GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-30-2005, 17:17   #1
dizzydean
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: DALLAS, TEXAS
Posts: 28
Send a message via AIM to dizzydean
Accelerated Battlefield Combatives DVDs

Has anyone purchased the dvds Accelerated Battlefield Combatives ? You probably have read the ads in various gun mags. The ads start like this.

The Shocking Story of How The
U.S. Military, The Feds, and Every Martial Art School On The Planet Is Trying To Prevent You From Getting This
Elite Combat Training


Just wondering if anyone had checked this out. Looks like a scam.
dizzydean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 17:31   #2
Roundeyesamurai
Sensei Member
 
Roundeyesamurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,773
Send a message via AIM to Roundeyesamurai Send a message via Yahoo to Roundeyesamurai
It's a complete and total scam.

ANYTHING advertised as a "shocking secret", or words to that effect, is a scam.
Roundeyesamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2005, 17:59   #3
G33
CLM Number 296
Re-Assigned
 
G33's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: With G29
Posts: 57,796


Secret secrets also.;f
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


"I'd wager G would waterboard a salmon."--tous

"...those without swords can still die upon them." --Eowyn
G33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2005, 09:58   #4
garythenuke
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: paso robles california
Posts: 156
I wonder if it is anything like SCARS....

This isn't another Jerry Peterson LLC thing is it? Anyone know what ever happened to that big guy who was with Peterson at the beginning? The former Navy SEAL? He branched out to so something on his own I think.
garythenuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2005, 09:19   #5
dizzydean
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: DALLAS, TEXAS
Posts: 28
Send a message via AIM to dizzydean
I thought it probably was a scam, but I keep seeing it in different places. Just wondering if anyone had tried it out.
dizzydean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2005, 12:43   #6
Roundeyesamurai
Sensei Member
 
Roundeyesamurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,773
Send a message via AIM to Roundeyesamurai Send a message via Yahoo to Roundeyesamurai
Quote:
Originally posted by dizzydean
I thought it probably was a scam, but I keep seeing it in different places. Just wondering if anyone had tried it out.
No need to "try it out"- precisely the same sales pitch, with precisely the same text, and even the exact same letter from the exact same "Navy SEAL LCDR" in the beginning.

Garythenuke got it right- this crap is put out by the same company, with a new name, every year or so. It's a gimmick to sell DVDs to people who don't know any better.
Roundeyesamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2005, 15:32   #7
garythenuke
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: paso robles california
Posts: 156
dizzy,
Do not try it out... I very much hate to admit, but I tired out the SCARS thing about ten years ago. I bought the whole package and still have the videos. What a crock!! It is one of those things in life that one does that makes one's stomach cramp up when one thinks of it.

Find a real place to train with a real person. I am not terribly sold on the whole video/DVD thing for fight training. I happen to live about five minutes from Demi at CSPT so that is where I go for other-than-backyard training.

Good luck,
gary
garythenuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2005, 09:13   #8
dizzydean
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: DALLAS, TEXAS
Posts: 28
Send a message via AIM to dizzydean
garythenuke,
Thanks for the info. I have seen these ads for years and was just curious. I figured someone had probably tried it.
I have been out of martial arts for quite a while and have been thinking about getting back in to it.
dizzydean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2005, 22:03   #9
garythenuke
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: paso robles california
Posts: 156
I just remembered the big guy'sname. Tim Larkin. He set out to do the same kind of stuff. I do not know if he ever made any headway, but I saw him in a few magazines. Sorry for the hijack...
garythenuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 07:04   #10
AlexLarsen
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 27
If we're talking combatives, which is an Army term, just go find your nearest Brazilian Jiujitsu place. If you're lucky enough to have a Gracie Jiujitsu school near where you live, that's what is taught to recruits and, in greatly more detail, those going through the Army Combatives School.
AlexLarsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 12:10   #11
Roundeyesamurai
Sensei Member
 
Roundeyesamurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,773
Send a message via AIM to Roundeyesamurai Send a message via Yahoo to Roundeyesamurai
Quote:
Originally posted by AlexLarsen
If we're talking combatives, which is an Army term, just go find your nearest Brazilian Jiujitsu place. If you're lucky enough to have a Gracie Jiujitsu school near where you live, that's what is taught to recruits and, in greatly more detail, those going through the Army Combatives School.
Aaahhh... now we get into the debate portion of the event.

