What martial art do military combatives employ

I am assuming prison guards do get training. Now why shouldnt they be more proficient at dealing with shivs?

Are we talking about the measly handful of training hours a prison guard gets or the training and mindset work Geoff Thomson, Paul Vunak and the Dog Brothers train into their students?

Am MMA fighters worries more about his ruleset. Single legs, butterfly sweeps probably wont look like people are used to if the other guys has a shiv.

Butterfly sweeps? No prison guard has an answer for a scenario where an attacker with a knife is sitting on his shins.

Anyone with a bit of wrestling knows how to tie up someone's functionally, certainly comparable to a handful of prison guard training sessions. The prison guard might know knife-specific techniques, but the wrestler has spent hours and hours making his training work against real attackers.

I dont even know if strikes will work unless they are to the groin or eye pokes.

I don't even know what this means.

Also, I've seen people walk through ball shots and I've personally had the bottom half of my cornea scraped off by a thumb gouge and the pain didn't set in for me until hours later. vision was fine. these are dangerous moves, but they're not guaranteed finishers.

If I have shiv, and someone throws a cross at my face, I just stab at the same time to his face. Lets see who comes out on top, or if the guy covers up classic boxing style, I just slash at the forearms.

What in God's name do you think a prison guard is going to do in these situations? Arguments always go downhill once someone is imagining themselves taking over a situation like a boss, fyi.

I have a world of respect for reality-based self defense training, more so than most sport fighters, but a random prison guard is not the superman you think he is.[/quote][/Quote]
 
Are we talking about the measly handful of training hours a prison guard gets or the training and mindset work Geoff Thomson, Paul Vunak and the Dog Brothers train into their students?



Butterfly sweeps? No prison guard has an answer for a scenario where an attacker with a knife is sitting on his shins.

Anyone with a bit of wrestling knows how to tie up someone's functionally, certainly comparable to a handful of prison guard training sessions. The prison guard might know knife-specific techniques, but the wrestler has spent hours and hours making his training work against real attackers.



I don't even know what this means.

Also, I've seen people walk through ball shots and I've personally had the bottom half of my cornea scraped off by a thumb gouge and the pain didn't set in for me until hours later. vision was fine. these are dangerous moves, but they're not guaranteed finishers.



What in God's name do you think a prison guard is going to do in these situations? Arguments always go downhill once someone is imagining themselves taking over a situation like a boss, fyi.

I have a world of respect for reality-based self defense training, more so than most sport fighters, but a random prison guard is not the superman you think he is.

I am assuming prison guards get decent training. And they will train for specific things. Just like wrestlers. They tie up under specific rulesets, and scoring criteria.

MMA fighters, and wrestlers are not supermen either. There is really nothing to make one assume that an mma fighter is much better than a professional prison guard in a knife attack.
 
I am assuming prison guards get decent training.

Why are you assuming that? Cops don't even get decent training.

And they will train for specific things. Just like wrestlers. They tie up under specific rulesets, and scoring criteria.

What does this mean? in what way do the rules of wrestling inhibit a wrestler tying up an attacker's arms?

MMA fighters, and wrestlers are not supermen either. -


Exactly. Even a highly trained fighter would have trouble in that situation. What kind of magic voodoo are you imagining a prison guard with a handful of training is going to pull off?

And let's say, hypothetically, that there is some specially-trained technique which is much more effective against knives than thousands of hours of fight training. What are the chances a security guard is able to pull it off the few times he finds himself in a life-or-death situation?

there is really nothing to make one assume that an mma fighter is much better than a professional prison guard in a knife attack.

Is there anything to make one assume that a guard would be much better at controlling an attacker's arms than an MMA fighter?
 
Why are you assuming that? Cops don't even get decent training.



What does this mean? in what way do the rules of wrestling inhibit a wrestler tying up an attacker's arms?




Exactly. Even a highly trained fighter would have trouble in that situation. What kind of magic voodoo are you imagining a prison guard with a handful of training is going to pull off?

And let's say, hypothetically, that there is some specially-trained technique which is much more effective against knives than thousands of hours of fight training. What are the chances a security guard is able to pull it off the few times he finds himself in a life-or-death situation?



Is there anything to make one assume that a guard would be much better at controlling an attacker's arms than an MMA fighter?

