POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorway?

Forum to discuss CQB entry tactics / room clearing, with other registered users.

Moderators: jimothy_183, Admin

Post Reply
User avatar
DareTactical
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 6:24 am
Location: United Kingdom

POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorway?

Post by DareTactical » Fri Jun 05, 2015 5:11 pm

I was once asked "As a point-man, should I cross or button-hook when entering an open doorless threshold or outward swinging door?"
It's a good question.

Excerpt from US Army Ranger Handbook 2006 (no difference in 2011 version except less pages on MOUT..)

"When using a doorway as the point of entry, the team uses the path
of least resistance, which they determine initially based on the way the door opens. If the door opens inward, the first man plans to
move away from the hinges. If the door opens outward, he plans to move toward the hinged side."

(Inward means into the room, Outward means away from the room towards the entry team).

So the above statement is what is basically taught to all NATO militaries, but that doesn't make it right. Let's think about this.

Situation: You have a four man entry team with M4 length rifles, with a single stack near the open doorless doorway (or breacher on the other side if you have an outward swinging door). In these cases, the point-man should not always follow Path of Least Resistance (POLR). Why?

Most people forget that in immediate entries, it is NOT about the point man getting into the room as soon as possible, it is about the no.2 man getting into the room as soon as possible (because this would mean he is going in as soon as point-man crosses the threshold and therefore able to clear his deep corner and cover pointman's back). As the team make entry, the pointman is the only member who is does not have a fellow team member obstructing him or his weapon. He has the space to swing around the door and bring his weapon up to engage any potential threat in his corner. The no.2 man does not have this luxury, so it would make sense for no.2 to cross to the other side instead of buttonhooking, would it not?

If the no.2 had to buttonhook, especially if the door is on the rightside and he is right handed, he would have to wait a long time for no.1 to get out of the way before he can get his body through the threshold, buttonhook, then raise his weapon.

Any thoughts?
"train hard, fight easy"

DTas
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2015 6:32 pm
Location: Israel

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by DTas » Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:20 am

From what I understand, it's better to hook, why?

Most of the opposite side is already scanned from outside, I'd rather go to where I don't see than re learning what I already saw.
Also, as the point man, I'd like to engage the first threat I see, and in order to do that, I'd be happy to have to opportunity to scan the entire room.
This clashes with the Area of Responsibility concept, but who would not shoot a 3-meter threat in order to scan a corner.

User avatar
DareTactical
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 6:24 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by DareTactical » Sat Jun 27, 2015 7:30 am

DTas wrote:From what I understand, it's better to hook, why?

Most of the opposite side is already scanned from outside, I'd rather go to where I don't see than re learning what I already saw.
Also, as the point man, I'd like to engage the first threat I see, and in order to do that, I'd be happy to have to opportunity to scan the entire room.
This clashes with the Area of Responsibility concept, but who would not shoot a 3-meter threat in order to scan a corner.

Yes I totally agree. These reasons are why I think pointman should usually buttonhook as SOP unless the door is open and swings into the room and the team is single stacked up on the hinge side, then pointman should cross as the door may give him a few milliseconds of cover as the 2nd man comes through.
"train hard, fight easy"

ClearRight
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:39 pm

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by ClearRight » Wed Jul 08, 2015 8:29 pm

DTas wrote:From what I understand, it's better to hook, why?

Most of the opposite side is already scanned from outside, I'd rather go to where I don't see than re learning what I already saw.
Also, as the point man, I'd like to engage the first threat I see, and in order to do that, I'd be happy to have to opportunity to scan the entire room.
This clashes with the Area of Responsibility concept, but who would not shoot a 3-meter threat in order to scan a corner.
Image
More guns and bullets make bad guys go away faster,
which in turn makes everyone in the area safer.
- Paul Howe

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2806
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by Ryan » Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:52 am

DTas wrote:but who would not shoot a 3-meter threat in order to scan a corner.
You'd be surprised. Nathan has some good stories of mates freezing on the trigger against close threats in Iraq. We need to train bad habits of threat negligence out of people. Hesitation occurs more often when you give a task which conflicts against a threat or another task at hand i.e. engaging that threat. For example clearing a corner over shooting a fucker in front of you.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2806
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by Ryan » Wed Jul 15, 2015 5:31 pm

DTas wrote:From what I understand, it's better to hook, why?
This said, how do you buttonhook? I've found there are multiple "subtypes" of buttonhook - the J hook, DJT, traditional "C" hook. I have found if you're worried about an immediate threat then giving some distance and J-hooking is 'better' in theory than a "C" hook from close to the wall. I've always thought to myself that hooking can be bad news too, as it's a bigger angle and a longer distance to travel. Just like racing, your turn-in, apex and turn-out points need to be good but you're still navigating a bigger area than just crossing into it.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by jimothy_183 » Wed Jul 15, 2015 11:04 pm

Paraphrasing me Ryan? :wink:
jimothy_183 wrote:No, I believe it's because it makes it easier to hook around the doorway with the offset off the wall. By making the turn less sharp you can move around it faster. It's the same thing with motor racing, the sharper the turn the slower you have to go to get through it.
http://www.cqb-team.com/cqbforum/viewto ... f=2&t=1191
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2806
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by Ryan » Thu Jul 16, 2015 2:22 am

:lol: We have similar minds, Jimothy.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
DareTactical
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 6:24 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by DareTactical » Fri Jul 17, 2015 7:53 am

Ryan wrote:
DTas wrote:From what I understand, it's better to hook, why?
This said, how do you buttonhook? I've found there are multiple "subtypes" of buttonhook - the J hook, DJT, traditional "C" hook. I have found if you're worried about an immediate threat then giving some distance and J-hooking is 'better' in theory than a "C" hook from close to the wall. I've always thought to myself that hooking can be bad news too, as it's a bigger angle and a longer distance to travel. Just like racing, your turn-in, apex and turn-out points need to be good but you're still navigating a bigger area than just crossing into it.
This is a good topic, I personally do not have a preference between the different buttonhooking methods (yet). In the british army we used the C-hook, I believe.

I also remember watching this video a while back:

The only thing I thought was good in this video was when the pointman uses the door threshold as a springboard to buttonhook (@ 1:39)


Also an image from a post on another topic by Ryan
Image

You can see that the point man used POLR, as you see the no.2 man buttonhooking. This image highlights the problem of point man using POLR since his back is exposed. The delay between the two men entering would have been less had the pointman buttonhooked, in my opinion.
"train hard, fight easy"

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2806
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: POLR for Point Man - Cross or Buttonhook for Open Doorwa

Post by Ryan » Sun Jul 19, 2015 7:26 am

DareTactical wrote: I also remember watching this video a while back:

The only thing I thought was good in this video was when the pointman uses the door threshold as a springboard to buttonhook (@ 1:39)
This video is the doorjamb take-off. We have a thread about it here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1509. The video is a poor example of the DJT, to be fair. The videos I posted on the linked thread show SOF members conducting it, with much better execution. I think it's important to have "subtypes" of entry and different configurations (for example a high/low isn't a static technique, it can configured into other tactics). Differentiating a J-hook from a "C" (or some call a "U") hook can be the difference between life and death.

A J-hook giving you that reactionary, shooting, gap between stack and entrypoint can allow you to engage immediate threat and then turn into the corner (a win-win for Military standards). Some would argue, though, that it's overcomplicating what should be a simple process. I argue that it is still a simple process and in fact a J-hook or at minimum distance from the entrypoint to allow a reactionary gap should become standard practice.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

Post Reply

Return to “CQB entry tactics / room clearing”