anyone have all of Danaher's instructionals?

[machomang]

If so, which one helped you out the most? I don't have the bank account nor the patience to go through all of his material, looking to study only one of his instructionals at the moment.

 

[yetanother]

I only watched the Leg locks/back attacks and kimura ones. The kimura one kind of sucked. The leg lock one seemed the best one (I train IBJJF rules only) so I only picked bits and pieces for it.

 

[Calibur]

I only watched the Leg locks/back attacks and kimura ones. The kimura one kind of sucked. The leg lock one seemed the best one (I train IBJJF rules only) so I only picked bits and pieces for it.

What was bad about the limits dvd?

 

[yetanother]

What was bad about the limits dvd?

It has the inane Danaher babbling like all his stuff do but there is a lot more other quality kimura instruction so no need to endure that.
Also parts of that where low percentage (like kimuras from bottom turtle).

 

[Peteyandjia]

If so, which one helped you out the most? I don't have the bank account nor the patience to go through all of his material, looking to study only one of his instructionals at the moment.

If you have to just pick one, Danaher himself has said a person should start with Back Attacks.

The only exception I would add to that is, if you feel you have either a severe deficiency in another area that you need to address, or a real proficiency in another area that you want to perfect into true mastery, then maybe pick one of the others. Short of either of those though, I would just take Danaher's advice & get Back Attacks.

 

[Quebec Nick]

It has the inane Danaher babbling like all his stuff do but there is a lot more other quality kimura instruction so no need to endure that.
Also parts of that where low percentage (like kimuras from bottom turtle).

I have the back attacks, leg locks and kimura dvds.

The kimura north south style (disc 2) (dorsal kimura for Danaher) is pretty good to mix with the back attacks DVD who is very good overall.

I was a complete newby for leglocks before watching that DVD, now I have very good entries and I finish people with it.

I picked up about ten things in those dvd's that are now my main attacks, gi and no gi. Yes there's blabbering and it's very tough to get through them, but the level of detail and the way is system mix well together is worth something, maybe not the 600$ I put to buy them, but it's worth something.

For the last 5 months I just watch and analyse DVD 2 of the Kimura (dorsal kimura), the 411 entries and the 411 finishes from the leg lock dvd (so pretty much 2 DVDs) and the straight jacket entries, and auxiliary finishes from the back attack DVD. I watched them all once, but I'm gonna take my time to master some stuff before trying to put all those techiques into my game.

 

[mataleaos]

Back attacks is the best. Leg locks next especially if you're into those. In my opinion the next best are the armbar one and then the triangle one.

The kimura and front headlock are my least favorite which is weird because those are 2 of my favorite positions. Front headlock is good if you want to learn entries to the position and control. But I really think the submission sections left a lot to be desired. #unpopularopinion but for a guy that can put together 8 quality discs on the armbar...the guillotine/brabo/anaconda world is way too deep to cover in 2 or 3 discs. It's a shame because that was his instructional I was most interested in. The kimura set is solid early on but ends up being padded I think with some either low percentage or more "filler" techniques near the end.

None of them are bad by any means. In fact they're all quite good but some are better than others. I like armbars slightly more than triangles so I ranked it higher but both are about dead even in quality.

So my ranking of them is:

Back attacks
Leg locks
Armbar
Triangle
Headlock
Kimura

 

[asian-glow]

Back attacks is the best. Leg locks next especially if you're into those. In my opinion the next best are the armbar one and then the triangle one.

The kimura and front headlock are my least favorite which is weird because those are 2 of my favorite positions. Front headlock is good if you want to learn entries to the position and control. But I really think the submission sections left a lot to be desired. #unpopularopinion but for a guy that can put together 8 quality discs on the armbar...the guillotine/brabo/anaconda world is way too deep to cover in 2 or 3 discs. It's a shame because that was his instructional I was most interested in. The kimura set is solid early on but ends up being padded I think with some either low percentage or more "filler" techniques near the end.

None of them are bad by any means. In fact they're all quite good but some are better than others. I like armbars slightly more than triangles so I ranked it higher but both are about dead even in quality.

So my ranking of them is:

Back attacks
Leg locks
Armbar
Triangle
Headlock
Kimura

Pretty interesting. I have the first two but was particularly interested in the armbar, headlock, and kimura set, as I have more experience with those positions/subs than the back and legs.

 

[trustdoesntrust]

Back attacks is the best. Leg locks next especially if you're into those. In my opinion the next best are the armbar one and then the triangle one.

The kimura and front headlock are my least favorite which is weird because those are 2 of my favorite positions. Front headlock is good if you want to learn entries to the position and control. But I really think the submission sections left a lot to be desired. #unpopularopinion but for a guy that can put together 8 quality discs on the armbar...the guillotine/brabo/anaconda world is way too deep to cover in 2 or 3 discs. It's a shame because that was his instructional I was most interested in. The kimura set is solid early on but ends up being padded I think with some either low percentage or more "filler" techniques near the end.

None of them are bad by any means. In fact they're all quite good but some are better than others. I like armbars slightly more than triangles so I ranked it higher but both are about dead even in quality.

