The Better Way to High/Low

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

Moderators: jimothy_183, Admin

Post Reply
User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Ryan » Sat Aug 29, 2015 2:38 am



The way they slide into it, just offset from each other, looks a lot better than just standing over one another in my opinion.



Compare and contrast. Worse economy of movement in the second video.

First video was "trapping the knee" to roll-out, fyi.
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: 2793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Ryan » Tue Sep 15, 2015 5:55 am

Image

And compare to this. How about?
This is a low/high like the Israelis do.

And then compare to trapping the knee like this.
Image
Image
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: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by DareTactical » Tue Sep 15, 2015 11:48 am

The specific method of High-Low are one area where I don't have a strong opinion or preference.
However, from what I understand, it is more optimal for the low man to look straight along wall, and the high man to look at a diagonal angle at the opposing corner at the end of the corridor.


Also Ryan, I don't see the Israeli style 'Low-High' image in this post, dunno if you were meant to upload one or not. I know how it looks like but it wold be good to have it here for reference.
"train hard, fight easy"

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Ryan » Tue Sep 15, 2015 4:30 pm

DareTactical wrote:Also Ryan, I don't see the Israeli style 'Low-High' image in this post, dunno if you were meant to upload one or not. I know how it looks like but it wold be good to have it here for reference.
Try these links:
http://imgur.com/XVgy6In
OR
http://i.imgur.com/XVgy6In.jpg
They should work.

A high/low is first man staying high, second man low (the real way of doing it).
A low/high is first man going low, second man going high (the way the Americans call high/low, arseways around).
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: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by DareTactical » Tue Sep 15, 2015 6:53 pm

Oh, i think I got confused, I assumed you were gonna show me a pic of front man High and rear man Low. How is the Israeli way different from the american way?

I was always taught High-Low in the 'American' way with the 'American' designation (front man = Low, rear man = High). I assumed the israeli's did the opposite based on a video I saw by Caliber 3 (a true "high-low" as you say), but that was just one video. Your right-way-round designation is far more logical and wish it would catch on, but I'm worried it will create a lot of confusion. I think referring all of these types of positions (including "low-highs"), simply as variations "high-lows" will prevent a lot of confusion. "Reversed High-Low" perhaps?
"train hard, fight easy"

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Ryan » Wed Sep 16, 2015 1:56 am

:lol: The Art of the Tactical High-Low.

Seriously I just keep it KISS.
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."

seal236
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 2:56 pm

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by seal236 » Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:29 am

I don't get the purpose of two men doing high low when both are pointed in the same direction.

User avatar
tacticalguy
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by tacticalguy » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:25 am

seal236 wrote:I don't get the purpose of two men doing high low when both are pointed in the same direction.
Thank you for saying that. I was going to make the same point.
If you have `cleared' all the rooms and met no resistance, you and your entry team have probably kicked in the door of the wrong house.
(Murphy's Cop Laws)

The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan. (Von Clausewitz)

User avatar
Robb
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 1:23 pm

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Robb » Fri Jul 08, 2016 2:01 am

tacticalguy wrote:
seal236 wrote:I don't get the purpose of two men doing high low when both are pointed in the same direction.
Thank you for saying that. I was going to make the same point.
I was trained to use High-low when dealing with corridors. Front man looks straight along the corridor. Rear man looks a little bit off to the side at an angle. Essentially they each look at separate edges of the other end of the corridor.

Alfa47
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Alfa47 » Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:59 pm

tacticalguy wrote:
seal236 wrote:I don't get the purpose of two men doing high low when both are pointed in the same direction.
Thank you for saying that. I was going to make the same point.
Yeah, but wouldn't that double the firepower? Like, I'd rather have 2 friendlies on 1 tango than 1 on 1.

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Ryan » Fri Jul 15, 2016 12:00 pm

Alfa47 wrote:
tacticalguy wrote:
seal236 wrote:I don't get the purpose of two men doing high low when both are pointed in the same direction.
Thank you for saying that. I was going to make the same point.
Yeah, but wouldn't that double the firepower? Like, I'd rather have 2 friendlies on 1 tango than 1 on 1.
And if you approach the corner right, you can clear the 45 meaning there is no other direction to point towards. The threat has to be straight ahead. I wouldn't like to high-low into the unknown covering multiple angles but I've seen it taught. I've sure seal has done it more than a few times so he'll have his reasons.
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
tacticalguy
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by tacticalguy » Sun Jul 17, 2016 5:33 am

For me, it comes back to resources and time. If I have the men to flood with, I can see putting two men to high/low in each direction down a corridor/hallway. If I only have two men to clear a T intersection, I want them going high/low in opposite directions. Again, just me.
If you have `cleared' all the rooms and met no resistance, you and your entry team have probably kicked in the door of the wrong house.
(Murphy's Cop Laws)

The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan. (Von Clausewitz)

Alfa47
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Eastern Europe

Re: The Better Way to High/Low

Post by Alfa47 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:31 pm

tacticalguy wrote:For me, it comes back to resources and time. If I have the men to flood with, I can see putting two men to high/low in each direction down a corridor/hallway. If I only have two men to clear a T intersection, I want them going high/low in opposite directions. Again, just me.
That makes sense. Everyone does what works for them lol.

Post Reply

Return to “CQB entry tactics / room clearing”