Archive for February, 2010

Monday, February 22nd, 2010

Evaluating A Combat Technique

WHILE many people are attracted to systems of self-defense that boast of having literally hundreds (and in the case of some systems, thousands) of self-defense techniques, and that offer dozens upon dozens of other skills (kicks, punches, strikes, kata, traditional weaponry, meditation, exercise, self-improvement, etc.), the serious student of self-defense and close combat requires relatively few techniques.  A few dozen generally applicable and destructive “self-defense” techniques are plenty. And there is little need for more than perhaps a dozen well mastered blows, and the ability to blend and combine these in combinations that allow followup, and that lace viciously destructive moves together. Aside from skill with individual weapons, the unarmed combat aspect of close combat and personal defense can be readily and most adequately handled with less than 10% of the number of techniques that are popularly taught.

The difficult problem, of course, is selecting the right techniques. In many cases we see techniques being taught and practiced that are more of a detriment to self-defense than they could possibly be an aid! They are too complex and intricate; they are not destructive enough; and they are way too situationally specific. That is, for all the trouble one must go to in order to acquire the technique, one will — at best — be able to utilize it, if one is really skilled and lucky, in but a single, very narrow and specific context or predicament.

We have always found Col Rex Applegate’s standard for judging the value and practicality of a technique to be spot on. Although written in 1943 and first published in Kill Or Get Killed, that year, the following is as valid today as it was when the good Colonel (then Captain) first penned it:

“WILL THIS WORK SO THAT I CAN USE IT INSTINCTIVELY IN VITAL COMBAT AGAINST AN OPPONENT WHO IS DETERMINED TO PREVENT ME FROM DOING SO, AND WHO IS STRIVING TO ELIMINATE ME BY FAIR MEANS OR FOUL?”

Before you place your confidence in whatever skills you are striving to learn, test them — objectively and ruthlessly — against this simple standard.

For our visitors who train in other systems or/and who self-teach, trying to build and retain practical, life-saving abilities without the aid of a good teacher, we offer some further assistance in selecting that which you should pour your effort and time into studying. Consider te following four simple requirements, which we maintain must be satisfied before a technique can or ought to be included in a combat and self-defense training program:

1. MAKE CERTAIN THAT THE TECHNIQUE IS SIMPLE.

There are quite enough problems and dangers attendant a hand-to-hand encounter with a lethal enemy without bringing to such an event skills that are so complicated, elaborate, and acrobatic that you have all you can do remember the steps when you practice them. Simplicity and directness matter tremendously, and when any technique smacks of complexity it must go.

2. A GOOD COMBAT TECHNIQUE IS DESTRUCTIVE.

There’s no “nice” way to stop a vicious criminal predator or an enemy on the battlefield. Either you cripple, maim, or kill him, or he will do that to you. And it will not be pleasant.

“Pain compliance” is — we can tell you as a licensed hypnotherapist with more than a quarter century experience — is nonsense. It works against mildly resisting, non-dangerous pests and lukewarm “attackers”, but it doesn’t even faze a serious, determined killer (who is the type of opponent you ought to be concerned with defeating). INJURY not pain is what brings a serious enemy to a halt under combat conditions. STOP HIS BREATHING and/or INDUCE MASSIVE SHOCK TO HIS CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM. Unpleasant? Certainly. But nevertheless exactly what the real world requires.

To stop a dangerous attacker you must damage and destroy him.

3.  A GOOD COMBAT TECHNIQUE IS READILY RETAINABLE.

Only enthusiasts train regularly and continue to train in combat skills. Most people learn whatever the “course” contains, and then quit Anyone who has been in the martial arts knows that the dropout rate is astronomical.

Real world combatives and defense actions must be retainable even with little or no continued training. Obviously, it is desirable for anyone to maintain an active training schedule, but successful action using close combat techniques should not depend entirely for success upon the student’s always being in shape and in training.

When people commence training in martial arts they normally give no thought whatever to the fact that, one day, they will likely discontinue training. They do not concern themselves with the important matter of retaining and being able to employ basic defense and combat actions years from the day when they leave the program. And then, of course, there are ridiculous techniques (speaking from the standpoint of close combat and self-defense, with no intention of attacking the art, per se). Elaborate and high kicks. Fancy throwing movements. Intricate holds, and fancy methods of defending against numerous physical attacks, etc. If you must remain in hard training and be “stretched out” for whatever you are depending upon to save you to work, forget it! You are just kidding yourself.

If it won’t work reasonably well for you years after you have learned it, when you are ill, if you are in an unfavorable environment, are elderly, are out of shape, then toss it, mister! You are spending time on questionable techniques, and if you are in this for self-defense, you cannot afford to train in questionable techniques. The skills you learn must be there when you need them; whenever and wherever that may be.

