SCARS

[freelancer]

Anyone know anything about SCARS? $1800.00 for a three day training course sounds crazy. Anyone seen the videos?

[usnavy-233]

Here’s a couple good reviews:
From http://www.navyseals.com

FAQs about BUD/s Training.
Can you tell me, if it’s not classified info, a little bit about Navy SEAL hand to hand combat? There are many advertisements in Black Belt magazine that claim to be the instructors of the SEALs or the style that the SEALs use, like Col. Jerry Peterson’s SCARS, Lew Hick’s SAFTA, Richard Burton Jeet Kune Do. Also do they have any opinion about the Ultimate Fighting Championship, Brazilian Jiujitsu, and grappling in general? One contestant in the UFC, John Bess, or Hess, who said he was the co-founder of SAFTA, lost his fight which consisted mostly of punching.

All the claimes in Black Belt Magazine or SOF are semi-true. Jerry Peterson, Lew Hicks and Richard Burton all had some involvment with SEAL hand to hand combat programs. East Coast teams used Jeet Kun Do for some number of years in the 80’s and 90’s. Peterson modified San Soo Kung Fu into his \”Special Combat Aggressive Reactionary System (\”SCARS\”) and sold it the NSW as a complete combat fighting system. It was a pretty decent program – I participated in the 2nd 30 day intensive instructor course and I can validate that it is a very effective offensive fighting system. Jerry’s problem was his ego and inflexibility. Also there were people in NSW who thought it should be an internal program and not external. So hand to hand training at the Schoolhouse level (as opposed to informal) was brought into the Naval Special Warfare Center Advanced Training and is now called the Combat Fighting Course and is taught as part of Close Quarter Battle training.
Now SAFTA was a creation of Lew Hicks. Lew was Jerry’s top SEAL student. My impression of SAFTA is that it is SCARS with new terminology and marketing – along with a few SEAL specific tricks thrown in. Whereas Jerry Peterson claimed to have combat experience, he had no special operations experience. Lew never sold SAFTA to Naval Special Warfare, but did train a number of SEALs on the side \”unofficially\”. UFC contestant Hess was a student of Lew Hicks whom he partnered with for the purposes of gaining greater exposure for the SAFTA fighting system.
That is my take on your questions. Some of my details may be a little fuzzy – but I am pretty sure it is mostly accurate.

Mark D.
NavySEALs.com

And A Video Review by Phil Elmore, from The Martialist (http://www.themartialist.com)
Jerry L. Petersen’s Special Combat Aggressive Reactionary Systems Combat Fighting Course (SCARS/CFC) is touted as being \”proven in combat.\” Depending on to whom you speak, this modern martial arts style is or was what SEALs are taught, what sailors in the UDT/SEAL qualification course are taught, improved Kung Fu San Soo, repackaged Kung Foo San Soo, all of the above, or none of the above.
The SCARS system is offensive, not defensive, in nature — a point on which the SCARS material harps constantly. This is a valid concept, though the utter horror with which some SCARS stylists view terms that even sound defensive rather than offensive in nature is a bit overdone. In SCARS, there are no \”blocks\” — only strikes. This is semantics, of course, but you can make an argument for insistence on offensive terminology only as building and triggering the appropriate mindset for the aggressive fighter.
The \”science\” of SCARS, autokinematics, seems built on the idea that striking a person in a certain way will reliably and repeatedly produce the same result each time. While there are certain generalizations you can make reliably regarding what a person will do when you strike them a certain way in defined areas, I think building an entire system on the idea takes the concept too far. I mention this now because it goes to the heart of what SCARS is as a style.

[usnavy-233]