So my ranking of them is:

Back attacks
Leg locks
Armbar
Triangle
Headlock
Kimura

The million dollar question for me (or $200 question as it were) is whether any of the DVD's are noticably better or different from good "down market" instructionals on the same techniques. i own, and have gotten significant use out of, Craig Jones Down Under Leg Attacks, Vagner Rocha 50/50 of the Arms, Roy Marsh The Guillotine Code, and am currently working through Vagner's Back Attacks dvd (i also studied Ryan Hall's back attacks dvd a couple years ago)

 

[tekkenfan]

I only watched the Leg locks/back attacks and kimura ones. The kimura one kind of sucked. The leg lock one seemed the best one (I train IBJJF rules only) so I only picked bits and pieces for it.

i have them as i said but i have not watched the kimura or the triangle yet though whats so bad about the kimura set? tbh i dont have a deep kimura game should i try to go with vagner rochas then?

 

[yetanother]

i have them as i said but i have not watched the kimura or the triangle yet though whats so bad about the kimura set? tbh i dont have a deep kimura game should i try to go with vagner rochas then?

I haven't seen the Rocha one. Dunno if you like Danaher's style I super dislike it. The Danaher seemed just generic with most of the unique stuff being low percentage things.

 

[Daz2300]

i have them as i said but i have not watched the kimura or the triangle yet though whats so bad about the kimura set? tbh i dont have a deep kimura game should i try to go with vagner rochas then?

Have both but have only watched a few bits of the Danaher one so far so can't say to much about it. I just find him hard work to listen too and its putting me off.

I really like the Vagner Rocha one and use a bunch of stuff from it constantly now for getting kimura control to hit armbars.

He lays out a really clear approach using the kimura grip to attack the same sequence from multiple positions from the back, on top and certain guards running through kimura/armbar/reverse triangle. It gives you a really simple answer to each layer of their defence and likely response to the last stage so is very easy to pick up if you're not already a big kimura user. It also has the usual Kimura trap stuff and a few little bits on using the kimura to pass thrown in as well as the main systematic approach he shows.

 

[trustdoesntrust]

i have them as i said but i have not watched the kimura or the triangle yet though whats so bad about the kimura set? tbh i dont have a deep kimura game should i try to go with vagner rochas then?

love the Vagner Rocha one. if you bristle at Danaher or Ryan Hall's know-it-all style then you'll definitely like Vagner. He's animated, confident, and likeable. Techniques are solid all around, and you can readily find comp clips of him using most of them,

 

[Daz2300]

love the Vagner Rocha one. if you bristle at Danaher or Ryan Hall's know-it-all style then you'll definitely like Vagner. He's animated, confident, and likeable. Techniques are solid all around, and you can readily find comp clips of him using most of them,

You'll like the back attacks set he did recently with Digitsu so if you haven't already seen it.

A lot of overlap between both involving using the kimura stuff as they defend chokes that means it combines really well with the 50/50 of the Arms dvd.

 

[mataleaos]

love the Vagner Rocha one. if you bristle at Danaher or Ryan Hall's know-it-all style then you'll definitely like Vagner. He's animated, confident, and likeable. Techniques are solid all around, and you can readily find comp clips of him using most of them,

Vagner's teaching style is awesome.

I must be the only person that thinks Hall and Danaher teach very differently.

They both are talkative but Danaher has more of a distance to him and seems like someone that is brilliant about grappling but doesn't train. I don't want to say it seems like he's talking down to the audience but he gives off way more of a lecturer/professor vibe.

Hall comes across as almost a knowledgeable and quirky dude that you already train with.He may have know it all moments but he's also self deprecating so it's not obnoxious.

The following two sentences are two examples that I'm making up, but it should be super obvious who is JD and who is RH.

"I don't know about you guys, but I got heel hooked all the time, and the best way to fix that from this position is to keep your feet inside of theirs."

"I'll repeat this again because it's so important. I insist that my athletes never make the critical error of keeping their feet in the outside position from here."

 

[tekkenfan]

You'll like the back attacks set he did recently with Digitsu so if you haven't already seen it.

A lot of overlap between both involving using the kimura stuff as they defend chokes that means it combines really well with the 50/50 of the Arms dvd.

is it much dif from johns? iv gotten matt arroyos first then johns matts was similar t johns just not near as detailed

i like danahers techs but my god i hate how long he talks and really only goes over a move 2 times in slow motion since i guess hes to hurt to do it normal speed i like for someone before they even teach a technique to do it full speed first so you know what to look for thennnnn slowly explain how it works

 

[tekkenfan]

Vagner's teaching style is awesome.

I must be the only person that thinks Hall and Danaher teach very differently.

They both are talkative but Danaher has more of a distance to him and seems like someone that is brilliant about grappling but doesn't train. I don't want to say it seems like he's talking down to the audience but he gives off way more of a lecturer/professor vibe.

Hall comes across as almost a knowledgeable and quirky dude that you already train with.He may have know it all moments but he's also self deprecating so it's not obnoxious.

The following two sentences are two examples that I'm making up, but it should be super obvious who is JD and who is RH.