Techniques must be retainable.

4. A GOOD COMBAT TECHNIQUE IS ADAPTABLE.

Instead of thinking in the “commercialized martial artsy” way (i.e. “I want to learn thousands of techniques — so that O have a perfect reaction to every specific attack that might occur!”) start to think like the combat masters of WWII thought — and taught. You want a handful of techniques that will be adaptable to thousands of varying situations and circumstances.

We have a total of approximately 125 counterattacking techniques (”self-defense” techniques) in our entire System! And we emphasize but 16 key blows and 30 attacks. We lace strangulation skills, throwing methods, takedowns, and all sorts of miscellaneous skills into our core curriculum. Contrast this with certain kenpo-karate systems that boast nearly 600 “self-defense” techniques (just for 1st degree black belt!), or with hapkido, kuk sool won, or aiki-jutsu — each of which teaches thousands of techniques. And we continue to strive to reduce, rather than add to, our core curriculum.

By the time one of our students is promoted to Yellow Belt (first promotion) he has acquired but 8 basic blows, 4 attack combinations, and 12 counterattacks. Yet, the versatility, adaptability, and practical functionality of the skills taught better prepare him to handle real world violence than most black belts enjoy in classical/traditional systems. We say this neither as a boast nor as a criticism of classical/traditional methods. We merely wish to point out that, while we respect all martial arts and schools, we must insist that the unique demands of actual, real world close combat and self-defense demand something truly suitable, and geared to the specific needs of that venue.

We do hope that what we have presented is accepted in the spirit it is intended: i.e. That of sincerely wishing to help those who wish to do so, to prepare themselves for actual emergency situations — preferably by enrolling in a school where professional instruction geared to that purpose is offered, but if not, then by supplementing their classical/traditional training with combatively functional skills, carefully selected according to realistic standards. Or, as a last but not necessarily poor resort, by utilizing our common sense guidelines for obtaining maximum benefits from self-instructional efforts via quality books on the subject (see our book review section for help in finding good books).

Good combat techniques are a great thing. If you ever need them, you will need them very badly, indeed. So take great pains to select the best. Those are the only ones you want or need.

————————————————————————————————–


Posted in Monthly Instruction | Comments Off

Sunday, February 21st, 2010
Thiis is an original 1950's edition of the book. The Paladin reprint contains the material that is in the original — in its entirety. However, it is doubtful that any professional in our field will be satisfied until he acquires an "original". If you can locate a copy of either the 1943 or the 1950's edition of Hand-to-Hand Combat be prepared to spend a hefty sum for it. In its original editions, this book it a collector's item.

Thiis is an original 1950's edition of the book. The Paladin reprint contains the material that is in the original — in its entirety. However, it is doubtful that any professional in our field will be satisfied until he acquires an "original". If you can locate a copy of either the 1943 or the 1950's edition of Hand-to-Hand Combat be prepared to spend a hefty sum for it. In its original editions, this book it a collector's item.

Paladin Press has reprinted this wartime classic, HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT, and we recommend the book highly. We first obtained a copy of this Manual in the 1950's and — like KILL OR GET KILLED and GET TOUGH!, and other wartime titles — it strongly influenced us in our development of AMERICAN COMBATO. Most especially persons working on their own to acquire self-defense skills will benefit from a careful study of this and similar works. We also emphasize that classical/traditional stylists who are into their arts for self-defense, will benefit enormously by adopting much of that which HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT presents, for use in an actual emergency.

Paladin Press has reprinted this wartime classic, HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT, and we recommend the book highly. We first obtained a copy of this Manual in the 1950’s and — like KILL OR GET KILLED and GET TOUGH!, and other wartime titles — it strongly influenced us in our development of AMERICAN COMBATO. Most especially persons working on their own to acquire self-defense skills will benefit from a careful study of this and similar works. We also emphasize that classical/traditional stylists who are into their arts for self-defense, will benefit enormously by adopting much of that which HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT presents, for use in an actual emergency.

V-5 U.S. NAVY Manual Hand-to-Hand Combat

Published originally in 1943. Available today from Paladin Press in a softcover reprint of the original edition.

WE first acquired a copy of this book in the 1950’s, and we still have it, along with another original wartime edition (published earlier), which we acquired from a bookfinder in the 1980’s. We regard these books as supremely valuable and important contributions to the literature of close combat and realistic, practical personal defense.

