New USMC unarmed combat system

[G1FAL]

I agree with the spirit of the program the Marines are teaching, and I believe they are actually training enough that it may have some effectiveness, though I believe the confidence and aggression gained are the primary goals.

This is actually some pretty decent training. And although it starts off mild, after a while it's 'full speed', where if you dont block right, that punch lands, and it HURTS, because the guy you're fighting is trying to hurt you. I've seen a few guys get hurt while doing the HTH training.

Just because we have all these fancy bombs and planes doesnt mean that the basics of combat should be forsaken. We've got bombs that will destroy pretty much anything, hit bunkers buried deep within the earth, but we still train in trench clearing. You never know when you'll need to know how to do something. Its not really THAT foreign of a concept for a small unit to be overrun and have to fight with knives, fists, e-tools, etc.

Gray hit on something pretty well: a lot of combat nowadays is urban stuff, 'peacekeeping' and so forth. When the bad guy is in the next room, its very possible for you to be eyeball to eyeball before very long, and your squadmates not be able to fire for fear of hitting you. Being able to kick the snot out of the BG is very important.

And those who menetioned mindset and warrior spirit hit on something important, too.

 

[Blackhawk 6]

While I am critical of the Modern Army Combatives program, I have been through the Level 1 Instructor's program and feel qualified to comment on the rationale behind its design.

For years we were taught basic strikes, kicks and throws from a variety of martial arts. No one that attended an Army hand to hand session walked away believing that he would be able to actually use the techniques to defend himself. It was not because the techniques were ineffective, but rather because it took time to develop proficiency with the technique before one could employ it effectively. Therefore, one of the criteria for the new system was that the technique needed to be effective with a minimum amount of training.

The next issue dated back to the 1850's, the amount of time devoted to training. It may shock some people but infantryman do not show up every day and spend all there time preparing to kill people. The reasons are beyond the scope of this post but the bottom line is training time is a premium and little if any is devoted to combatives. Therefore, the next criteria for the new system was that it could not require significant amounts of time to maintain proficiency.

The third issue is closely related to the second. Those involved with the development of the system look at our rather pathetic hand to hand program and compared it to the Russian Sambo program. Sambo competitions were regularly conducted throughout the Russian armed forces and since everyone received the training, everyone could participate. Our Army had been conducting "Boxing Smoker's" but only those soldiers with previous boxing experience would generally compete leaving the vast majority out of the competition. Everyone enjoys winning a medal, patch, whatever and as a result they pursue proficiency in their free time. Therefore, a criteria was that the system had to be that it supported competition at the unit level.

A final consideration was that while boxing, Muay Thai, pancrase, kung-fu, whatever are all effective systems, they either require the user to wear excessive amounts of protective equipment (usually with associated disadvantages) or the techniques cannot be performed full power, at combat speed against an opponent.

Brazilian jui-jitsu was identified as a system that met these criteria. Having perused some books written by the Gracie's, I see that we are teaching basic, intermediate and advanced techniques. The techniques selected have been assembled into combinations that allow the soldiers to conduct ten or fifteen minutes of Combatives training at the end of PT. As mentioned earlier unit competitions are aslo able to be organized to promote profficiency. Whatever your opinion, it is certainly better that what we have had in the past.

It should also be pointed out that the instructors frequently point out that the guy who wins the hand to hand fight is the one whose buddy shows up with a rifle. Even the most passive graduate of the combatives program possesses sufficient skill to keep himself alive for a minute or two

As I mentioned earlier I am not a tremendous fan of the system. Rolling around on the ground with a bad guy while my grenades, knives, pistol etc. are all within reach is not my idea of a preferred course of action. I supplement my combatives training with a system of simple strikes that supports weapon retention and personnel control. That said, I have no doubt that if a fight does go to the ground I will emerge victorious.

Sorry if I hijacked the thread.

 

[JShirley]

Even the most passive graduate of the combatives program possesses sufficient skill to keep himself alive for a minute or two

With all the respect due to your rank and grade, I disagree. I am certainly NOT the "most passive" MA student, nor was I the most passive infantry recruit. I was paired up with a recruit who was about 5" taller and maybe 18 lbs heavier than I. We started upright, jockeyed for position for a few seconds, and then he lunged forward, while grabbing me.