"I don't know about you guys, but I got heel hooked all the time, and the best way to fix that from this position is to keep your feet inside of theirs."

"I'll repeat this again because it's so important. I insist that my athletes never make the critical error of keeping their feet in the outside position from here."

i get what you mean by him looking liek a guy who doesnt train but knows his stuff thats how he losk to me tbh

he looks kinda awkward compared to other guys who teach its hard to really explain i guess its cause his body is so jacked that when he does the moves he does it isnt very smooth. he could just get a student to do it and talk through it being preformed

 

[Fierce Brosnan]

I have all of his instructionals. It's hard to say which one helped the most. The Back Attack series changed the way I think about about the back and demonstrated, to me anyway, many details about control that I hadn't considered. However, that said, I still do not get the back as often as I'd like. However, my armbar and triangle finishes have gone way up since watching these two series. The triangle series greatly improved my entries into the triangle and has me hitting them a few times a month now whereas before the best I could hope for was getting stacked. The armbar series for me was a godsend; My s-mount armbar had always been trash prior to this series and my armbar from the guard was laughable in my opinion. With the former I always felt too light and off balance - not in control. With the latter, I felt like my terrible flexibility meant I was ever only going to hit that technique on white belts. I don't feel that way anymore. I went from not even attempting armbars outside of drilling a month ago to hitting them on longtime blue belts. For me, that's a massive improvement. My armbars are tighter, with a much higher degree of control that offers a much smaller opportunity for escape than before.

Much has been said about Danaher's teaching style. Yes, it's repetitive. Yes, it's verbose. My solution was to download the digital copies from BJJ Fanatics and watch them on VLC Player. VLC has a playback speed slider bar where you can finely adjust the speed. I find that I can watch the videos 25% faster than normal without losing any of the details. A big positive, for me, with regard to his teaching style is that it seems to stay in my head without drilling. I am not super talented when it comes to BJJ. I can almost never recall the details of a new technique unless I've drilled it numerous times. Not so with Danaher, I haven't drilled any of the details I've learned in his instructionals but I've been hitting them in live rolls from memory because I can hear him in my head. For me, it just works. However, I can understand why he annoys so many people.

 

[machomang]

I have all of his instructionals. It's hard to say which one helped the most. The Back Attack series changed the way I think about about the back and demonstrated, to me anyway, many details about control that I hadn't considered. However, that said, I still do not get the back as often as I'd like. However, my armbar and triangle finishes have gone way up since watching these two series. The triangle series greatly improved my entries into the triangle and has me hitting them a few times a month now whereas before the best I could hope for was getting stacked. The armbar series for me was a godsend; My s-mount armour had always been trash prior to this series and my armbar from the guard was laughable in my opinion. With the former I always felt too light and off balance - not in control. With the latter, I felt like my terrible flexibility meant I was ever only going to hit that technique on white belts. I don't feel that way anymore. I went from not even attempting armbars outside of drilling a month ago to hitting them on longtime blue belts. For me, that's a massive improvement. My armbars are tighter, with a much higher degree of control that offers a much smaller opportunity for escape than before.

Much has been said about Danaher's teaching style. Yes, it's repetitive. Yes, it's verbose. My solution was to download the digital copies from BJJ Fanatics and watch them on VLC Player. VLC has a playback speed slider bar where you can finely adjust the speed. I find that I can watch the videos 25% faster than normal without losing any of the details. A big positive, for me, with regard to his teaching style is that it seems to stay in my head without drilling. I am not super talented when it comes to BJJ. I can almost never recall the details of a new technique unless I've drilled it numerous times. Not so with Danaher, I haven't drilled any of the details I've learned in his instructionals but I've been hitting them in live rolls from memory because I can hear him in my head. For me, it just works. However, I can understand why he annoys so many people.

Thanks for the feedback, I'm the opposite of you, I never go for triangles outside of drilling. As for my arm bars, I don't intentionally go for them but they present themselves a lot when I am rolling. I always thought arm bars from guard were just legendary tales, but after reading your take on it, I think I'm gonna check out the arm bar dvd first.

 

[trustdoesntrust]

Vagner's teaching style is awesome.

I must be the only person that thinks Hall and Danaher teach very differently.

They both are talkative but Danaher has more of a distance to him and seems like someone that is brilliant about grappling but doesn't train. I don't want to say it seems like he's talking down to the audience but he gives off way more of a lecturer/professor vibe.

Hall comes across as almost a knowledgeable and quirky dude that you already train with.He may have know it all moments but he's also self deprecating so it's not obnoxious.

The following two sentences are two examples that I'm making up, but it should be super obvious who is JD and who is RH.

"I don't know about you guys, but I got heel hooked all the time, and the best way to fix that from this position is to keep your feet inside of theirs."

"I'll repeat this again because it's so important. I insist that my athletes never make the critical error of keeping their feet in the outside position from here."

It is Ryan Hall's (arrogant?) sense of certainty that I find most similar to Danaher, along with their shared verbosity of course. To paraphrase Hall: they're not *wrong*, but maybe they're not as *right* as they act like they are.