Krav-Maga??

[drop bear]

Well you can see why wrestling isn’t a good idea for military. If they get into a close quarters fight it won’t be in wrestling shoes or uniform it won’t even be in street clothes. They’ll be in heavy uniforms, carry heavy Bergens, carrying an assault rifle, a hand gun, a knife and everything else on them so shooting a takedown with a massive bag on your back probably isn’t the best plan.


And that is me trash talking wrestling, wrestling’s a good sport and good to know just not for that specific situation

You realise most modern military's do grappling based martial arts now?

Mat Larsen. Of Mcmap.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Well you can see why wrestling isn’t a good idea for military. If they get into a close quarters fight it won’t be in wrestling shoes or uniform it won’t even be in street clothes. They’ll be in heavy uniforms, carry heavy Bergens, carrying an assault rifle, a hand gun, a knife and everything else on them so shooting a takedown with a massive bag on your back probably isn’t the best plan.


And that is me trash talking wrestling, wrestling’s a good sport and good to know just not for that specific situation

No, grappling is perfectly fine for the military. Fighting over weapons is a grappling game more than a striking. (if we want to break it down into those two) If you want to disable somone weapon you either have to destroy the weapon, the hand that has the weapon or close in and grapple. If we also account for armour in the military, striking can easily equate to breaking your hands or knees on somone helemt or plate etc.

I belive history also backs me up on this one, grappling is the primary method for fighting in weapon systems, for the above reasons. (obviously striking exists, but its predominately about grappling the person, thats the folly with dividing it up into grappling and striking, you do both usually when doing either)


You also would ditch your pack in any actual fighting, especially if its a proper bergen, its too encumbersome to properly fire and move in for any signficant peroid of time (or at all), you would especially ditch it if you are room clearing or trench clearing or in any situation where you would engage in hand to hand with somone. Assualt packs can vary, but they are vastly less encumbersome than bergens, and are carried for as the name implies, assualting somewhere. (effectively where you dont need to lug around more than say 24 hours worth of equipment and food etc)

Uniforms are lighter today (at least for modern militaries) than they have been with full wool issue also and are pretty much neglible for the most part. Wool did have the issue fo it took on water, but thats only a safety issue for amphibious things. Plenty of people drowned that way or at least the wool didnt help in the invasion of normandy for example. (i dont think not wearing wool would have saved you if you couldnt swim and jumped off not remotely close to the beach)

 

[Headhunter]

No, grappling is perfectly fine for the military. Fighting over weapons is a grappling game more than a striking. (if we want to break it down into those two) If you want to disable somone weapon you either have to destroy the weapon, the hand that has the weapon or close in and grapple. If we also account for armour in the military, striking can easily equate to breaking your hands or knees on somone helemt or plate etc.

I belive history also backs me up on this one, grappling is the primary method for fighting in weapon systems, for the above reasons. (obviously striking exists, but its predominately about grappling the person, thats the folly with dividing it up into grappling and striking, you do both usually when doing either)


You also would ditch your pack in any actual fighting, especially if its a proper bergen, its too encumbersome to properly fire and move in for any signficant peroid of time (or at all), you would especially ditch it if you are room clearing or trench clearing or in any situation where you would engage in hand to hand with somone. Assualt packs can vary, but they are vastly less encumbersome than bergens, and are carried for as the name implies, assualting somewhere. (effectively where you dont need to lug around more than say 24 hours worth of equipment and food etc)

Uniforms are lighter today (at least for modern militaries) than they have been with full wool issue also and are pretty much neglible for the most part. Wool did have the issue fo it took on water, but thats only a safety issue for amphibious things. Plenty of people drowned that way or at least the wool didnt help in the invasion of normandy for example. (i dont think not wearing wool would have saved you if you couldnt swim and jumped off not remotely close to the beach)

You training yet?

 

[Oni_Kadaki]

You realise most modern military's do grappling based martial arts now?

Mat Larsen. Of Mcmap.

You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...

 

[Deleted member 39746]

You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...

I presume that would be in the context of against somone who isnt a soldier or in a well equiped military. I would love to see how well grabbing the testicles goes when they are wearing groin armour. (it wouldnt go down well at all)

 

[jobo]

You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...

im not convinced that grabbing people balls is that effective to be honest not in reasonable tight fitting trousers anyway.

an ex solderer did it to me of over a slight miscommunication, he thought i had called him a mindless parasite, suppressing people over oil rights

he was seated i was standing, he grabbed my balls and squeezed very hard, it was unpleasant, rather than painful, and didnt in anyway prevent me from smashing him repeatably in the head with my fist, which seemed far more effective, judging by the fact he quickly relinquish his grip

 

[Oni_Kadaki]

Replace the ball grab with an uppercut then, or a foot stomp on the instep. Point being, grappling takes time to become proficient, and unless you're special ops, you probably aren't allotted that much time to train hand-to-hand. Striking can be taught to reasonable proficiency in two weeks. I don't think grappling can.