I went with his momentum, applying a Te Makura sacrifice throw, but letting him out of the throw just before impact, so he wouldn't hurt himself.

He had me locked up in an unbreakable choke two seconds after he hit the ground. I would have been unconscious in less than a minute. Yes, I did find out that he was an accomplished wrestler, but I- and, I am certain, 99.99999% of those who might have faced him, would have done better to just try to knock his head off.

Sir, I do understand the value of a system that will encourage participation, but I believe this system sets our soldiers up for failure, if used in actual combat.

Respectfully,

John

 

[Blackhawk 6]

I believe this system sets our soldiers up for failure, if used in actual combat.

You and I agree on this point, to an extent. I do not believe going to the ground with an opponent is the best course of action. However, our opinion aside, several soldiers trained in the new combatives program have prevailed in hand to hand encounters in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

My point was that should a soldier find himself on the ground, he is fairly well-equipped to deal with the problem. Perhaps I overstated how well-equipped the individual is. Perhaps not.

I can't speak to your experience, but I can speak to mine. I have a limited martial arts background. The sum total of my grappling skills are the result of my military training. I frequently force soldiers who are younger and larger, some of whom have extensive wrestling backgrounds, to submit. By the end of the training program I am frequently hard pressed to get a submission in a two minute bout.

In all fairness, the criteria used in the development of the system were good. I have yet to see an alternative offered that operates within the constraints that the current system does.

Again, my view point is that while well-conceived and of some utility, in reality the combatives program is incomplete and fails to address the full range of requirements that soldiers will most likely face on the battlefield.

I hope this clarifies my position.

 

[Harold Mayo]

What will be interesting is when this "new" system filters out to the general public as Marines leave active duty. There is little doubt in my mind that some black belts in this style are gonna open dojos.

 

[JShirley]

I hope this clarifies my position.

It does, thanks. I think perhaps our stances and beliefs on this may not be so different.

Since I'm not in uniform anymore, though, I just wanted to do this.



John

 

[Teufelhunden]

Throughout the training, if a student has received a disabling blow, he or she is taught to hold out both hands to the opponent, back away and say, “Stop.â€

Have yet to see that! When we went through it, most of the guys that took blows moving a little too fast expressed their desire to cease the combat by collapsing to the earth in pain. Talking with other Marines in other units, it wasn't unusual to break ribs, noses, and leg joints during the training, not from incorrectly applied techniques, but from properly applied techniques. The training schedule had to be adjusted shortly after the program's inception to slow us down and attempt to keep injuries to a minimum.

I'm very impressed with MCMAP. The program levels incorparate a good PT session in the middle to burn you out. As it was explained to me, the reason for this wasn't just for the execise benefits, but to also clearly demonstrate to the participating Marine when they went back to the strikes and locks that they work on the strength of the technique, not on the strength of the Marine. The movements are simple and logical, and much less linear than the old LINE training was. I'm glad to have another weapon in my arsenal...

-Teuf

 

[Citadel99]

Blackhawk6,

I agree with you whole heartedly. Is it a perfect program? No. But I have yet to see one. The quick program that basic trainees go through gives them a basic knowledge of some choke holds and techniques. More importantly it opens the door to further training. At most of our posts there are comabative classes at night.

In my opinion you're betteroff taking it than not. I'm a better fighter for doing so. And agreed, I can't put on a number on how many times I've heard "the guy that wins the fight is the guy with a buddy with a gun."

Also, bayonet atacks with an M4? Not my cup of tea.

Mark

 

[Ghost]

You know, just as an aside, recently the modern Army ground-fighting stuff did not fare too well against the old USMC LINE training. My fiancée's reserve unit ended up having me come to a pre-deployment "self-defense" refresher class to evaluate it, be a practice dummy, and add pointers even though I told them that I was never an instructor, just a regular 0311 whose unit put a lot of emphasis on practicing HtH.

