- This topic has 31 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
CLFMak
I thought that was what you were saying in the previous post, I’m guessing Shan Sou
is something different?San shou is a kickboxing style. Its actually derived from kung fu, but resembles something between muay thai and American kickboxing. Takedowns are legal, and there are a large number of them, especially from kicks. Kung Lee is probably the best known san shou fighter, you may have seen his signature scissor takedown at some point- really cool move.
San soo is something different. It forms the bulk of the SCARS system, minus the compression groundfighting. San Soo focuses on agression and autokinetics (the concept that people will react in certain ways to strikes, like covering the face when poked in the eye or arching back when struck in the kidney). The agression is trained by an absence of defensive moves- blocking moves are called strikes to the arms and legs. From what I understand, there are forms, and two man techniques where there are specific follow ups trained based on the autonomic responses (ie strike an incoming arm on the forearm, follow with strike to eyes, then strike exposed midsection). They are one of those \”too deadly for the ring\” traditional styles, with lots of strikes like spearhands and chops.
Just a comment on the MCMAP
It has met a lot criticism because the marines that are taught it are not necessarily good h2h fighters. This is mainly due to the fact that they learn on ly the bare necessities of the system. However, an man that attends my church is an instructor trainer for MCMAP, and I assure you he can hold his own with any other fighting style. I guess it all goes back to how much training and instruction you are given, no matter what style.
HI,
What do you mean when you seen military systems?
A system made by military or ex military people? I dont thing so. A system still tested by the military, made for and by the military experts.
Krav Maga is truly like that. Sambo – made by the russians – is like that. Sorry, but systema is a joke…ask any russian about it, it is a marketing stuff. The very secret style of the comminust Russia…hehe…
Vietnam has another style, TKD, hapkido is again not combat proven, although TKD made by General Choi, but try those spinning kicks in full armor…
Haganah is made by an ex military. Is it tested, used by many people in true danger or combat?
The Russian Millitary has nothing whatsoever to do with Systema much like the US millitary has nothing to do with SCARS. You can say that Systema is the Russian SCARS – over the top advertizing, exaggerated claims, and no real link to the millitary.
The Russian soldiers get a very basic course in hand to hand combat on the base of combat sambo. Those that chose to train further and compete have the option to do so. The hand to hand program in the Russian millitary is actually pretty damn good, it’s just not mandatory for all soldiers.
This might be a question for Mr. Whitman, or someone else with the experience or knowledge. But, why is it that the Krav Maga that is for public consumption — what Krav HQ in the USA teaches, is different than what the IDF is trained in, or, I should ask, is it different?
I base this on having trained with a former IDF member for several months in 1990. He didn’t call it Krav Maga either. We just called it close combat. But, based on the history of Krav Maga, I have to assume that he was trained in Krav Maga.
Kravist, it was more than likely Krav or his version of what he learned. (But) Changes have been made to the system – it can’t always stay the same. Krav is taught to the IDF in a simple 3 week training session usually – It’s the basics so it’s taught, then if you are in a special forces branch or anti-terrorism squad there are other things taught. Some are obviously secret and not going to be taught to just anyone. And so what? Military is based around guns and bombs. Our own military is constantly changing what they teach the troops it is just common sense.
There is an article about military training in February’s Black Belt magazine. I didn’t get to read it though, because I was in the store and my meter was running… 😥
Oh, well, maybe next time.Just thought I’d pass this on….
Phillipines is Pekit Tirsia Kali
Hand to hand is the absolute last ditch, worst case scenario.. Lots of weapons to go thru before you arrive at that desperate situation.
For the Phillipines it is only Pekiti Tirsia Kali which covers armed and hand to hand.