 

[jobo]

Replace the ball grab with an uppercut then, or a foot stomp on the instep. Point being, grappling takes time to become proficient, and unless you're special ops, you probably aren't allotted that much time to train hand-to-hand. Striking can be taught to reasonable proficiency in two weeks. I don't think grappling can.

but as with a lot of ma discussion on competence, theres no objective measure of proficiency,

grappling is what children who fight do instinctively, they need to actually learn to strike, i remember my first fight where someone punched me repeatedly, it came as a real shock at the time, i had to go away and learn that as part of my physical development

any measure of proficiency is then totally dependent on the proficiency of your opponent, if you learn to grapple to such an extent that you can put people on the ground quickly, then you, by any meaningful measure have proficiency,

i could teach someone that in a couple of hours, allowing they had reasonable physical development,, if you want to be able to tangle with people who have twice your body weight or are themselves experienced grapple'rt hat takes time

but the same is equal true of striking, an hour on a bag can teach you to punch, hitting a fast and mobile target takes a good while longer

 

[drop bear]

No, grappling is perfectly fine for the military. Fighting over weapons is a grappling game more than a striking. (if we want to break it down into those two) If you want to disable somone weapon you either have to destroy the weapon, the hand that has the weapon or close in and grapple. If we also account for armour in the military, striking can easily equate to breaking your hands or knees on somone helemt or plate etc.

I belive history also backs me up on this one, grappling is the primary method for fighting in weapon systems, for the above reasons. (obviously striking exists, but its predominately about grappling the person, thats the folly with dividing it up into grappling and striking, you do both usually when doing either)


You also would ditch your pack in any actual fighting, especially if its a proper bergen, its too encumbersome to properly fire and move in for any signficant peroid of time (or at all), you would especially ditch it if you are room clearing or trench clearing or in any situation where you would engage in hand to hand with somone. Assualt packs can vary, but they are vastly less encumbersome than bergens, and are carried for as the name implies, assualting somewhere. (effectively where you dont need to lug around more than say 24 hours worth of equipment and food etc)

Uniforms are lighter today (at least for modern militaries) than they have been with full wool issue also and are pretty much neglible for the most part. Wool did have the issue fo it took on water, but thats only a safety issue for amphibious things. Plenty of people drowned that way or at least the wool didnt help in the invasion of normandy for example. (i dont think not wearing wool would have saved you if you couldnt swim and jumped off not remotely close to the beach)

If I double leg you with a heavy pack on that should put me in the best position to fight you as my mobility is no longer compromised and I have all this extra weight in which to pin you down.

Which is pretty much the same method I use for younger more agile guys. In that I won't beat their scramble but I might beat their grind.

 

[drop bear]

You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...

Because the fundamental escapes are more important to know.

So say I teach you all of these guillotine escape and train them for a week and then at the last second say slap them in the balls.

You could probably do that.

Say I teach slap them in the balls for a week and then at the last second say do the guillotine escape.

You would have no hope.

How much time do you want to spend training slapping a guy in the balls from here? I mean anyone can figure that out. Don't get choked is the trick.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

If I double leg you with a heavy pack on that should put me in the best position to fight you as my mobility is no longer compromised and I have all this extra weight in which to pin you down.

Which is pretty much the same method I use for younger more agile guys. In that I won't beat their scramble but I might beat their grind.

They wouldnt have it on most of the time. You cannot fire and manover with a expedition pack on, in any circumstance you would have hand to hand combat, either you or the enemy would have to fire and manover to you. They especially wouldnt have it on for trench and building clearing, thats just madness.

The only real expetion for expidition bags is if you arent going to resupplied any time soon and you wont be able to hike back on the supplies you keep on your person unless its for emergencies (you more than likely going to die if you keep it on as opposed to getting sporadic fire that breaks off)


So that is just largely a non issue. And its not really exploitable either as they are more than likely going to be ditched by the enemy.

 

[Headhunter]

They wouldnt have it on most of the time. You cannot fire and manover with a expedition pack on, in any circumstance you would have hand to hand combat, either you or the enemy would have to fire and manover to you. They especially wouldnt have it on for trench and building clearing, thats just madness.

The only real expetion for expidition bags is if you arent going to resupplied any time soon and you wont be able to hike back on the supplies you keep on your person unless its for emergencies (you more than likely going to die if you keep it on as opposed to getting sporadic fire that breaks off)


So that is just largely a non issue. And its not really exploitable either as they are more than likely going to be ditched by the enemy.

You been in the army?

