FRACTS!

Forum to discuss hand to hand combat.

Moderators: jimothy_183, Admin

Post Reply
User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

FRACTS!

Post by Ryan » Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:43 pm

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: 703
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: FRACTS!

Post by tacticalguy » Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:35 am

Interesting. I've seen a few of these "auto response" systems come along. They usually don't find all that much traction. Hmmm... How do I say this? I'm not a fan of any one martial art over any other. I started out in Aikido but, I'll be the first to admit that it has it's limitations. That was the reason that I was so open to studying other martial arts and attempting to integrate what I learned. "Flinch Response". That's an interesting way to explain the difference between being ready to fight and being committed, in my mind. If you feel that you're "ready" when aggression breaks out, you're not. You're behind the 8-ball, already. You're reacting to the aggression which means that you're already at least 2-3 tenths of a second slower than whatever attack is coming your way. Based on what I read on their website and what I know of martial arts, they're attempting to sell you on the idea of allowing your body's "natural" instincts for self preservation to take over. I've seen this before. There are only two "natural" instinctive reactions to aggression, fight or flight. To fight successfully, according to any reasonable person, you need certain things, in measure; speed, strength, stamina, skill, surprise... My opinion is and has been, that to win a conflict, I need three things; Surprise, Speed and Violence of Action. That's where being committed to the fight comes in. I will strike first, I will strike fast and my strike will be so devastating that you won't be capable of further aggressive action towards me. Does this make sense to anyone else?
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)

civiliansheepdog
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:03 am
Location: Canada

Re: FRACTS!

Post by civiliansheepdog » Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:29 am

Looks like the F.R.A.C.T system seems to be more selling than teaching. Like how now a days everyone is like a "krav maga instructor" just because that person took a week or 2 week seminar and is fully qualified to teach. As long there aren't more jim wagners or stolen act of valor people teaching people self defense and combatives then it's okay in my books, haaha. Hopefully one day I can train with Kelly Mccann

Yes I agree with tacticalguy, surprise, speed, and violence of action. The last part is important in my opinion. I've come to some situations where I wanted to tear the mofo that wanted to fight me, but realize my life isn't in any danger and had to use reasonable force. But if one day comes where if it's a life or death situation, my emotions and mental state will kick in, kill or be killed and live another day.

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: FRACTS!

Post by Ryan » Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:00 am

civiliansheepdog wrote:As long there aren't more jim wagners.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

TG, I agree. Our artificial response mechanisms and "readiness" to respond are two separate fields but either way they're all governed by our bodies natural reactions and that is why many people teach "riding the wave" of that shock factor come "flinch" response. You ride it and kick in your responses, for you being the three principles that will initiate a strong counter; speed, aggression and surprise. Some people get surprise in the wrong bucket. Surprise doesn't mean you scare them, it doesn't mean they don't know it's going to happen necessarily either - it may be an instant counter, a way of doing an action they did not expect; once you lose surprise, you use diversion, you use unpredictability and you can regain surprise just as you can regain superiority. That is to say you're not KTFO by that stage. :evil:
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: 703
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: FRACTS!

Post by tacticalguy » Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:12 pm

Ryan wrote:
civiliansheepdog wrote:As long there aren't more jim wagners.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

TG, I agree. Our artificial response mechanisms and "readiness" to respond are two separate fields but either way they're all governed by our bodies natural reactions and that is why many people teach "riding the wave" of that shock factor come "flinch" response. You ride it and kick in your responses, for you being the three principles that will initiate a strong counter; speed, aggression and surprise. Some people get surprise in the wrong bucket. Surprise doesn't mean you scare them, it doesn't mean they don't know it's going to happen necessarily either - it may be an instant counter, a way of doing an action they did not expect; once you lose surprise, you use diversion, you use unpredictability and you can regain surprise just as you can regain superiority. That is to say you're not KTFO by that stage. :evil:
What I forgot to put in my post is that I don't disagree with any of the "science" behind an "auto response". There is however a HUGE difference between someone flailing away in a undirected attack or defense and Bruce Lee. Bruce studied Wing Chun for many years and even boxing as well as hanging around with Ed Parker before attempting to start his own "style of no style". What I'm saying is that people need a basic grounding in some style that teaches formulaic motions, first. That repetitive motion along with "sparring" teaches how techniques may be used against an opponent and instills confidence. What have we talked about in here, time and time again? The "basic training" that a person receives in SWAT School doesn't qualify a person to be a shooter on a team. That's for the senior team members and the team leader to decide after (at least one year of, MHO) training with the team. We're talking about the same thing here, in my mind. Again, just my personal opinion, here.
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)

Post Reply

Return to “Hand to Hand Combat”