BJJ--How applicable?

Forum to discuss hand to hand combat.

Moderators: jimothy_183, Admin

Post Reply [phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2796
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

BJJ--How applicable?

Post by Ryan » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:09 pm

I have never done BJJ--how applicable is it to LE/MIL practice?

After reading this article...
http://www.bjjee.com/interview/bjj-in-t ... os-passos/
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
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by jimothy_183 » Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:53 am

Great for ground fighting and grapelling but that's where it ends.
http://www.warriortalknews.com/2012/10/book-of-five-rings-modern-application.html wrote:
“In my doctrine, I dislike preconceived, narrow spirit. You must study this well.” The lesson is clear. Do not be limited in your studies. If you study Tae Kwon Do, add Wing Chun and Brazilian Ju Jitsu to the mix to be come less "narrowly focused". If you focus on unarmed fighting, learn the knife and the gun. If you are a gun man, study JKD. Narrow mindedness kills.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2796
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by Ryan » Sat Jul 13, 2013 12:37 pm

Great quote!

I recently replied to a topic on this article.

Here it is:


There are many disappointments within the dogmatic and bureaucratic entity that is the Army of the United States especially in regards to associated training criteria. Matt Larsen perceived the fact that their hand-to-hand combat training was indeed lacking; and had been in a swirl of unchanging limited application content, even as far back as World War Two 'lessons learnt'. He was therefore the backbone behind a change that had to come but I don't think it has stopped there--room for improvement is still apparent. As stated, this program was simply a 're-invigoration' of hand-to-hand perception and training. It's not the shining light.

There's two perceptions I base my view off:
- Close Quarter Hand-to-Hand Fighting skills and certain techniques do increase the physical, mental and spiritual individual status, but in a way in which the 'paper' or 'ring' theory commonly seen, and,
- These skills must co-exist with soldiering skill and a 'soldiers reality' as opposed to Martial Artists opinion and non-combat related techniques which can be hard to delineate.

I have seen many Martial Artists and other 'fighting figures' or 'gurus' state that they have, can or will teach the Military and Law Enforcement "how-to". But they do not understand the reality of the application of what they plan to teach--and it tends to lack the realism, modifications and understanding needed. Martial Arts and "civilian" fighting methods are therefore only to be used as a partial training tool, not an insight into what will be needed in combat.

Mixed Martial Arts - Grappling specific - for example is still taught like it's the dogs bollocks but is only limited in application to combat. For example teaching to close in with the enemy and grapple is not realistic. Ecological validity is apparent. As a soldier, moving into a close engagement--nearly always defined through room clearance: Close Quarters Battle--you're not going to throw down your rifle and jump on a man. You're operating as a team, AOR's tend to operate with a buddy team either side and you have a rifle of which to use. Therefore the application of a muzzle strike, a butt-strike become more reasonable and therefore valid.

A take-down (TD) would be the last resort on the agenda of a man operating in a team, moving into a room and conducting the associated room entry against an immediate threat. Certain concepts such as a weapon-grab (door ambush) from the doorjamb should become a fixation of training more so than grappling of an unarmed combatant in my opinion. Not that the latter isn't needed, it should still be learnt but not as the bee's knee's - not as the bread and butter of such close combative engagements. Come with that the transition period, lateral segregation and co-ordination with teams and hand-to-hand can either turn into a reality or a fallacy, though I definitely advocate the teaching of combatives transitions and ways to operate the weapon in closed-distance engagements. I do not mean so much a combat knife or bayonet, but none the less they are tools still active today. For instance a co-holster with knife and pistol sheathed allows for best of both worlds on a combatives transition against a threat under twenty one foot.

In conclusion I believe more so in applications co-existing alongside combat realities such as room entry, an example the former L.I.N.E. applications as opposed to Martial Art 'technique bantering':

"Option One: disengage to regain projectile weapon range.

Option Two: gain a controlling position and utilize a secondary weapon.