 

[drop bear]

They wouldnt have it on most of the time. You cannot fire and manover with a expedition pack on, in any circumstance you would have hand to hand combat, either you or the enemy would have to fire and manover to you. They especially wouldnt have it on for trench and building clearing, thats just madness.

The only real expetion for expidition bags is if you arent going to resupplied any time soon and you wont be able to hike back on the supplies you keep on your person unless its for emergencies (you more than likely going to die if you keep it on as opposed to getting sporadic fire that breaks off)


So that is just largely a non issue. And its not really exploitable either as they are more than likely going to be ditched by the enemy.

That too. But there could be an argument made about weight and backpack on or off doesn't really change it.

Otherwise it just changes from back pack to body armour and webbing.

I had a police officer once try and tell me his tool belt and the flashing lights of a cop car completely changes the dynamic.

But considering we can see people these days who fight in plate male. I think these arguments are pretty inconsequential.

 

[drop bear]

You been in the army?

Is he right or wrong?

I mean fire and movement with a backpack on winds up being pretty silly which is why a military pack has breakaway toggles in the straps.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

That too. But there could be an argument made about weight and backpack on or off doesn't really change it.

Otherwise it just changes from back pack to body armour and webbing.

I had a police officer once try and tell me his tool belt and the flashing lights of a cop car completely changes the dynamic.

But considering we can see people these days who fight in plate male. I think these arguments are pretty inconsequential.

Body armour would depend heavily, but it at least is balances, same with webbing. Its not like a big 30kg weight straight on your back, its 10 or so balances across your body. (which the other person probbly has close to the same amount on unless they are a irregular)

The trend nowdays for armour is ceramic plates, which weight less than 4 steel plates in soft body armour. Its not always worn as well, if your not likely to get shot at and you are in a climate were you are more likely to get heat exaustion its probbly better to leave it off and just keep your helmet on you. Proper fire and movement negates the chances of being shot quite a bit.


But yeah, wearing this does change the dynamic a bit. It also means you cant punch somone in the stomach who has 2 plates and soft body armour on without breaking your fists unless you have a armoured glove on. And then it wouldnt do much down to displacement of the force. Its effectively jsut fighting over your weapons and trying to shoot them with your rifle or drawing a auxilary. thats why grappling is better for it and more common, basically that video summed it up niceley "there is a reason why we/they didnt shoot them/us"

Diffrent animal by a longshot, thats pretty much fighting with weapons involved when you are used to no weapons, diffrent animal, habits can get you killed from the latter when you are in the former.


Fun thing though, apparantly the creator of MCMAP wanted to use sambo as a base, but couldnt find enough instructors for it.

 

[Headhunter]

Body armour would depend heavily, but it at least is balances, same with webbing. Its not like a big 30kg weight straight on your back, its 10 or so balances across your body. (which the other person probbly has close to the same amount on unless they are a irregular)

The trend nowdays for armour is ceramic plates, which weight less than 4 steel plates in soft body armour. Its not always worn as well, if your not likely to get shot at and you are in a climate were you are more likely to get heat exaustion its probbly better to leave it off and just keep your helmet on you. Proper fire and movement negates the chances of being shot quite a bit.


But yeah, wearing this does change the dynamic a bit. It also means you cant punch somone in the stomach who has 2 plates and soft body armour on without breaking your fists unless you have a armoured glove on. And then it wouldnt do much down to displacement of the force. Its effectively jsut fighting over your weapons and trying to shoot them with your rifle or drawing a auxilary. thats why grappling is better for it and more common, basically that video summed it up niceley "there is a reason why we/they didnt shoot them/us"

Diffrent animal by a longshot, thats pretty much fighting with weapons involved when you are used to no weapons, diffrent animal, habits can get you killed from the latter when you are in the former.


Fun thing though, apparantly the creator of MCMAP wanted to use sambo as a base, but couldnt find enough instructors for it.

So you’re ignoring my questions then and continuing to talk about stuff you don’t know about?

 

[Deleted member 39746]

So you’re ignoring my questions then and continuing to talk about stuff you don’t know about?

I will humour it with this alone: If you propose a counter argument i will reply, until then i will refer you to drop bears reply to yours which you have also ignored. It is as it stands a ad hominem and potetional strawman. (if the argument were to switch to arguing about my chracter (personal knowledge) instead of my argument) The question is also flawed, but i will leave that up to you to self diagnose. So good day.

 

[Headhunter]

.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

.

Well said.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I will humour it with this alone: If you propose a counter argument i will reply, until then i will refer you to drop bears reply to yours which you have also ignored. It is as it stands a ad hominem and potetional strawman. (if the argument were to switch to arguing about my chracter (personal knowledge) instead of my argument) The question is also flawed, but i will leave that up to you to self diagnose. So good day.

Character and personal knowledge are two different things. I know squat about thermodynamics, if someone told me that it wouldn't be an attack on my character. Just a statement.