when to apply maximum pressure, when to conserve energy, and how to pace efforts based on match length and opponent style. This includes understanding your cardio capabilities and creating strategies that work within your conditioning limits.

Contingency Planning: Developing backup strategies and alternative pathways when primary game plan elements are successfully defended or countered by opponents. This skill involves identifying branch points where you transition from plan A to plan B, ensuring you maintain strategic coherence even when facing unexpected resistance.

Mental Rehearsal and Visualization: The practice of mentally executing planned sequences, visualizing specific scenarios, and mentally preparing responses to likely situations before they occur in actual competition. This includes developing mental triggers that cue specific technical responses during matches.

Strategic Flexibility and Adaptation: The ability to recognize when game plan modifications are needed mid-match and make tactical adjustments while maintaining overall strategic coherence. This skill balances commitment to prepared strategies with opportunistic recognition of better alternatives as they emerge.

Post-Match Analysis: Systematic evaluation of game plan effectiveness after matches, identifying which elements succeeded, which failed, and why. This includes honest assessment of execution quality versus strategic planning quality, and using these insights to refine future game planning approaches.

Related Principles

• Match Strategy (Complementary): Match Strategy focuses on in-match tactical decision-making while Game Planning provides the pre-match framework that guides those real-time decisions. Effective game planning creates the strategic foundation that match strategy executes.
• Match Preparation (Prerequisite): Match preparation provides the broader framework of physical, technical, and mental readiness within which game planning operates. Game planning cannot succeed without adequate preparation in conditioning, technique refinement, and mental readiness.
• Positional Hierarchy (Prerequisite): Understanding positional hierarchy is essential for game planning as it determines which positions you seek to achieve and which you seek to avoid. Game plans are fundamentally pathways through positional hierarchy toward dominant positions.
• Energy Management System (Complementary): Energy management principles inform how game plans allocate effort across match duration. Effective game planning incorporates energy management strategies to ensure technical execution throughout entire matches.
• System Building (Extension): System Building represents the development of cohesive technical systems that become the building blocks of game plans. Game planning connects individual systems into comprehensive strategic frameworks for specific competitive scenarios.
• Risk Assessment (Complementary): Risk assessment helps determine which strategic approaches are appropriate for specific match scenarios and opponents. Game planning uses risk assessment to balance aggressive and conservative elements based on match importance and position.
• Competition Mindset (Complementary): Competition mindset provides the mental framework that enables effective game plan execution under pressure. Game planning requires the competitive mentality to commit to prepared strategies despite stress and uncertainty.
• Dilemma Creation (Extension): Dilemma creation principles inform how game plans construct attack sequences that force opponents into no-win scenarios. Effective game planning incorporates deliberate dilemma structures into strategic approaches.
• Position Chains (Extension): Position chains represent the linked sequences of positions that form the pathways within game plans. Game planning connects position chains into comprehensive strategic frameworks with clear progression logic.
• Offensive Combinations (Extension): Offensive combinations are the tactical building blocks that game plans organize into coherent strategic sequences. Game planning determines which combinations to emphasize based on opponent weaknesses and your technical strengths.

Application Contexts

Closed Guard: Game plans from closed guard determine whether to prioritize sweeps, submissions, or transitions to other guard systems based on opponent passing style and your highest-percentage attacks. Planning includes identifying specific sweep-submission combinations and contingencies for when opponent establishes strong posture or begins passing sequences.

Mount: Game planning for mount involves predetermined attack sequences that create submission dilemmas, with clear decision trees for transitioning between collar chokes, armbars, and positional advances based on defensive responses. Plans include energy allocation for maintaining position versus pursuing submissions.

Back Control: Game plans for back attacks prioritize specific choking sequences while planning for common escape attempts, with predetermined responses to hand fighting and body positioning changes. Strategic planning includes when to pursue immediate submission versus controlling position for longer duration.

Half Guard: Game planning from half guard determines whether to prioritize underhook battles, lockdown control, or transitions to deep half based on opponent’s passing style and positional preferences. Plans include specific sweep sequences and submission setups that align with your technical strengths.

De La Riva Guard: Strategic planning from De La Riva includes predetermined sequences for berimbolo attempts, back takes, and sweeps based on opponent’s balance and gripping responses. Game plans account for transitions to other open guard systems when primary attacks are defended.

Side Control: Game plans for side control include specific submission sequences, transition timing to mount or north-south, and energy allocation for maintaining pressure versus pursuing advancement. Strategic planning determines when to consolidate position versus when to advance based on opponent’s defensive capabilities.