From http://www.pt-go.com
Today in the Philippines, Grand Tuhon Gajeís system of Pekiti-Tirsia is the ONLY Filipino Martial Art system recognized as official warfighting doctrine by the Armed Forces of the Philippines. The Military Edged-Impact Weapon System of Pekiti-Tirsia is the official close-quarters combat system of the Force Reconnaissance Battalion, Philippine Marine Corps (PMC) and is part of the official PMC Schools command being taught at Enlisted Basic Training and the Officerís Basic Course. The success of this program has spurned training requests from all other branch services of the AFP and the Philippine National Police (PNP).
Re: Phillipines is Pekit Tirsia Kali
quote \”dallasvideo\:Hand to hand is the absolute last ditch, worst case scenario.. Lots of weapons to go thru before you arrive at that desperate situation.For the Phillipines it is only Pekiti Tirsia Kali which covers armed and hand to hand.
From http://www.pt-go.com
Today in the Philippines, Grand Tuhon Gajeís system of Pekiti-Tirsia is the ONLY Filipino Martial Art system recognized as official warfighting doctrine by the Armed Forces of the Philippines. The Military Edged-Impact Weapon System of Pekiti-Tirsia is the official close-quarters combat system of the Force Reconnaissance Battalion, Philippine Marine Corps (PMC) and is part of the official PMC Schools command being taught at Enlisted Basic Training and the Officerís Basic Course. The success of this program has spurned training requests from all other branch services of the AFP and the Philippine National Police (PNP).
Thanks, I made the adjustment.
Very informative!
Questions for CLFMak
Have you ever served in the US Armed Forces?
Where did you get the information about MCMAP and LINE, about them being highly criticized?
Thanks,
0369
Re: Military based training, LET’S MAKE A LIST!
If you want the FACTS about MCMAP instead of all the opinions (many of which are wrong) here is the USMC order on the program-note the program is much broader than just H2H techniques. http://www.usmc.mil/news/publications/Documents/MCO%201500.54A.pdf
Re:
quote ppct_dti:Questions for CLFMakHave you ever served in the US Armed Forces?
Where did you get the information about MCMAP and LINE, about them being highly criticized?
Thanks,
0369
I don’t remember; this is a four year old thread. I’m kind of surprised I still post here.
Re: Military based training, LET’S MAKE A LIST!
It’s not hollywood like everyone thinks it is the H2H stuff your talking about for most this stuff is very basic i had better combatives training back at chatsworth. Theyre isnt really a huge emphasis on it since its isnt used all that often I have a better chance of getting hit by lighting or winnning the lottery. Im not saying it doesnt happen cause it does. Mainly during CQB which is why your unit trains (or should) have you train in CQD which has techniques tailored to meet the needs of unit like most special operations units do nowadays ex weapons retentions, knife defensives with or without weapons, taking down combative HVT etc. The LINE system was pretty good got to see some of it before they stopped teaching it however it was deamed by the military as too violent (cause dropping bombs isnt) and alternative means were introduced making a new system one that didnt just finish with killing. Theyre both not bad, but I wouldnt put my life in its hands. lol
Re: Military based training, LET’S MAKE A LIST!
As I understand it, the relative lack of hand-to-hand combat training we now see in the United States military is mostly the result of a revolution in American battle tactics.
Originally, US training focused on the development of each soldier – development of personal fortitude, accuracy with a rifle, close combat, etc. However, as the face of modern combat began to emerge around the Vietnam conflict, a change occurred.
With the advent and increasing advancement of firearms, it simply became an inefficient use of time and funds to train an individual infantryman to a high level of hand-to-hand proficiency. The focus was no longer on the accuracy of a soldiers aim, but on raw firepower. So then, the average infantryman simply needs to be physically conditioned, taught the basics of a standardized weapon, and – most importantly – taught how to fit in to a unit. There’s just no more sense in training every basic soldier to fight in an unarmed situation.
On the other hand, special forces units are highly individualized and incisive. Given their often close-quarters situation and high mobility, hand-to-hand is altogether necessary.
Well, that was long-winded. . . Why do I feel like I’m in school all over again?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