Marketed as a scientifically devised system, this type of terminology — \”autokinematics,\” \”neuro-offensive linguistics,\” and so forth — characterizes the manner in which the material is presented. While complex terminology is not automatically a bad thing, the individual student will have to decide if this presentation makes sense or feels complicated for its own sake.
The first of the two tapes begins with some nicely shot footage of trainees training and soldiers soldiering. A graphic block proclaims this the \”Original NAVY SEALS Hand to Hand Combat Program.\” Without preamble, Petersen begins Lesson 1 and continues through Lesson 10. The second tape contains Lessons 11 through 25.
Production values and sound of the videos are superb. These are very professionally produced. Audibility is great, which is saying something, given the poor audio that plagues so many instructional martial arts videotapes. The picture is crisp, the training environment is clean and relatively free of distractions, and the action is easy to follow.
The demonstrations on the tape all seem to involve an incredibly compliant attacker. The technique chains demonstrated also seem too complex, at least at times. A few won’t work as demonstrated, either. For example, a radial nerve \”strike,\” in which the arm is brought down in an arc to attack the radial nerve of the attacker’s limb as he delivers a punch, simply cannot be done fast enough to intercept an aggressive hook. My Wing Chun instructor demonstrated this to me as we discussed the same technique as demonstrated in one of Tim Larkin’s TFT tapes.
Given the prominence of circular blocks in the SCARS system, one section of the manual deserves comment on this score, too. \”Windmill strikes\” — large arcing movements of the arms — are described in the manual as \”the most versatile type of movement. If properly done, a windmill strike will stop either a right or left attack from a punch or a kick.\” This type of generalization strikes me as unsound, though the caveat \”if properly done\” can be used to excuse a multitude of sins. While circular motions are indeed effective when done tightly and timed properly, arcing blocks simply aren’t fast enough to justify what I see as the overdependence on them described in the manual. \”These two striking moves will replace any blocking moves you have learned in the past,\” the text proclaims.
While proper breathing is extremely important, the very specific breathing Petersen uses to accompany different kinds of techniques sounds vaguely ridiculous and overcomplicates the issue. Hearing him yell, \” Wah! Yah! Wah!\” while executing large circular radial nerve blocks (excuse me, strikes) and deep upper cuts to the solar plexus and jaw reminded me of the old Batman television series starring Adam West. Pow! Biff! Bam!
The accompanying spiral-bound manual (every single page of which bears the prominent and too-dark watermark declaring COPYRIGHTED INFORMATION ñ DO NOT REPRODUCE/ SCARS INSTITUTE) contains an overview of SCARS, a discussion of the SCARS combat mindset, text on autokinematics, a section on body mechanics and dynamic breathing, line drawings illustrating the natural weapons of the body, an explanation of \”positions of balance,\” and copious space for \”personal notes.\” Strike charts and \”working-out\” procedures are followed by explanations of the 25 \”combat lessons\” demonstrated on the two tapes.
The quality of the line art illustrating the manual ranges from good to mediocre. The illustrations for the \”combat lessons\” are fairly useless, as they don’t clearly show what the techniques involve. (This is not an uncommon problem when trying to demonstrate movement with line art, but these illustrations could be a lot better.) The manual concludes with an appendix containing \”fighting sets,\” which look to be graphic depictions of technique combinations.

[usnavy-233]

As a style, SCARS is marketed as being extremely effective. I cannot say, based on the presentation in this book and video set, that I find it so. While there is some material of value here, and the videos are worth watching if you can get your hands on them, their hefty price tags generally outpace their value.
As a result I do not recommend the SCARS/HCS system.

______________________________________________________-

Now my take on the system.
I have no experience with this as it was already phased out before I arrived at the teams so my opinion is one deduced of logic and common sense rather than personal experience. When I came into the community they were (and still are) teaching CQD. CQD is good for what it is but it is not a self-defense system, this is not its intention. Keep in mind that SEAL fighting revolves around gear and weapons. If we were to need to rely on unarmed self-defense that would essentially mean that our primary weapon had failed, then our secondary, none of our buddies have a working secondary to give me, and now weíre standing in the middle of a firefight holding a knife or an empty gun. This is the epitome of ìthe shit has hit the fanî. So, keeping that in mind, CQD is a fine system incorporating weapons and gear for the mission we have. Now, I would imagine that if SCARS were all it is cracked up to be that either 1) the teams would still be using it or 2) allot of team guys would be pissed that itís gone. I saw neither from any of my teammates. Take that for what itís worth.

[freelancer]

Man.. great reply usnavy. I was talking to a guy at work about Krav and he brought up SCARS, which I had never heard of and checked out their web site.

Sounds like it has some merit but nothing I would be interested in. How often would operators refresh their skills with a system like this? Are their regular trining cycles that cover H2H? Is the new system another modification of the basic tenents of the old system?

