Combat Jiu-Jitsu with Matt Bryers

[drop bear]

Oops, forgot Drop Bear.

Here's one from December. You'll see me on the left (starting the camera).

Also, check on the nice slam off the wall by our wrestling coach about a minute in.

by the way i am going to use this vid the next time someone mentions that in sparring you only have to worry about the guy in front of you.

 

[drop bear]

I did catch that slam by the way. And the dirty beck crank knee ride finish.

We are are very different in style. It would be interesting to try yours out. If you ever hit Australia. Pop in.

 

[Matt Bryers]

I teach a very brutal, simplest and creative style. The way I fight maybe vastly different than my students, but with experience, they test and develop their own "style" . Yet we're all still doing Jiu-Jitsu / martial arts and studying the art of combat.

It's truly amazing to watch them... Evolve.

Side note, that was a knee on belly "ride" to the solar plexus. Our BJJ coach, Formiga, does it to all of us. It's so simple, and you think it shouldn't work because... Who actually submits to a knee on belly.... But it's quite brutal and effective.

 

[drop bear]

I teach a very brutal, simplest and creative style. The way I fight maybe vastly different than my students, but with experience, they test and develop their own "style" . Yet we're all still doing Jiu-Jitsu / martial arts and studying the art of combat.

It's truly amazing to watch them... Evolve.

Side note, that was a knee on belly "ride" to the solar plexus. Our BJJ coach, Formiga, does it to all of us. It's so simple, and you think it shouldn't work because... Who actually submits to a knee on belly.... But it's quite brutal and effective.

we are very mma stand up wrestle,scramble.

I havve had it done to me and it is the balls. Even if I do defend it it just sucks the life out of me.

 

[Matt Bryers]

Ah very nice!

And yes, "sucks the life out of you" is a great way to describe it.

 

[Transk53]

Side note, that was a knee on belly "ride" to the solar plexus. Our BJJ coach, Formiga, does it to all of us. It's so simple, and you think it shouldn't work because... Who actually submits to a knee on belly.... But it's quite brutal and effective.

Sounds like something a Klingon would do. Knee to the solar plexus. Sorry I am not up on BJJ terminology. "Knee on belly ride" Figure of speech, or an actual technique?

 

[kuniggety]

Knee on belly is actually a very descriptively named technique. It's used more in gi than no-gi but you're on top of someone and have one of your shins across the belly of the person below you. If you want to bring the pressure on (which is already there), you bring your leg up a bit to the solar plexus. When you've got someone 10kg+ more than you doing this to you, it's one of the most uncomfortable positions ever to try to fight/defend from.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sounds like something a Klingon would do. Knee to the solar plexus. Sorry I am not up on BJJ terminology. "Knee on belly ride" Figure of speech, or an actual technique?

The standard variation is actually more "shin across waist" than knee on belly. The knee on solar plexus variation mentioned above is meaner, but less stable.

 

[Transk53]

Knee on belly is actually a very descriptively named technique. It's used more in gi than no-gi but you're on top of someone and have one of your shins across the belly of the person below you. If you want to bring the pressure on (which is already there), you bring your leg up a bit to the solar plexus. When you've got someone 10kg+ more than you doing this to you, it's one of the most uncomfortable positions ever to try to fight/defend from.

Yeah sounds it. Someone of my weight would be very uncomfortable. Thanks for the info

 

[Transk53]

The standard variation is actually more "shin across waist" than knee on belly. The knee on solar plexus variation mentioned above is meaner, but less stable.

I take it because he only has one leg stabilizing his posture. Which I assume if the fella below manages to manoeuvre to the left, he would him off balance? Just wondering if fella whom is pinned, could he effectively throw that right knee into the shoulder region and knock off balance. Just curious as how much pressure is being applied on the hold?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Which I assume if the fella below manages to manoeuvre to the left, he would him off balance?

Many of the escapes do involve shrimping away from the top person while inserting some sort of frame to keep the opponent from following. The top person won't usually be thrown very far off balance, though. It's a very mobile position and the top person can easily transition to standing or to side control.