Open Guard: Game planning for open guard determines which specific guard systems to employ based on opponent’s passing style, with predetermined transitions between spider, lasso, De La Riva, and other variations. Plans include recognition points for when to stand up, when to pull closed guard, and when to invert.

Butterfly Guard: Game plans from butterfly guard prioritize specific sweep directions and submission setups based on opponent’s base and weight distribution. Strategic planning includes transitions to X-guard or single-leg X when sweeps are defended and predetermined responses to smash passing attempts.

Ashi Garami: Strategic planning for leg entanglement positions determines specific submission sequences, positional transitions between ashi variations, and defensive responses to common opponent counters. Game plans account for rule set legality and include pathways to legal positions when needed.

X-Guard: Game planning from X-guard includes specific sweep directions based on opponent stance and balance, with predetermined submission setups and transitions to other guard systems when primary attacks are defended. Strategic decisions include when to maintain position versus when to sweep immediately.

Standing Position: Game planning for match openings determines takedown attempts versus guard pulling based on opponent tendencies and rule set advantages. Strategic decisions include grip fighting approaches, when to engage versus when to disengage, and energy expenditure in opening exchanges.

Turtle: Strategic planning for turtle position includes predetermined sequences for back takes, rolling attacks, or guard recovery based on opponent’s control methods. Game plans determine when to stay defensive versus when to explode into transitions or stand-ups.

Spider Guard: Game plans from spider guard prioritize specific sweep angles and submission entries based on opponent’s posture and gripping responses. Strategic planning includes transitions to triangle setups, omoplata attacks, and alternative guard systems when primary attacks are neutralized.

Knee on Belly: Strategic planning for knee on belly includes specific submission sequences, timing for transitions to mount or side control, and decision points for when to apply maximum pressure versus when to advance positions. Game plans optimize point scoring while maintaining positional security.

North-South: Game planning for north-south includes predetermined submission sequences, transition timing back to side control or mount, and energy allocation for choke attempts. Strategic decisions determine when to maintain control versus when to pursue immediate submissions.

Decision Framework

1. Assess your technical strengths and highest-percentage positions: Conduct honest inventory of competition results and training performance to identify which positions, transitions, and submissions you execute most reliably under pressure, forming the foundation of your strategic approach
2. Analyze opponent tendencies and technical patterns: Study available footage, competitive record, and reputation to identify opponent’s preferred positions, common attack sequences, defensive weaknesses, and strategic tendencies that can be exploited
3. Determine optimal pathways based on strengths versus opponent weaknesses: Identify 2-3 primary strategic pathways that leverage your strengths against opponent’s weaknesses while accounting for rule set optimization and realistic success probabilities
4. Plan energy allocation across match duration: Determine when to apply maximum pressure, when to conserve energy, and how to pace efforts based on match length, your conditioning capabilities, and opponent’s likely energy management approach
5. Develop contingency plans for defended primary approaches: Create backup strategies with clear decision points for transitioning from plan A to plan B when opponent successfully defends primary attacks, ensuring strategic coherence despite unexpected resistance
6. Visualize specific scenarios and technical sequences: Mentally rehearse planned positions, transitions, and submissions with detailed visualization of opponent responses and your counter-responses, developing mental triggers for automatic technical execution
7. Execute game plan while maintaining strategic flexibility: Commit to prepared strategies while remaining alert for better opportunities, balancing plan adherence with opportunistic adaptation when superior alternatives emerge during actual competition
8. Conduct post-match analysis of game plan effectiveness: Evaluate which strategic elements succeeded, which failed, and whether failures resulted from poor planning or poor execution, using insights to refine future game planning approaches and technical development priorities