I can also say that not every MMA fighter or wrestler is any good at their sport either even if they train live. It is like with every other sport. I am sure we have all played with kids that are just not that good no matter how long they try. Plus some mma fighters, and wrestlers are specialists. Maybe they never tie someone up or dont put much emphasis on that aspect.

We just have to assume that each professional is proficient at what they each do, and get the training they need.

In what way does training sport wrestling mean you can successfully tie up an armed attacker or defend against an armed attacker any better than training to specifically tie up an armed attacker, if that is your strategy, or defend against him?

I dont think it is too silly that anyone outside MMA fighting and training can defend themselves against a shiv.
 
I am assuming prison guards get decent training. And they will train for specific things. Just like wrestlers. They tie up under specific rulesets, and scoring criteria.

MMA fighters, and wrestlers are not supermen either. There is really nothing to make one assume that an mma fighter is much better than a professional prison guard in a knife attack.

I am in Law Enforcement and our Defensive tactics are an absolute joke. Learning techniques 4 times a year, and then repeating them 4 or 5 times does more harm than good. Unfortunately that is what most law Enforcement training is like.

True MMA fighters and wrestlers are not superman, but they have muscle memory(which they gained through thousands of repetitions) which helps them react without thought when the adrenaline dump shuts off their fore brain.
 
I am in Law Enforcement and our Defensive tactics are an absolute joke. Learning techniques 4 times a year, and then repeating them 4 or 5 times does more harm than good. Unfortunately that is what most law Enforcement training is like.

True MMA fighters and wrestlers are not superman, but they have muscle memory(which they gained through thousands of repetitions) which helps them react without thought when the adrenaline dump shuts off their fore brain.

Sure it can help, but if you can get proficient training for a specific situation, you too can gain those attributes.

And is it not safe to assume that some prison guards who dont feel the training they were given for free is sufficient, and maybe seek out training elsewhere?

And let me ask you if you do not mind. This may or may not have anything to do with the discussion at hand. Do LEO get proficient weapons training? Meaning with the firearm. I am not sure if that is the same as defensive tactics.
 
Sure it can help, but if you can get proficient training for a specific situation, you too can gain those attributes.

And is it not safe to assume that some prison guards who dont feel the training they were given for free is sufficient, and maybe seek out training elsewhere?

And let me ask you if you do not mind. This may or may not have anything to do with the discussion at hand. Do LEO get proficient weapons training? Meaning with the firearm. I am not sure if that is the same as defensive tactics.
The firearms training is usually decent ,knowing when to shoot and when not to shoot is a different story, it is mediocre, but it is getting better due to recent law suits.

Defensive tactics is also called "intermediate use of force" which is basically hands on techniques. I think the best defense for an attack is not giving the person an opportunity to attack you in the first place High risk prisoners are kept in lockdown 23 out of 24 hours a day, when they are allowed out, the are frisked and they are not allowed to face the Corrections Officer. Their cells are also constantly swept for contraband.

Keep in mind, I never actually worked in corrections so if an actual corrections officer disagrees with me, take his word for it.
 
Last edited:
you must understand, the military only used "hand to hand" "martial arts" as a training tool. It was used to develop warrior spirit, fitness, and entertainment. Even during the time of Alexander the Great, the main training was about fighting in formation and with "war weapons" rather than hand to hand.
 
But if you dont have either your rifle or your handgun, and did not have the space or time to get it ready, you should still have a combat knife on you right? That needs no time to get ready. You can only really be so effective when restraining anyone or defending yourself unless you have a way to hurt them very badly, and force them to comply.

A pistol should be as accessible as a knife if your kit is set up right.
 
A pistol should be as accessible as a knife if your kit is set up right.

Well yes, but I thought the whole Military combatives is for when you dont have gun on you or cant use it. They should still have knife on them. Why not teach them to use that?
 
I thought they needed to know who to kill the enemy.

They do. They also need to know how to control angry civilians in a riot situation, deal with local kids throwing rocks and trying to snatch your pistol, keep everyone separated and calm whenever the bug-eaters you are chucking sacks of rice to start going apeshit at each other...

Soldiers have to do a lot of shit, and a lot of that shit falls somewhere within the yawning gulf between 'Justifiable Mag Dump' and 'drawing dicks on stuff while waiting for orders'.
 
Others have already commented on the army program, but I'll add a few things.