Just wondering if fella whom is pinned, could he effectively throw that right knee into the shoulder region and knock off balance.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you talking about the bottom person using his own right knee to throw his opponent off balance or shoving his opponent's knee? There are difficulties either way.

Just curious as how much pressure is being applied on the hold?

Depending on how big the top person is and how he uses his/her weight it can range from mildly uncomfortable* to "oh my god, make it stop!" Some of the meaner variations** sacrifice a certain degree of stability and mobility in exchange for making the opponent suffer more.

*(Bear in mind that once you've been grappling for a while, your notion of what qualifies as "mildly uncomfortable" may evolve.)

**(If you want to be really mean, there's always "knee on neck" and "knee on jaw." These positions will not make you popular with your sparring partners. Discretion is advised.)

 

[Matt Bryers]

Depending on how big the top person is and how he uses his/her weight it can range from mildly uncomfortable* to "oh my god, make it stop!" Some of the meaner variations** sacrifice a certain degree of stability and mobility in exchange for making the opponent suffer more.

That's the key right there. The ability to use your weight and pinpoint that weight into your knee makes it extremely uncomfortable.

The knee on belly position is one I use all the time due to its mobility and the response it produces in your opponent.

 

[Transk53]

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you talking about the bottom person using his own right knee to throw his opponent off balance or shoving his opponent's knee? There are difficulties either way.

I did indeed. That is what I meant by pinned. I thought the guy on the bottom could launch his knee into the fella on top

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I did indeed. That is what I meant by pinned. I thought the guy on the bottom could launch his knee into the fella on top

Not very effectively in most cases. The bottom guy has his hips pinned to the floor and the top guys pinning shin is already very close to the bottom guys hip, so all you can usually get is a very weak bump with the top of your thigh.

 

[Transk53]

Not very effectively in most cases. The bottom guy has his hips pinned to the floor and the top guys pinning shin is already very close to the bottom guys hip, so all you can usually get is a very weak bump with the top of your thigh.

Right, yeah get it. I discounted the other guys leg for some reason.

 

[drop bear]

Many of the escapes do involve shrimping away from the top person while inserting some sort of frame to keep the opponent from following. The top person won't usually be thrown very far off balance, though. It's a very mobile position and the top person can easily transition to standing or to side control.



I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you talking about the bottom person using his own right knee to throw his opponent off balance or shoving his opponent's knee? There are difficulties either way.



Depending on how big the top person is and how he uses his/her weight it can range from mildly uncomfortable* to "oh my god, make it stop!" Some of the meaner variations** sacrifice a certain degree of stability and mobility in exchange for making the opponent suffer more.

*(Bear in mind that once you've been grappling for a while, your notion of what qualifies as "mildly uncomfortable" may evolve.)

**(If you want to be really mean, there's always "knee on neck" and "knee on jaw." These positions will not make you popular with your sparring partners. Discretion is advised.)

we had a wrestling coach knee on everything one of our guys for a five minute set as a lesson not to be a duchebag. He made the guy cry.

 

[drop bear]

That's the key right there. The ability to use your weight and pinpoint that weight into your knee makes it extremely uncomfortable.

The knee on belly position is one I use all the time due to its mobility and the response it produces in your opponent. View attachment 19166View attachment 19167

Yep.. That is the knee on belly face.

 

[Chris Parker]

Okay, back after some internet issues… and there's a few things I'd like to clarify.

Really? LOL, I think it's safe to say that we both know what I'm talking about, but for the sake of discussion: let's see...mcdojo's, people who make up their own art, people who claim multiple high ranks in multiple arts, people claiming no touch KO's. I mean really Chris, all it takes is a look through some old threads on this forum and a search on you tube, and, well, you know what I mean.

Then let's look at the bolded form of "BS", yeah? That's really where some of this is coming from. Now, to be clear, creating an evolving system, as Matt is doing, isn't an issue in and of itself… it's when certain claims are made that are patently false, or inaccurate.

OK. Well, Matt apparently thought they were fine, I thought they were fine, but apparently they weren't.

I'm going to address this more with Steve's post in a bit, but no, Matt's answers weren't "fine". The only way that they can be seen to be fine is to not understand the questions I asked, or to not actually read the two posts (my questions and his "answers") next to each other. This isn't a "difference of opinion" situation.