Wesley Brown and Joe Begala were the men who developed the hand-to-hand combat course that was taught at the U.S. Naval Institute to Navy Aviators during WWII. Both men were accomplished experts in wrestling, and Wesley Brown had also done some cursory studies in ju-jutsu and savate. Hand-to-Hand Combat is a rather complete exposition of a good deal of excellent technical material that is, for the most part, fully reliable in real world encounters — whether in wartime or on the streets of an urban city, in peacetime. Although not without some flaws, we’d rate this tome as one of the essential references for serious students of personal combat, and for all teachers who focus upon practicality and realism in the martial arts that they present to their students.

The book’s section on FUNDAMENTALS is in our opinion the most valuable part of the book. Emphasis is given here to a presentation of many gouges, blows, jabs, and other damaging actions that are forthright, practical, and easily adaptable to an infinite number of emergencies. Necklocks are explained, as are a few simple holds and throws — these last two being perhaps less than the very best actions for close combat. However, there is no great complexity in the holds and throws taught, and it is possible that with lots of practice a fit and serious trainee could apply them against a dangerous foe. In other words, this is not Kodokan judo or any of the flashy ju-jutsu one is so often presented with in “self-defense” books. The techniques are all quite practical — with some being somewhat less practical than others.

Being primarily wrestlers, Wesley Brown and Joe Begala (the two men who created and taught the WWII program to Naval personnel, and who put together the Manual) let their wrestling orientation influence a bit too much of their program’s contents. For example, their advocacy of wrestling’s arm drag and switch techniques against frontal attack is, in our opinion, questionable. Perhaps a skilled wrestler could pull this off in a hand-to-hand encounter, but we seriously doubt that anyone whose exposure to these techniques was limited to their being taught in a brief close combat course could ever make them work against a fierce military adversary, or a seasoned street assailant.

There is also a too great an emphasis in those sections of the Manual subsequent to the fundamentals section on reactive or defensive combatives. That is, the reader finds description after description of (albeit for the most part effective) self-defense responses to attacks. This neglects the all-important OFFENSIVE methods — and we therefore cannot equate the fundamental premise of this work, or the manner in which it is presented, as equivalent to that which one finds in the works of Applegate, Fairbairn (especially in GET TOUGH!), and Styers. Doubtless, graduates of the program for which this book served as a text were fierce and formidable hand-to-hand fighters, and we know that Brown and Begala did stree attack; however, we would like to see this philosophy reflected much more powerfully in the physical skills that the Manual describes.

We like the section in this Manual on knife use. It does not present a method of knifework equal in merit to that described in Kill or Get Killed, but it offers a refreshing emphasis on attacking and killing with the knife (as opposed to the ridiculous dueling, which, unfortunately, has even crept into the training today of CIA personnel at Camp Peary, and that constitutes the farce of “knife fighting” instruction so often taught in seminars and classes in the martial arts).

Oddly, the mistake that the authors of Hand-to-Hand Combat avoid when teaching knife skills, they make when describing stick techniques.  For some odd reason, the Manual contains stick vs. stick work which, while infinitely more practical and realistic than the popularly taught stick work of, for example arnis, still reflects little of what practical stick combat ought to entail (i.e. attacking and maiming or killing, with the stick — period).

Some of the weapon “disarms” (poor but common choice of words when discussing counterattacking a knife, stick, or gun wielding foe) are good, and some are not. The knife defenses are less than the best. We would not recommend them. The handgun and shoulder weapon counters are mixed in value. We would suggest not using anything like the “takeaway” described versus a pistol threat, or the counters to a man’s reaching for a shoulder-holstered sidearm using an armlock. This type of threat calls for a killing blow to the throat, or a kick to the testicles, followed up with a lethal attack — not the application of an armlock(!) as depicted in the Manual.

Offensive methods of liquidating an enemy is a good section of the book. We would never suggest that the full nelson with forward trip be taught, however, for such a purpose. Maybe a genuine wrestling master could employ such a technique in wartime by coming up behind an enemy and applying it; but no short-term pupil of a combat course could do so, if that was all the wrestling experience he possessed. Also, it takes physical superiority to make the full nelson effective under any conditions — and realistic training demands that what is taught be doable against an enemy who is stronger and larger than oneself. Additionally, the full nelson can be countered instantly and effectively by doing the most simple of actions: locking one’s elbows to one’s side upon feeling the attack commence. Better to use a knife in the back, and then slit the throat, or apply a neckbreak from behind and forget about wrestling with the guy!

Hand-to-Hand Combat is a lengthy work with a lot of good, valuable material. We do not on any account wish to leave the reader with the idea that this book is so-so. It is excellent.

On balance, despite the few flaws in its presentation, we must rate this wartime classic  “8” on a scale of 1 to 10. You are missing some real gold if you neglect a serious study of what Hand-to-Hand Combat contains.

———————————————————————————————–

Posted in Book Reviews | Comments Off