Glock Talk banner
  • Notice image

    Glocktalk is a forum community dedicated to Glock enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Glock pistols and rifles, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, and more!

21 - 25 of 25 Posts
DD,
With all do respect to your being a professional training professionals, you are not the only one. And, I also would disagree police officers do not submit violent felons, that is exactly what they do. Or do you go around double tapping every felony suspect you arrest? There is huge difference between arresting someone and a full on street fight. I know that arrest can degrade into street fights but the vast majority of them never do.

I have had more then my share of violent felony arrests and not one of them could compare in the amount of energy expended, or the amount of times I could have been taken out by Rorion Gracie when I got on the ground with him. In fact, most of the drunks I arrested were a walk in the park compared to training with the guys I pay to train with.

What I do has never and never will be about sport fighting, and BJJ is a big part of what I do and teach "real professionals". You are not the only one here who has been around the block.
 
Never claimed to be the only one. The original point was fighting a street fight using a sport mentality. Pain compliance has it's place to be sure in LEO/Corrections work. But it doesn't work on everyone, nor does it work all the time. An arrest that goes to the ground can be articulated as a deadly force situation given the right scenerio. The goal is to control and regain your feet as quickly as possible. Not roll around trying to get an arm lock. Knowing how to get a lock is great, but there are more things to consider that sport doesn't address.

Environment, weapons, mulitiple attackers, drugs, a determined attacker etc.

The comment was made above that the UFC was as close to real life as you can get. No...it is not. There is a world of difference and a professional needs to train for those situations.

Peace.
 
Perhaps this e-newsletter I receive reguarly will help to explain my position better than I have been able to...

"COMBATIVES? ...... DonÂ’t Tell Me. I Know What That Is!

By Carl Cestari

Part One

“Combatives” from the root word COMBAT – “to fight in direct contact”, “active fighting between enemies”, “any fight or struggle”.

Well, letÂ’s seeÂ…Â…Â…Â…Â…Â…..There is ONE singular glaring absence in the above definition. Notice it? Absolutely NO mention of Fairbairn, Applegate, or Coach Hanley. No mention of Jiu-Jitsu, Boxing, Savate or any member of the Gracie family. No mention of World War Two, the Punic Wars or the Spartans. No mention of Juji-Gatame, a smashing overhand right, an edge of hand blow, or even a good old kick in the ass!

Get it? THERE ARE NO SPECIFICS that define what is or isn’t so-called “COMBATIVES”! So why do so many people feel such an overriding need to “define” combatives into a narrow scope of limited methodology? “I know what you do”…………………..”That Fairbairn stuff”. A month ago this same guy thought FAIRBAIRN was simply a decent suntan. “Yea, I base my combatives on Applegate”……………..six months ago this dude thought Applegate was the entrance to an orchard! Everybody’s an “expert”. At what exactly? I’m not sure even “they” really know.

I won’t presume to speak for ANYONE else that uses this term “combatives”. Actually I wouldn’t want to! All I can do is offer a CORRECT semantic observation and proffer my view on what encompasses my study, training and understanding of so-called “combatives”.

If you really do your research and homework you will see that even in manuals describing man to man combat that are CENTURIES old there exists a very COMPREHENSIVE survey and presentations of MANY forms of armed and unarmed combat. ALL in the same manuals! A vast array of weapon skills are shown and even the “unarmed” combat is a diverse mix of “techniques”. Before the use of London Prize Ring rules and the Marquis of Queensbury, “pugilists” used and relied on a great number of different grappling/striking/kicking and gouging methods. Ancient Greek Pankration was a combined system of “ALL POWERS” combat. The original Koryu Bujutsu of the Samurai included a comprehensive catalog of both armed and unarmed skills. The unarmed combatives of the Japanese Bushi also DIDN’T limit scope or method. Grappling was stressed when THAT was the best method of gaining tactical superiority. Striking, kicking and even BITING was resorted to when THAT was deemed the most appropriate method. The Chinese have ALWAYS maintained fully robust systems of combat that included all manner of striking, punching, kicking, throwing, strangling and joint-locking. Original Okinawan Te (Ti) included percussion methods as well as “tegumi” and “tuite”. Punch his lungs out if that did the job best. Kick his gonads out the top of his head if THAT worked best. Or grapple him into submission and control OR grapple him into a spine lock and neck break. Whatever was called for and whatever GOT THE JOB AT HAND DONE!

The 19th century saw many methods of “combined” self-defense systems develop in the West. The French combined elements of Chausson/Savate (Basque Zipota as well) with Boxe Anglaise, Parisian Lutte, and even the “new” Japanese Jiu-Jitsu. The British did the same. The “BAR****U” of Barton-Wright is a classic example. In the US a number of “self-protection” methods became available to the public that combined methods from Boxing and Wrestling. EVEN before any “organized” systems were presented, men who “fought” even for “sport” used virtually ANY device to insure victory. Just read Elliot J. Gorn.

The Twentieth century saw even MORE “mixed” combat systems. It CERTAINLY didn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to figure out that in a REAL fight ANYTHING goes. Any and ALL manner of grappling, throttling, kicking, kneeing, butting, biting, punching, gouging, stomping and whatever other methods of mayhem could be employed were ALL “FAIR” when “fair” meant the difference between life or death. And it CERTAINLY didn’t just end at “unarmed” fighting! A “Gentleman” beset upon by a rough and tumble “footpad” on a lonely and desolate backstreet would feel perfectly JUSTIFIED in running said “footpad” thru and thru again with his sword cane or bashing his brains in with a “lifesaver”. Even when the highwayman wasn’t even armed with a lowly brickbat. What’s that old saying? All’s fair in love and war. Often it’s not a matter of who’s “right”, but simply who’s LEFT!

This IS “combatives” pure and simple. Whatever WORKS BEST at the time! A sort of “mixture” of varied fighting skills. HEY………………..wait a minute! A “mixed” fighting system? What a NOVEL IDEA!

Our next installment will look at “combatives” from the Russo-Japanese war and World War One thru to our “brandy new” millennium and all our new age “innovations”. Should be fun!
 
Dgg9,

There had to be something we'd agree on ;f
 
21 - 25 of 25 Posts