Common Mistakes

• Mistake: Building game plans around aspirational techniques rather than proven high-percentage skills
  • Consequence: Strategic approaches rely on techniques that fail under competition pressure, leading to reactive scrambling when planned attacks don’t materialize and inability to execute coherent strategy
  • Correction: Base game plans exclusively on techniques you have successfully executed in hard training and previous competitions, accepting current technical level and planning around actual capabilities rather than wished-for abilities
• Mistake: Creating overly complex game plans with too many options and decision branches
  • Consequence: Mental paralysis during matches as you struggle to remember complex decision trees, leading to hesitation, missed opportunities, and reversion to instinctive rather than strategic behavior
  • Correction: Limit game plans to 2-3 primary pathways with clear, simple decision points, ensuring you can remember and execute strategic elements even under maximum competitive stress
• Mistake: Failing to account for likely opponent strategies and common defensive patterns
  • Consequence: Game plan collapses when opponent defends primary approaches effectively, leaving you without prepared responses and forcing reactive rather than strategic adaptation
  • Correction: Include specific contingency plans for most likely opponent defenses, with predetermined alternative approaches when primary pathways are blocked or countered
• Mistake: Ignoring rule set specifics and point optimization in strategic planning
  • Consequence: Pursuing strategies that don’t maximize advantages within specific rule sets, potentially losing matches despite technical superiority due to poor strategic alignment with scoring system
  • Correction: Tailor game plans explicitly to rule set requirements, understanding point values, advantage systems, and penalties to optimize strategic approaches for specific competitive frameworks
• Mistake: Planning energy expenditure unrealistically relative to actual conditioning capabilities
  • Consequence: Exhaustion before match completion, inability to execute techniques in later stages, and vulnerability to opponent’s attacks when too fatigued to defend effectively
  • Correction: Plan energy allocation conservatively based on proven conditioning levels, building in energy reserves and pacing strategies that ensure technical execution throughout entire match duration
• Mistake: Abandoning prepared game plans too quickly when facing initial resistance
  • Consequence: Reverting to random reactive grappling at first sign of difficulty, wasting pre-match preparation and losing strategic advantages that come from coordinated approach
  • Correction: Commit to game plan elements through initial resistance unless clearly non-viable, allowing strategic approaches time to develop rather than abandoning them prematurely
• Mistake: Failing to visualize and mentally rehearse planned sequences before competition
  • Consequence: Unable to execute game plan elements smoothly under pressure, missing opportunities because technical sequences aren’t mentally prepared and automatic
  • Correction: Dedicate significant time to mental rehearsal and visualization of planned scenarios, developing mental triggers that automatically cue appropriate technical responses during matches

Training Methods

Positional Sparring with Game Plan Focus (Focus: Developing automatic execution of game plan elements through repeated practice in realistic resistance scenarios that simulate competition positioning) Conduct positional training rounds starting from specific positions central to your game plan, with exclusive focus on executing planned sequences and transitions rather than random exploration

Video Analysis Sessions (Focus: Building opponent analysis skills and self-assessment capabilities through structured observation and pattern recognition rather than casual video watching) Regular systematic study of your own competition footage and potential opponent footage, identifying patterns, tendencies, strategic opportunities, and technical details that inform game planning

Simulated Match Scenarios (Focus: Testing game plan viability under conditions that closely approximate actual competition, revealing strategic weaknesses and execution difficulties before they emerge in tournaments) Training rounds structured to simulate specific competitive scenarios with predetermined starting positions, time limits, and rule sets that mirror planned competition conditions

Mental Rehearsal and Visualization Practice (Focus: Developing mental preparation capabilities and automatic response triggers through systematic visualization that complements physical training) Dedicated time outside physical training for detailed mental rehearsal of planned sequences, opponent responses, and your counter-responses with vivid sensory detail

Strategic Debriefing Sessions (Focus: Accelerating strategic development through structured reflection and expert feedback rather than relying solely on personal post-training analysis) Post-training analysis with coaches or training partners to evaluate game plan elements, discuss strategic decisions, and refine planning approaches based on training results

Rule Set Specific Training (Focus: Developing rule set fluency and strategic optimization skills by training under actual competitive constraints rather than defaulting to standard training room rules) Training rounds conducted under specific rule sets you’ll compete under, with conscious attention to point optimization, legal techniques, and strategic implications of regulatory frameworks

Mastery Indicators

Beginner Level:

• Can identify 1-2 favorite positions or techniques they prefer to work toward
• Understands basic match objectives (submit opponent, achieve dominant position, avoid being submitted)
• Begins to recognize when random reactive grappling differs from strategic approach
• Can articulate simple preferences (“I want to pull guard” or “I want to pass and get to mount”)

Intermediate Level:

• Develops coherent pathways connecting 3-4 positions in logical sequence toward submission or points
• Conducts basic self-assessment to identify highest-percentage techniques from training performance
• Creates simple game plans with primary approach and one backup option when primary is defended
• Begins opponent analysis through observation and discussion rather than random engagement approach
• Demonstrates some mental preparation and visualization before matches rather than purely reactive approach

Advanced Level:

• Constructs comprehensive game plans with multiple pathways, clear decision points, and specific contingencies
• Conducts sophisticated opponent analysis using video study, pattern recognition, and strategic weakness identification
• Optimizes strategies for specific rule sets with conscious attention to point maximization and legal constraints
• Executes planned sequences automatically under pressure with minimal conscious decision-making required
• Maintains strategic flexibility while executing game plans, adapting when better opportunities emerge
• Conducts systematic post-match analysis to refine planning approaches based on competition results

Expert Level:

• Creates layered game plans that function as decision trees with dozens of predetermined responses to opponent actions
• Conducts professional-level opponent analysis extracting subtle technical details and strategic patterns others miss
• Balances game plan commitment with opportunistic adaptation seamlessly without losing strategic coherence
• Mental preparation includes detailed visualization of specific opponent tendencies and planned counter-strategies
• Post-match analysis distinguishes execution failures from planning failures with precise attribution
• Teaches game planning concepts effectively to others through systematic frameworks and structured approaches

Related Content

• Match Strategy (Principle) - Complementary principle focusing on in-match tactical decision-making that executes game plan frameworks
• Match Preparation (Principle) - Related principle covering immediate pre-match readiness including warm-up, mental state, and final preparations
• Competition Mindset (Principle) - Mental framework that enables effective game plan execution under competitive pressure
• Positional Hierarchy (Principle) - Foundational principle that determines which positions game plans seek to achieve or avoid
• Energy Management System (Principle) - Principles for allocating effort across match duration that inform game planning energy strategies
• System Building (Principle) - Development of cohesive technical systems that become building blocks for comprehensive game plans
• Risk Assessment (Principle) - Evaluation framework that helps balance aggressive and conservative game plan elements
• Dilemma Creation (Principle) - Strategic principle for constructing attack sequences that force opponents into no-win scenarios
• Competition Preparation System (System) - Broader system providing physical, technical, and mental readiness within which game planning operates
• Mental Game Framework (System) - Psychological preparation system that supports effective game planning and execution

Expert Insights

• John Danaher: Game planning represents one of the most underutilized advantages available to competitive grapplers, as the vast majority approach matches with vague intentions rather than systematic strategic frameworks. The essence of effective game planning lies in honest self-assessment rather than wishful thinking—you must build plans around techniques you can actually execute under maximum pressure, not techniques you aspire to perform someday. I teach students to construct hierarchical decision trees where they identify their strongest positions and highest-percentage pathways, then create strategic frameworks that maximize time spent in those positions while minimizing exposure to weaknesses. The most sophisticated game plans function as layered systems where when opponent successfully defends one layer, you seamlessly transition to the next with equally prepared alternatives, creating the impression of endless strategic depth. Game planning should never be rigid—the plan provides structure and direction while maintaining space for opportunistic adaptation when superior options emerge during actual engagement.
• Gordon Ryan: I spend more time on game planning and opponent analysis than almost any other competitor, studying hours of footage to identify specific technical weaknesses and strategic patterns I can exploit systematically during matches. My game plans focus on what I call forced exchanges—situations I deliberately create that favor my technical strengths while neutralizing my opponent’s best techniques, essentially controlling what kind of match we have rather than reacting to their preferred game. The key is building plans around techniques that have proven reliable in previous high-level competitions rather than techniques that merely look impressive in training room rolling but haven’t been tested under championship-level pressure. I constantly refine my game planning approach based on competition results, honestly assessing which strategic elements worked, which failed, and making adjustments for future matches. The mental preparation component is equally important—I visualize specific scenarios and opponent responses so thoroughly that actual matches feel like repetitions I’ve already completed mentally dozens of times, removing surprise and uncertainty from competitive execution.
• Eddie Bravo: My approach to game planning emphasizes what I call confusion strategy, where the game plan deliberately includes unorthodox positions and techniques that opponents haven’t trained to defend, creating psychological disruption that’s as valuable as technical execution. When I teach game planning to students, I stress flexibility and opportunism—treat detailed plans as general guidelines while remaining completely ready to abandon them when better opportunities emerge during actual rolling. I believe in game plans that keep opponents mentally uncomfortable through unfamiliar positions and attack patterns, because when they’re confused and uncertain, their technical execution degrades regardless of their actual skill level. The 10th Planet system’s strength in competition often comes from strategic surprise—opponents prepare for conventional guard passing or back attacks, then face rubber guard controls or truck positions they’ve barely encountered, forcing them to problem-solve in real-time rather than executing prepared defenses. Game planning should include this psychological dimension, not just technical pathways, understanding that mental disruption creates openings that pure technical execution might not achieve.