LOL, actually we need to look no further than the Buj itself. We both know all the controversy that revolves around that art. Yet those same people that train it, swear that all is legit. My point, and probably Matt's point too, is that sure it is important, but harping on it like what's happening here? That proves what?

The Bujinkan is an interesting case-study… if the claim is simply that Hatsumi studied under Takamatsu, then there's no controversy… even with Takamatsu himself, there is support and validation of a number of his arts, and his teachers of them… it's only some of the traditions, and one teacher of Takamatsu's, that lends the controversy, realistically… and, even there, there is some support.

But, honestly, that's fairly removed from the situation I described. And the thing is, I get Matt's point (and yours)… but it's really fairly irrelevant in this occasion. My questions were about the history and claims of the system… and I was asking the head instructor of a school for the system… saying "well, it doesn't matter" doesn't cut it, frankly.

Ky d - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hey, I wasn't even thought of when that art was around. Did it serve a purpose back then? Maybe. Does it serve one today? Some things are done simply to honor tradition. But who is going to fight with a bow and arrow today?

"Back then", Mike??? "When that art was around"??? Kyudo is a modern variation on older forms of Japanese archery… it was only really "formed" in 1953, when the initial maul was published… and is absolutely "still around"… it's not about "honouring tradition", you realise… and, as far as practical archery, well, that's more in line with hunting than anything else (although that's really not a consideration in Kyudo), but you might as well ask if anyone fights with an epee anymore, and if not, why have fencing in the Olympics?

But, realistically, that's kinda my point… I was using Kyudo as an example of martial arts not being "about fighting"… so… you're agreeing with me?

No way in hell I'm reading all that. From skimming:

Yeah… perhaps you should have read it properly. Once more, then?

• Yes I care, I explained before, just not my focus. What I teach I am sure is vastly different than previous "generations". But still using the "framework" of JJJ.

That's the thing, Matt… what you're teaching, from all indications, your posts, the videos, and what I've been able to find, shows that you absolutely do not use "the 'framework' of JJJ"… bluntly, I don't think you have the first idea what that would be. Your description earlier is most closely related to the basic, kihon section of some systems… which all comes well and truly before the actual "framework" of JJJ. But, really, this is not answering my question, other than to show that I was correct in my first assessment.

• Yes lineage is important, I posted my lineage above, but have trained with many MMA fighters / grapplers who are extremely talented, but would have no clue where their art came from. So if you're using lineage as your way to "validate yourself". Cool. I'd rather prove it.

The claim is that Kobukai is traditional… and that it is a form of Japanese Jujutsu (note the spelling)… also that it has "deep roots in JJJ"… after all, it bears a "Japanese" name (after a fashion). Lineage is the only thing that matters in that regard. I don't really care what you can or can't do, that's not the point, the question, or the focus I've been looking at.

I still don't see a relevant question.

Really? Look, I'm going to state them again, as clearly as I can…

The Kobukai Jujitsu system is promoted as being "traditional", as well as being either Japanese Jujutsu, or closely related to Japanese Jujutsu. All the evidence points to none of that being the case. As a result, I am asking whether or not there is anything in the history (that I haven't found through my searches) which does back up these claims? If not, why are such claims being made?

You eventually answered (partially) the name question, so I'm not rehashing that.

If your ultimate question is "Is Kobukai Ju-Jitsu" a traditional Japanese Martial Art that was practiced in the Samurai ages.... then no.

Good lord, Matt, no, that is not my question. The insistence on that qualification has not been a part of any question I've asked… I even clarified that when Tony put forth the idea that that was what I was asking (if it was claiming to be Koryu… believe me, if that was your claim, it would have been blasted out of the water in seconds flat, and I would have absolutely no need to ask you for any clarification).

The question is "are the claims being made, that Kobukai Jujitsu is traditional and Japanese, or Japanese based, correct?"

But I'm glad it's not! I tried in many different Jiu-Jitsu schools before KJJ and KJJ was the only one where I experienced students and instructors that knew their stuff.