Their unit instructor had been through whatever Army school is necessary to teach their stuff, and he was serving as a police officer before he was called up. The guy outweighed me by about 50 pounds of muscle and moved pretty well, but the problem was their system has a mindset of "defense" instead of going on the offensive. He would just get into his stance and wait for me to make a move (of course, this could be ingrained from his police training, the whole "level of proper force response" thing). In the one instance he managed to start out with me on the ground so we could demonstrate their ground fighting techniques, he managed to get me to tap out, he wrapped me up and had me locked out fairly quickly, but when we would start from standing and he would just have me advance any attack, he did not do well at all. During one instance, he moved into a strike and we had to take about a 5-minute break so he could relearn how to breathe after I hit him in the throat a little harder than I had intended to. Most of the Soldiers were very surprised that all of the basic stuff I used had been taught to me in boot camp and later SOI, and I didn't demonstrate any of the sentry removal techniques or other things we had been taught by the III MEF SOTG guys during our "Scout Swimmer" course (if memory serves, line 7 and higher). The main problem appeared to be mindset; their system taught a self-defense mindset rather than an aggressive combative style.

In addition, my fiancée had been in an MP unit prior to her deployment with a medium transportation company (all the females in her old unit were transferred before the deployment for a variety of stated reasons, but I still think the main one was because of the nature of the old units planned mission profile). During some cross training they had done with the USMC MPs, one of their more aggressive guys managed to piss of a female Marine by taking advantage of the close contact necessary when teaching restraint techniques to grope her. After disengaging and informing him that she was going to punish him for the grope, she then broke his arm and dislocated his shoulder. Duly warned and given a chance to prepare, his ground fighting techniques did not help him one bit against her current USMC MA skills.

IMHO hand-to-hand training is necessary because modern American culture does not place any emphasis on being able to handle yourself in a physical confrontation. Hell, most of the kids at college (I'm using my GIBill to get a degree so I can apply for OCS) think that my friends and I were insane while growing up because we used to go into a buddies basement, turn out the lights, and brawl with each other for fun. I tried to explain that we didn't go full speed and the worst injuries that ever occurred were a couple of broken noses, some bruised egos, split lips, black eyes, and two minor concussions, but they still thought we were nuts for doing so. The pool of people that the military has to draw upon (for the most part, usually those from either a rural or an inner city environment appear to have some personal experience with physical confrontation) has very little natural aggression as the media has advanced the idea that any violence, even in a controlled environment is a negative thing.

 

[Don Gwinn]

In my opinion you're betteroff taking it than not.

That was my argument for TKD. It wasn't very popular in Strategies and Tactics.


As several have said, even if it only increases confidence and aggression, that's a gain. Those are keys to every fight which can often (people are going to hate this, but you've all heard it before) overwhelm technique. My cousin Jeremy was mugged in Decatur, IL while home for Christmas a few years ago. This would have been about 1999 or 2000, I think, so I guess that would be the LINE era. Three unarmed young men tried to take his wallet and attacked when he resisted. He hurt two with straight jabs and knee smashes and all three fled. If they'd all been Golden Gloves boxers, he might have been in trouble, but they weren't, and his aggression and clear willingness to do violence against three opponents carried the day.

Honestly, what else should they be doing? If you really want them to train in smashing people with rocks, I will admit the combat applications, but how do you suggest they get a few hundred thousand people excited and enthusiastic about it? Also, is there that much technique involved in bashing somebody with a rock?

 

[fix]

LINE was a good system. Every time I try to point out the advantages, I am immediately pounced on by the "elite martial arts" bigots and ridiculed. LINE has the advantage of simplicity, much like the old Fairbairn system. Simple, effective, and quite violent techniques that can be taught to anyone in a matter of a few hours, and mastered with a modest amount of practice. The biggest problem with LINE is that the desired end result of an engagement is usually a crushed skull. Not so kosher in the civilian world that the Marines come in contact with both at home and abroad. MCMAP appears to be a good system, though a bit more complex. It requires more training, and appears to offer more options as it relates to ending the encounter with an opponent. Almost all LINE techniques lead to the dreaded "sweep and stomp" which tends to get messy.