Option Three: close the distance and gain control to finish the fight."
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."

civiliansheepdog
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:03 am
Location: Canada
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by civiliansheepdog » Sun Jul 14, 2013 9:13 am

BJJ it's fun to watch and it's a good art to train too, but for me personally it's not effective in a real fight. When I say real fight I mean no refs, no rules; someone dies or gets seriously injured, weapons, back ups, etc. It has good ground defense but don't be spending your whole time on the ground. If you find a good lock or a choke, do that technique 100%, don't expect for a tap out or mercy.

Davo
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 12:16 pm
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by Davo » Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:19 pm

I'm affiliated with a world class and truly international defensive tactics training provider and the Board of Directors consists of 2 BJJ Black belts and 2 brown belts. All are successful BJJ and MMA coaches with lengthy operational pedigrees. Naturally you'd assume that their program would be heavily weighted towards BJJ and grappling, but that's actually not the case..... clinch fighting, takedowns and common ground escapes yes - but BJJ no - if it comes to ground situations where the trained escapes are insufficient to deal with a highly trained and motivated offender, we escalate to tools near immediately. It's only through mat time and solid reps with a variety of partners under progressive alive resistance that students can gauge what they are capable of and when it's time to escalate.

User avatar
tacticalguy
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by tacticalguy » Tue Sep 17, 2013 3:58 am

Davo wrote:I'm affiliated with a world class and truly international defensive tactics training provider and the Board of Directors consists of 2 BJJ Black belts and 2 brown belts. All are successful BJJ and MMA coaches with lengthy operational pedigrees. Naturally you'd assume that their program would be heavily weighted towards BJJ and grappling, but that's actually not the case..... clinch fighting, takedowns and common ground escapes yes - but BJJ no - if it comes to ground situations where the trained escapes are insufficient to deal with a highly trained and motivated offender, we escalate to tools near immediately. It's only through mat time and solid reps with a variety of partners under progressive alive resistance that students can gauge what they are capable of and when it's time to escalate.
Very well reasoned out response, sir. I've always said that the old quote, "If it's stupid but, it works, then it's not stupid." is an absolute pearl of wisdom. I don't dismiss any close quarters combat system out of hand. I think that there are many times where rote responses just aren't going to be effective and too many instructors are reluctant to admit that their system isn't 100% applicable, all the time. "If it works, use it" has been my motto for 27 years.
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)

Davo
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 12:16 pm
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by Davo » Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:13 pm

Ok, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say something controversial. Something that 99% of instructors don't say: There comes a time that every technique will fail. Accept it. Train for it. Embrace it. It's not going to change. Even unconsciousness is only temporary. The only true restraint is death - and hell, with advanced medical care even that can sometimes be reversed.

Officers that bet their life and career on this or that move will one day be let down. When that happens they will often inappropriately freeze or panic because they haven't been adequately trained to default to alternate options. All too often we are told that the answer is mindset and aggression. While mindset and commitment (as opposed to uncontrolled aggression) is the other side of the same coin, this alone won't always cut it if the skills are deficient. The ability to accurately gauge and respond to the necessity to transition through different control holds, to disengage or to transition to tools when others freeze or panic makes all the difference. LEO's need to be trained to problem solve mid flight on the fly. Their TRAINED AND TESTED course of action should be aligned with their role specific strategic point of view.

I see a lot of systems out there that are made up of component parts that just don't gel. A beast comprised of the limbs, torso, head, tail and brain of different animals. An uncoordinated mutant creature that can kind of crawl in a dysfunctional kind of way but it sure can't run. It ticks all the boxes, it's got the right number of appendages and looks fine on paper but it's just not functional and doesn't work when it matters.

I've seen very few systems that are actually compatible with the LEO's mission, mindset, use of force guidelines and individual physical capabilities. Most are the mutant beast that will fail under pressure and when the system fails it's sadly the officer that's left injured or justifying an escalation of force. While there are some rock star athlete's out there that can make anything work, that doesn't help the majority of LEO's.