Look, to be blunt, I don't think you've ever seen anything like actual traditional Jujutsu… but even then, I don't think you'd enjoy it much. It's just too different from what you think is important, honestly. I will say, though, that I doubt that the KJJ guys are the first who "knew their stuff"… realistically, they're the first you came across who's views and perceptions matched yours, and whose approach matched what you thought it should be like. My perspective, as I'm sure you'd expect, would give quite a different appraisal.

Lastly, you state that you have no issue with me, but it comes off quite different. You sound very arrogant, and like you're trying to prove something. Kinda annoying.

Honestly, Matt, I don't have an issue with you, and I'm not trying to prove anything. I was asking about the system you teach, as my interest is in traditional Japanese arts, and the systems they spawned… you have consistently missed the point, misunderstood the questions, failed to address what I've been talking about and asking, and more. When I've attempted to clarify, you've gotten huffy, and are now refusing to even engage?

I'm going to put it simply. I asked about the system you're the head instructor for. If that's annoying, as you don't have the answers, or the education to understand the questions, then I suggest you take a look at what you're teaching, and how well you understand it.

Oh, and arrogant? Sure… not an uncommon comment where I'm concerned… but here's the thing… my "arrogance" is based in knowing what I'm talking about.

In this particular thread, I am done having a discussion with you.

I really don't think it bodes well for the head instructor of a system to throw a fit just because they were asked some questions they didn't expect, you know… I mean… I asked about the history of your system, you answered something completely different (finishing by inviting further questions), so I clarified… at which point you started getting defensive, and a single post after that has this? Hmm…

Chris, I disagreed because I thought Matt answered your questions and you said he didn't. You didn't like his answer, which is not the same thing. Once again, I think some consideration regarding opinions and facts would be helpful.

Must I agree with everything you write?

It was nothing to do with not liking his answers, Steve, it was that he was answering things that bore no relation to the questions I was asking. Again, I invite you to go back to the first page and check that… I asked about the history of the system, including why it was classed (internally) as "traditional", and linked with Japanese arts, when no such link seemed apparent, as well as asking about the name itself.

Matt's response was to say that I'd already done some work on the history, so he didn't need to add to it. Uh.. yeah, actually, he did. That was the point of the question… I was saying that I'd gotten as much information as I could, and asking if he could add to it. So that's the first avoidance.

He followed that by describing other systems taught (BJJ) or that are used in the make-up and development of KJJ (BJJ, Judo, boxing, wrestling, Kyokushin, etc)… he also described what the system was made up of, but only in very general terms that denoted nothing to do with what I was asking (striking, grappling, ground work etc)… none of which was anything to do with my questions about the history, what made it "traditional", or "Japanese", or any of my questions about the name.

In among the answer were two comments that were partially related, which really were just claims ("KJJ, like other JJJ systems"… "So….. the answer to your question is that we are a Traditional Martial Art Style that has deep roots in JJJ"), neither of which were supported by anything shown at all, and both of which were then followed by comments that showed that neither claim was correct (the description of "other Japanese Ju-jitsu [sic] styles" structure doesn't match Japanese Jujutsu systems in the main, other than at a very base level, and the follow-on from the "traditional martial art style with deep roots" was really just another case of Matt showing that tradition wasn't a part of his art, nor was any "deep root" to Japanese Jujutsu, but that what he teaches is an evolving, modern, Western eclectic system).

So no, Steve, it wasn't a case of "opinion and facts"… I asked specific questions, none of which were answered or even addressed. If you can find any part of Matts post that does address my comments and questions, please point them out. I've read and re-read his post many many times… and simply, it isn't there.

But no, you don't have to agree with everything I write… and I gotta say, this passive aggressive approach you've been taking recently is getting a little stale… but I do prefer it that you have something to actually disagree with. Disliking my post? Fine. If you're going to disagree, though, show your work.