The term "Combatives" was in use by other organizations long before the US Army adopted it. In its simplest form, it refers to exceptionally simplified (some might say, "over-simplified") methods of striking with the hands and occasionally with the feet, and sometimes including limited weapon disarming skills, as well as limited knife and stick fighting skills.

To be succinct, the term "combatives" refers to methods which can be learned by a novice in an extremely limited period of time.

When the Army adopted some Brazilian Jiu Jitsu skills and incorporated them into the hand to hand combat doctrine, the term "combatives" as used by the Army probably should have been modified to "combatives (in lieu of a better term)", as Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is not something at which one can become proficient in a limited epriod of time.

"Combatives" video tapes and classes for the civilian market frankly appeal to two types of people- the exceptionally misinformed, and the exceptionally lazy. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu tends to weed out both of these groups.
Roundeyesamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 12:29   #12
AlexLarsen
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 27
I'd never heard of the term before I went through Basic, so I assumed it was something the Army had coined. Appologies for putting forward misleading information.

As for the unarmed combat training, it's now based entirely on Gracie Jiujitsu. Mind you, for trainees the Drill Sargeants focus on teaching the trainee how to get inside someone's guard, the dominant positions, how to get out of bad situations, and basic chokes and locks. Combatives School, as I understand it, is a somewhat more extensive and grueling course.

However, I will say at no point do they pretend to teach you to master BJJ. Their focus is on getting the dominant position and either disabling or killing the opponent as quickly as possible.
AlexLarsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 12:35   #13
Roundeyesamurai
Sensei Member
 
Roundeyesamurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,773
Send a message via AIM to Roundeyesamurai Send a message via Yahoo to Roundeyesamurai
Larsen- no problem at all.

I used to think I was well-trained too, until I got out of the military!
Roundeyesamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 14:52   #14
Victory
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 1,336
I don't understand how someone thought a grappling-centric form would make the most sense for the army. It's a situation where you're almost guaranteed that your enemy has friends and weapons. I seriously hope they're still teaching the guys how to stand up.

Granted the old WWII combatives are far from perfect. It's essentially 8 techniques for every situation.

Last edited by Victory; 12-05-2005 at 14:55..
Victory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 15:17   #15
Roundeyesamurai
Sensei Member
 
Roundeyesamurai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 2,773
Send a message via AIM to Roundeyesamurai Send a message via Yahoo to Roundeyesamurai
Quote:
Originally posted by Victory
I don't understand how someone thought a grappling-centric form would make the most sense for the army. It's a situation where you're almost guaranteed that your enemy has friends and weapons. I seriously hope they're still teaching the guys how to stand up.
For this, we must dig back into history.

Remember, most of the world's grappling methods originated as military methods. We have a tendency to think of grappling as a less-injurious means of controlling opponents, but this is a modern concept.

In previous times, grappling made the most sense in a military environment, for the simple fact that striking an opponent with a hand or foot was futile- a fist does no good against armor, and the weight of one's own armor makes kicking difficult.

Grappling, however, can be achieved against an opponent regardless of what he is wearing- in fact, the more weight he wears, the better.

Grappling also permits the application of superior close-combat killing techniques- strangulation, neck-breaking, bludgeoning (with whatever heavy object is at hand), and knifing.

Fast forward to the modern day- what has actually changed? Aside from the presence of firearms (not really a significant change), not much. We still wear armor (and equally cumbersome equipment harnesses and vests), our opponents are increasingly using same, and hitting with fists and feet is still equally futile.

Add to this the fact that it is nature's tendency for close combat to go to the ground, especially mortal close combat, and groundfighting skills become even more imperative.

As for the argument that "there are multiple opponents and weapons involved"-

a) Who ever went into a military environment alone? HIS comrades are likely fighting with YOUR comrades;

b) If your weapon isn't working, you want to be low anyway- the better to avoid being shot.

Given the choice between a potentially minutes-long boxing match, or a potentially seconds-long wrestling match, I'll take the latter.
Roundeyesamurai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2005, 22:32   #16
AlexLarsen
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 27
Roundeyesamurai, has it right. The primary consideration in switching to Gracie was the fact that most fighting goes to the ground and that the Soldiers needed a fighting style that would work with the rather combersome IBAs. And yeah, how to stand was the first thing we learned.
AlexLarsen is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:58.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,151
226 Members
925 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42