Who wants a new instructional? #bteamjiujitsu

The discussion surrounding the B-Team's influence often points to a supposed "new wave" of jiu-jitsu, particularly in the no-gi landscape, yet it is worth recalling that the concept of an accessible, systematic approach to no-gi grappling with a focus on leg locks has been evolving for decades, not solely emerging in the last few years. While the B-Team, and indeed many contemporary competitors, have undeniably refined and popularized specific entries and finishing mechanics for lower-body submissions, the foundational principles and the emphasis on a "submission-first" mentality in no-gi competition can be traced back to earlier innovators, such as the initial ADCC events and the competitors who shaped them.

For instance, the first ADCC World Submission Fighting Championship in 1998 in Abu Dhabi brought together a diverse group of grapplers from various disciplines—wrestling, judo, sambo, and jiu-jitsu—and its ruleset, which allowed for heel hooks and emphasized submission, inherently pushed competitors to explore and develop a comprehensive no-gi game. Competitors like Mark Kerr, who won the +99kg division, and Renzo Gracie, the winner of the -77kg category, were already demonstrating sophisticated no-gi control and submission attempts that transcended traditional gi-centric jiu-jitsu. The shift toward a more aggressive, leg-entanglement-focused meta, which is often attributed to the modern era, saw significant early developments with figures like Dean Lister, who was famously quoted as stating "Why would you not attack the leg? It's the biggest limb on the body," following his performance at ADCC 2005 where he submitted Jean Jacques Machado with a heel hook.

What the B-Team and similar groups have achieved, perhaps more significantly than inventing entirely new techniques, is a remarkable level of codification and dissemination, making advanced no-gi concepts more widely understandable and applicable. This mirrors, in a sense, the process that Mitsuyo Maeda initiated when he taught specific *judo* techniques to Carlos Gracie in Brazil, transforming an existing martial art into something adaptable for a new context, and similarly, how figures like John Danaher later systematized his understanding of leg attacks for a broader audience. The current accessibility of detailed instructionals and digital content has undoubtedly accelerated the pace at which these techniques are absorbed and integrated into the global grappling community, a phenomenon that was certainly not available to early ADCC competitors. However, to frame this as an entirely novel movement risks overlooking the extensive groundwork laid by earlier generations of no-gi practitioners and rule-set pioneers. Does the current generation's success owe more to innovative technique development or to unprecedented access to systematized knowledge?

Okay, let’s be real about "new instructionals" from the B-Team. Everyone’s tripping over themselves to praise the latest drop, but the idea that they’re consistently pushing some revolutionary, never-before-seen approach is getting a little tired. HoG Historian’s right that this "new wave" narrative needs some context. We’re talking about an ecosystem built on decades of development, not something that magically materialized with the advent of slick YouTube production and funny memes.

Take the whole "systematic leg lock" angle – it’s literally been the cornerstone of John Danaher’s philosophy for years. What the B-Team is doing, and doing extremely well, is *refining* and *packaging* existing concepts for a specific audience. They're like the Apple of jiu-jitsu instructionals: they didn't invent the smartphone, but they made it sexy and accessible. The underlying technology, the fundamental mechanics of entries, breaking grips, and finishing leg locks? That’s all been in play since at least the late 90s, if not earlier, with guys like Dean Lister showing the way.

The real genius of the B-Team isn't innovation, it's *curation* and *demystification*. They strip away the unnecessary complexity, boil it down to a flowchart, and deliver it with a personality that resonates with the current generation of no-gi practitioners. They’re making complex ideas *easier to learn*, which is a massive contribution. But let’s not confuse "easier to learn" with "never been done before." There’s a distinction between being a brilliant teacher and being an originator of technique.

When I watch their stuff, I see a clear lineage back to Danaher, to Renzo Gracie’s academy, and even further back to the catch wrestling roots that informed so much of early no-gi. Is it good? Absolutely. Is it *new* in the sense of groundbreaking technical discovery? Rarely. It's often a more efficient, more intuitive *presentation* of established principles. And frankly, for most people, that's far more valuable than a never-before-seen guard pass that only works on Jupiter.

My take is this: it's less about the "new technique" and more about the "new perspective" they bring to tried-and-true methods. What are we *really* learning here that wasn’t available, albeit in a less polished form, five or ten years ago?