Once again, LEO's should be trained to accept the reality of technique failure, to quickly recognise the need to transition to alternatives options and to have the skills to do just that under pressure. Rote learning of a few key movements to pass a qualification or re-qualification test doesn't provide the student with adequate comprehension of the material to perform admirably under real resistance. All this common talk of brief scenario training whereby the student must eventually always win creates students who never had the opportunity to learn, improve and counter ambush under resistance on the mat. Their first sense of loss is on the street and they aren't appropriately trained and empowered to deal with that and turn the tables appropriately.

User avatar
tacticalguy
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Re: BJJ--How applicable?

Post by tacticalguy » Wed Sep 18, 2013 5:13 am

Davo wrote:Ok, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say something controversial. Something that 99% of instructors don't say: There comes a time that every technique will fail. Accept it. Train for it. Embrace it. It's not going to change. Even unconsciousness is only temporary. The only true restraint is death - and hell, with advanced medical care even that can sometimes be reversed.
Apparently, you and I are in that 1%, mate. I've been teaching through the use of failure drills since I started teaching close quarters combat in the U.S. Army in '87. Even before I had been exposed to the Army's form of defensive tactics though, when I was teaching aikido and aikijutsu as a civilian, I stressed the fact that there would be times when your opponent would be just too strong, practiced in his own style or just by "chance" your technique would fall apart and that a true aikidoka knew that it could happen and had contingency plans in mind. We practice Mozambique drills as a matter of course, why wouldn't we do the same with our defensive tactics skills?
Davo wrote:Officers that bet their life and career on this or that move will one day be let down. When that happens they will often inappropriately freeze or panic because they haven't been adequately trained to default to alternate options. All too often we are told that the answer is mindset and aggression. While mindset and commitment (as opposed to uncontrolled aggression) is the other side of the same coin, this alone won't always cut it if the skills are deficient. The ability to accurately gauge and respond to the necessity to transition through different control holds, to disengage or to transition to tools when others freeze or panic makes all the difference. LEO's need to be trained to problem solve mid flight on the fly. Their TRAINED AND TESTED course of action should be aligned with their role specific strategic point of view.
Couldn't agree more.
Davo wrote:I see a lot of systems out there that are made up of component parts that just don't gel. A beast comprised of the limbs, torso, head, tail and brain of different animals. An uncoordinated mutant creature that can kind of crawl in a dysfunctional kind of way but it sure can't run. It ticks all the boxes, it's got the right number of appendages and looks fine on paper but it's just not functional and doesn't work when it matters.
Ah, the "super martial art" syndrome. I've seen it, too. No smooth transition between techniques, looks like the originator of the system sat down and borrowed from 20 different styles to create the "ultimate" style... Uh-huh.
Davo wrote:I've seen very few systems that are actually compatible with the LEO's mission, mindset, use of force guidelines and individual physical capabilities. Most are the mutant beast that will fail under pressure and when the system fails it's sadly the officer that's left injured or justifying an escalation of force. While there are some rock star athlete's out there that can make anything work, that doesn't help the majority of LEO's.

Yup and unfortunately, those systems are being pushed by "higher authority" on their depts and when the officers are injured while attempting to use this or that technique the assessment by the dept is: "the officer attended the requisite classes in the XYZ system but, failed to employ the techniques successfully, resulting in injury to the officer, the subject or both."
Davo wrote:Once again, LEO's should be trained to accept the reality of technique failure, to quickly recognise the need to transition to alternatives options and to have the skills to do just that under pressure. Rote learning of a few key movements to pass a qualification or re-qualification test doesn't provide the student with adequate comprehension of the material to perform admirably under real resistance. All this common talk of brief scenario training whereby the student must eventually always win creates students who never had the opportunity to learn, improve and counter ambush under resistance on the mat. Their first sense of loss is on the street and they aren't appropriately trained and empowered to deal with that and turn the tables appropriately.
Sir, you and I MUST be psychically connected. You have managed to state succinctly the very things that I have spoken at considerable length about, numerous times to LE depts and security agencies. The quick and easy path is always preferred to the slow and stony one.
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
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1275: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Return to “Hand to Hand Combat”