[usnavy-233]

Re:

quote \”Freelancer\:

Man.. great reply usnavy. I was talking to a guy at work about Krav and he brought up SCARS, which I had never heard of and checked out their web site.

Sounds like it has some merit but nothing I would be interested in. How often would operators refresh their skills with a system like this? Are their regular trining cycles that cover H2H? Is the new system another modification of the basic tenents of the old system?

One would attend an abbreviated course during BUD/S and then a slightly more in-depth course at SQT (SEAL Qualification Training). Once at a platoon, it’s not part of the regualr platoon workup cycle but refresher training can be obtained during the PRODEV (Professional Development) cycle.

As far as whether CQD is similar to SCARS, CQD was created by a guy named Duane Dieter. His website is: http://www.cqd.net/

Of note, Black Hawk industries have a line of products from his \”Masters of Defense\” collection. Itís mostly knives, weapons catches, gear, etc. Funny, when I went through CQD training, they made us all sign non-disclosure agreements because we weren’t allow to show anyone else \”our\” techniques. Now the website lists a link for \”private citizens\” training.

Since I don’t know much about SCARS really, I can’t say for sure if it’s that similar. I do know that the premise behind CQD is also offensive in nature. Allot of prisoner control tactics, weapons strikes, and offensive maneuvers. So I guess one could reason that it’s a different ballpark but the same game.

My personal opinion is that Krav Maga is a far better choice for the average person to learn and that SCARS, LINE, CQD, etc are better left for operators that have a specific mission. Just my two cents.

[clfmak]

SCARS and san soo are divided into \”lessons\” that are what many martial arts would call techniques, similar to American Kempo. Unlike krav maga, every follow up move is predetermined. As someone punches you, you block with your right hand as you step into a particular stance. The same hand darts into the eye. A prescrcribed series of punches, kicks, throws or stomps ensue, because each previous strike sets it up based on the opponent’s reaction. Everything about it is opposite of CQB as I understand it. CQB generally involves nonspecific techniqes more similar to krav maga. Instead of \”someone is choking you from behind- rotate your body right as your right elbow circles to clear the arms, then deliver a right up elbow, followed by a right eye rake, followed by a sweep and a right stomp to the face\”, its more like \”someone is choking you- use the available strikes you’ve learned to get him off you, then create space\”. CQB uses basic strikes you can do under stress- a palm strike to the face or knee to the groin, while SCARS/San Soo uses precise pin point strikes that may be difficult under stress- a middle knuckle strike to the eyeball or philtrum. CQB uses stress drills with unchoreographed resisting opponents , while SCARS/san soo trains a person to feed a certain attack to their partner, who react as prescribed as the set technique is done. To recap:
SCARS:
Specific series of movements as counters to attacks
Pinpoint strikes against small anatomical entities
Compilant choreographed training
CQB:
nonspecific concept driven attack and defense
gross motor skills against easy to attack anatomical structures
noncompliant unchoreographed training
If we assume that violence unfolds in chaotic and rapidly changing way, and that people are more likely to remember a simple set of moves that is appliable against a wide variety of situations over learning a complex series of moves against each specific attack, it seems that training for soldiers, who don’t get lost of time to train for hand to hand fighting, CQB type training is far more practical and applicable for military. Masters of Defense also makes some really good knives.

[clfmak]

I remember a while back on the Attack Proof forum, which went down a few years ago, there was a guy who did SCARS. Aside from the san soo, there’s also what they call compression groudfighting. I assume this comes from the term compression strikes, that are used standing up. There’s also modern weapon disarms, which I’ve actually read good things about, but can’t comment on these things personally.

There’s an article by a guy that went to a SCARS camp:
http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=46

Some notes I’ll mention about compression groundfighting:
On that link about halfway down, there’s a hold that attacks the shoulder and neck simultaneously- it seems like it would totally not work. Also:
\”For example, I had never appreciated the variety and lethal effectiveness of \”compression\” attacks before taking this camp. One such killset involves, first, making your opponent throw up by twice striking a certain nerve plexus and then insuring, by a brutal compression, that, while gasping for the air he can no longer get, the man breathes in only his own hot vomit.\”
Sounds pretty brutal, but also sounds very suspect- unlike conventional grappling where you can apply about half the pressure and see where it would go at full speed, you can’t make someone sort of breathe in their own vomit.