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

MartialTalk has a strict policy on fraudbusting in order to prevent heated discussions like has happened here. We welcome and encourage civil and positive discussion of different arts and their history, but must insist on mutual respect in those discussions, but neither MartialTalk nor its Staff or members are in a position to serve as arbiter of other arts.

jks9199
Administrator

And just to further clarify… my aim is not to fraud bust. I don't consider that Matt is a fraud in any sense of the word… I think he's a dedicated teacher, striving to do the best he can for himself and his students. I do have question marks over large parts of the history of this particular system, but even that wasn't the point of my comments… realistically, I was looking for clarification of the marketing of the system, nothing more. Honestly, if Matt had simply said "You know what, we're not a traditional system, we're not a Japanese one, we're a modern Western system, we just have that as part of our marketing", that would have been fine… of course, he continued to insist that it was traditional… and had "deep roots to JJJ"… which, to be clear, is absolutely not the case. And, to ensure that I'm not misunderstood here again, there is nothing wrong with being a modern, eclectic, Western system… provided claims aren't made to the contrary.

 

[Steve]

Chris, the answers were there, even though you can't or won't see them. I appreciate that you explained your train of thought.

 

[Steve]

It was nothing to do with not liking his answers, Steve, it was that he was answering things that bore no relation to the questions I was asking. {Snipped out the extra bits}

Chris, I'll explain a little further. Having read through Mike's posts, it seems to me that he tried to answer your questions, and when you began your usual alpha dog BS (where you attempt to establish yourself as the de facto expert on pretty much everything to any new poster), he let you know in a firm but friendly manner that he isn't interested in engaging in it with you. I think he handled you very well. He answered your questions to the extent that he could, and then told you very clearly that he was finished. You continued hounding him, and so he politely asked you to knock it off. Every one of these is an answer to you. Some are direct and some are indirect, but they are all answers. This ties in neatly to the last part of this post, as well.

So no, Steve, it wasn't a case of "opinion and facts"… I asked specific questions, none of which were answered or even addressed. If you can find any part of Matts post that does address my comments and questions, please point them out. I've read and re-read his post many many times… and simply, it isn't there.

The answers are there. They don't answer you in the manner you would like. If you understood that, you'd stop asking the same questions again and insisting on a different answer.

But no, you don't have to agree with everything I write…

Well, thanks, Chris. I appreciate that.

and I gotta say, this passive aggressive approach you've been taking recently is getting a little stale… but I do prefer it that you have something to actually disagree with.

Other than the personal dig, Chris, I honestly don't understand what you're driving at... prefer that I have something to disagree with? I'm pretty sure that when I disagree with someone around here, they know it.

Personally, hounding someone for answers to questions after they have made it very clear that they are finished answering them, and acting as though it's not rude... that's what I would call passive aggressive. The whole, "Hey friend, haha. I'm not busting your balls or anything. Just having a friendly interrogation... i mean chat. But, I'm going to ask that you take an hour to read my novella of a post, and then respond to each point. And if you don't, to my satisfaction, I will continue to harangue you until I am quite done, whether you like it or not." That's what I would call passive aggressive. But, that's just my opinion.

Disliking my post? Fine. If you're going to disagree, though, show your work.

Can you point me to the section of the ToS that requires that I or anyone else respond to you in precisely the manner you demand? I can't seem to find it. You don't get to tell people how to respond to you.

Above, I mentioned that it ties well into the last part. This is the part. The real takeaway here is that if you are consistently failing to get the answers you demand (whether it's to demand that I 'show my work' or demand that someone else answer your questions to your satisfaction), perhaps you should consider whether that in itself is your answer and you're just not getting it.

And just to further clarify… my aim is not to fraud bust. I don't consider that Matt is a fraud in any sense of the word… I think he's a dedicated teacher, striving to do the best he can for himself and his students. I do have question marks over large parts of the history of this particular system, but even that wasn't the point of my comments… realistically, I was looking for clarification of the marketing of the system, nothing more. Honestly, if Matt had simply said "You know what, we're not a traditional system, we're not a Japanese one, we're a modern Western system, we just have that as part of our marketing", that would have been fine… of course, he continued to insist that it was traditional… and had "deep roots to JJJ"… which, to be clear, is absolutely not the case. And, to ensure that I'm not misunderstood here again, there is nothing wrong with being a modern, eclectic, Western system… provided claims aren't made to the contrary.

I forgot this part. I can't see much difference between your required answer in bold above and this:

Ahhhh I see. Then no, we are definitely not traditional.

You're a little more wordy, but otherwise, isn't Matt saying functionally what you are insisting he should have said???