Lvl 1, as far as I can tell, is just a 40hr Gracie Combatives course. It gives you some basic knowledge. Some of the modules are shit. A glaring example is the guard pass they teach, or at least used to teach. Also, a lot of details are different from bjj because they try to keep things in mind like striking and uniforms/gear.

Some of it depends on where you go. Five years ago at Ft Bragg, the guy running it was very influential in the MACP and SOCP programs, but I'm not sure what it's like now. Lvl 2 there was a lot more stand up and real world based like close quarter drills, restraining, crowd scenarios, full kit, rolling with strikes from day 1.

Everyone has to go through a combatives class at some point. The ones who keep going are the ones who are into it. Not everyone believes in the program, nor does everyone have interest in it.

Also, at least one of you watches too many movies. Most regular soldiers only have one weapon, no secondary, and most who carry knives do so as a tool and not much so as a weapon.

Lastly, the fundamental aspect of the program that gets lost is that you are learning to hold your own and/or restrain someone until others come to assist you.
 
at least the Army has combatives tournaments up to brigade level with striking, we need that shit in the Marine Corps!
 
Also, at least one of you watches too many movies. Most regular soldiers only have one weapon, no secondary, and most who carry knives do so as a tool and not much so as a weapon.

I'm referring to people that would actually be out on patrol and detaining people, those types are more likely to have a secondary weapon. My level two class went over using grappling to either control or disengage enough to be able to drawn a secondary weapon.
 
Ours did the same. Again, not sure what you're referring to, but a sidearm secondary is uncommon and not at all standard. Give me more ammo, keep your secondary.
 
I would assume they restrain a lot more people then they kill in hand to hand combat.

I have no idea honestly, but if you have a weapon even if it is not projectile, and know how to use, would it not be easier to ensure people comply with your demands?

As opposed to the perp running away, and the soldier having to chase, and try to tackle them. Plus I thought most soldiers carried a knife. It seem like a waste not to be able to use.
 
They do. They also need to know how to control angry civilians in a riot situation, deal with local kids throwing rocks and trying to snatch your pistol, keep everyone separated and calm whenever the bug-eaters you are chucking sacks of rice to start going apeshit at each other...

Soldiers have to do a lot of shit, and a lot of that shit falls somewhere within the yawning gulf between 'Justifiable Mag Dump' and 'drawing dicks on stuff while waiting for orders'.

Even in those situations arent the soldiers carrying some kind of weapon making them a threat to anyone not complying with demands?

In riot control dont you get at least a shield and baton? For most soldiers I thought they all carried a knife as part of the combat loadout.
 
Even in those situations arent the soldiers carrying some kind of weapon making them a threat to anyone not complying with demands?

In riot control dont you get at least a shield and baton? For most soldiers I thought they all carried a knife as part of the combat loadout.

You are always armed, and trained and ready to use those arms if necessary.

If some 10 yr old Pashtun kid grabs a flashlight, despite being told to fuck off, do I stab him?

If we're evacuating citizens from Haiti, and my section/platoon/whatever is holding a line at the embassy entrance, letting passport-carriers in and keeping a group of desperate people out, do I go immediately between politely asking the refugees to stop pushing, to emptying a mag? Or would it benefit me and the other troops to have some rudimentary controlling techniques in our skill set.

If two of my guys need to detain and search a suspicious traveller near the wire who refused to stop walking away, would it be more advisable to huck grenades at him or just high-low tackle him?

It's technically legal for me to bayonet the dirty hippy who tries to grab the Regimental Colours during that parade in downtown Toronto, but how well is that going to play on the CBC? Wouldn't it be better if I, or another soldier, just clinched him, dumped him on his ass, or walked him back to the police?

There's a lot of room in between the various sorts of armed response a soldier might face, and not all situations call for immediate deadly response.

Edit; as to the riot control question, you will be issued the kit appropriate for the situation whenever you have forewarning that the situation will develop, and the time and logistical readiness to get you that kit, which is to say, almost fucking never.
 
When I did army combatives lvl 2 it was BJJ positioning - one sweep from guard, a mount escape, side control, that kind of thing. It's basically used to hold the person down until your buddy can shoot him in the face or so you can get up so you can transition to a firearm while making distance and taking them out.

Also went over some small MT stuff especially clinch knees.

Then the rest was weapon retention drills.
 
Back
Top