[anonymous]

The article is interesting. They don’t give many sample techniques, so it’s difficult to judge.

If they always attack rather than defend first and then strike, I wonder what they do in case of gun attacks. Do they redirect the weapon first or strike right away without a redirection in these cases, too?

Of course an immediate strike where a defense isn’t necessary would be even faster and better than a defense and then counter, but what if you are late and your strike isn’t going to get there fast enough? Why not make a simultaneous defense, just in case, the way we often do in KM?

I’m also a bit skeptical about training a whole succession of counters and relying on the opponent to react a certain way. It could work, but what if you miss the crucial nerve point due to fear and stress and the opponent doesn’t react the way you thought he would? Then you might be stumped and don’t know how to adjust to the new situation.

There are also some things that sound strange, such as having a method to keep 30 guys from pinning you against a wall, although the author said that it was possible and he was even able to learn this technique quickly.

5000$ for 40 hours sounds like a steep price. Something rich people would pay in order to pretend to be a special op for a few days.

So, I don’t know, it may work, one would have to take the course to know for sure, but, just judging from the article, I think KM may work better for ordinary civiians, especially smaller ones (since they seem to incorporate a lot of throws and a high kick to the neck is shown, harder for short people to do).

_________________
Giantkiller

[clfmak]

The \”attack only\” thing is mostly semantics- there are various types of blocks they utilize, but rather than just redirecting a limb, it is \”attacked\” with the block, for instance using the edge of the hand to chop the forearm as a punch arrives. Or blocking a knee with an elbow spike. So I would assume that against a gun one of these limb attacks is employed to redirect the line of fire.

In that picture of the guy getting kicked in the throat, I think that was supposed to be a kick to a guy who was bent over, and the followthrough make it look like a high kick.

I believe I read somewhere that the method to keep the guys from pinning you to a wall was to palm strike under the nose or chin and keep driving through to use that guy like a battering ram. In my opinion, there’s no way you can learn one technique quickly to keep all those people away. Its too chaotic. Unless that technique involves some sort of weapon.

Anyway, if SCARS is indeed modified san soo, there’s some cool clips of that around:
http://www.combatdvds.com/samples.htm I’m a fan of the type of kneebar in the second video on this link. I’mve never tried it against a well trained grappler, but it has worked well in subduing friends of mine, and I think submissions you can instantly release and be in an upright stance are preferrable in reality.
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/images/gl18a.mpg sort of an ankle pick takedown
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/images/gl2a.mpg somewhat impractical looking but fun to watch technique.
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/images/yl10b.mpg interesting grappling hold/takedown to throat kick
http://www.sansoo.com/ the front page has some very pro wrestling looking techniques.
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/Videos/Chuck/Lesson1/lesson-one_wmv.htm
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/Videos/Society/Tape1/society-low.htm there’s some interesting leg manipulations here.
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/Videos/Hopkins/Total%20Body/Total1.htm There’s some interesting stuff here too. The second clip of him (the link doesn’t go directly, but you can find it) is a duck under a punch to a groin attack, followed by a web hand to the throat, followed by an ankle pick to a rolled over calf crusher, or what I believe is sometimes called a half boston crab.
http://www.easthillskungfu.com/Videos/Shores/Summer2002/Summer2002.htm more leverages, etc.
Some of the material looks pretty good, other stuff looks horrible. If I was in the market for San Soo videos, I would look into the combatDVD ones on account of the actual MMA success of the makers.

[anonymous]

Hmmm, so for the 30 guys he pushes the head of the closest guy back, then drives him through the other guys? Then what does he do? Let go of the guy? Run? How does he deal with the remaining 29 who will be coming after him, even if he breaks through?

Maybe the ram could work, although 30 people is a high number, what if they pull the defender away from that one guy, or hit/choke him from behind or the side as he is trying to ram his way through? I assume it would take at least a couple of seconds to plough your way through 30 people, possibly longer and all the while they’d be free to attack you and pull you away from the guy used as a ram. But one would have to try this, especially if it’s fewer than 30 people and the crowd around you isn’t quite so dense.

_________________
Giantkiller

[Author]

Posts