Intro and a chance for you all to wade in!

**bwerb** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:17pm

I'll ask again...what is the make-up of the students in the course? Military, security, police, ex-military bodyguards etc. or "average joes". If it is average joes, why would any of them (yourself included) need to aspire to reach "phase three" where you would be learning techniques for which you would have little to no use of no matter how bad a situation you found yourself in...unless you were actually using them as part of your job.

I think this is where the sport/street/RBSD classes are really all forms of self-delusion...most of the time we do them for FUN. Sure there are techniques, tactics and training at each one which have total application to self-defense but at least in BJJ we acknowledge that it is largely a competitive sport (with some great real world applications). I think where the RBSD communities can really get off tangent is when they ultimately fail to acknowledge that they too are really a form of sport/fun and in some ways just as self-deceptive in their insistence that they are "real". Sure if you are in the military some of this is "real" but for "Jack from suburbia" learning how to track and silently assasinate or capture an unwarry target is nothing more than dress-up (again albeit a fun one and one with SOME practical applications).

**Enech** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:30pm

It is a mixed make up. The majority of the students would be police, military reserves, and university students (the last two often being the same group). I have been in security work before I graduated with my PhD in Chemistry (one has to pay the bills somehow). I say again phase three is hand picked. I never got to the point of having that choice given or taken away from me as I moved to the USA to persue a career in research. All the phase three people partake in security, police, or military work at some point! It is not thus dress up.

**Cdnronin** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:37pm

Originally Posted by Enech

Yes indeed it is CQB. Tank (Geoff Todd) is the master cheif instructor. Like all martial arts and fighting systems there is of course pissing matches between various schools. SOme US practitioners (who would rather shoot a gun than get up close and personal) do not believe his credentials (after all how could someone from a small country be trained that indepth?) this leads to bad blood and insult flinging. As I said not that different from martial arts I guess.

Phase tests are hard core. A friend of mine (female .... we all test with each other) left with 2 broken rinbs, a cracked shin and more bruises than when I got run over by a mini). I left with a hyper extended knee, a chipped tooth, and a mild concussion. I came of easy.

would these US practioners you are referring to be the long time Charles Nelson students on the Yahoo group, who I believe would be more than willing "to get up close and personal", or have you come across this re-action in other places? why do you assume they would rather shoot? Perpetuating regional stereotypes?

**bwerb** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:50pm

Originally Posted by Enech

It is a mixed make up. The majority of the students would be police, military reserves, and university students (the last two often being the same group). I have been in security work before I graduated with my PhD in Chemistry (one has to pay the bills somehow). I say again phase three is hand picked. I never got to the point of having that choice given or taken away from me as I moved to the USA to persue a career in research. All the phase three people partake in security, police, or military work at some point! It is not thus dress up.

Thank-you...that's what I was looking for. You can understand where I'm coming from though right? If you are not going to use these tactics in your job (at phase three) you are really doing this for fun and it is now one step (at least) removed from the reality you could be expected to face in the realm of self-defense...it has become a "sport".

**Enech** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:52pm

Originally Posted by Cdnronin

would these US practioners you are referring to be the long time Charles Nelson students on the Yahoo group, who I believe would be more than willing "to get up close and personal", or have you come across this re-action in other places? why do you assume they would rather shoot? Perpetuating regional stereotypes?

Do a google search on CQB and CQC, most sites are reactionary shooting, and combat shooting. Yes Mr Nelsons students indeed do close quarter unarmed comabat.

Further I am NOT perpetuating any regional stereotypes, my wife has been a member of the NRA, my wife was born in the southern US states, and my wife worked on the first Bush campaign. She is no gun nut, and I do not think every US citizen is!

**Enech** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:54pm

Originally Posted by bwerb

Thank-you...that's what I was looking for. You can understand where I'm coming from though right? If you are not going to use these tactics in your job (at phase three) you are really doing this for fun and it is now one step (at least) removed from the reality you could be expected to face in the realm of self-defense...it has become a "sport".

Like I said I never made it to phase three (I barely have touched phase two), Geoff would have had to decide IF I was suited if I ever get that far. If I make it that far I will move from an academic and or research career to on that can use both sets of skills (security consulting? )

**Tom Kagan** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 12:59pm

Originally Posted by bwerb

... Sure if you are in the military some of this is "real" ...

There are about 5,000 people aboard an aircraft carrier, including at least one person whose full-time job is to restock the candy machines.

I'll contend that, for an overwhelming number of people in the military, this isn't "real" either. :smile:

**Cdnronin** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 1:28pm

Originally Posted by Enech

Do a google search on CQB and CQC, most sites are reactionary shooting, and combat shooting. Yes Mr Nelsons students indeed do close quarter unarmed comabat.

Further I am NOT perpetuating any regional stereotypes, my wife has been a member of the NRA, my wife was born in the southern US states, and my wife worked on the first Bush campaign. She is no gun nut, and I do not think every US citizen is!

Whether or not most sites that reference CQC or CQB include shooting, when you make a statement " SOme US practitioners (who would rather shoot a gun than get up close and personal) do not believe his credentials (after all how could someone from a small country be trained that indepth?) this leads to bad blood and insult flinging. " it STRONGLY implies that you have had run-ins (on line or otherwise) with one or more of these groups.

When I asked"would these US practioners you are referring to be the long time Charles Nelson students on the Yahoo group, who I believe would be more than willing "to get up close and personal", or have you come across this re-action in other places?", I was not looking for a lesson in google-fu, simply whether you were referring to the Yahoo group I mentioned, or if you have had the same reaction elsewhere.

So, just to be sure no one is confused about what I am asking, when you refer to people who would rather shoot than get up close and personal, who are you talking about/

**Enech** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 1:41pm

Originally Posted by Cdnronin

Whether or not most sites that reference CQC or CQB include shooting, when you make a statement " SOme US practitioners (who would rather shoot a gun than get up close and personal) do not believe his credentials (after all how could someone from a small country be trained that indepth?) this leads to bad blood and insult flinging. " it STRONGLY implies that you have had run-ins (on line or otherwise) with one or more of these groups.

When I asked"would these US practioners you are referring to be the long time Charles Nelson students on the Yahoo group, who I believe would be more than willing "to get up close and personal", or have you come across this re-action in other places?", I was not looking for a lesson in google-fu, simply whether you were referring to the Yahoo group I mentioned, or if you have had the same reaction elsewhere.

So, just to be sure no one is confused about what I am asking, when you refer to people who would rather shoot than get up close and personal, who are you talking about/

:beatdead:

You did not make it that clear. Mr Nelsons students (Tank is also one of those) from what I have read online (in Combatives, and Selfdefence forum) tend to be less than polite about Geoff. They seem to think it is their duty to claim their way is the only true way. That does not sit well with me (it does not sit well with me in any aspect of my life when someone claims that crap).

I am refering to the large number of GUN CQB courses out there. I was less than happy to see that I would have to search long and hard to find something similar.

**Vile** · Posted On: 1/25/2006 6:11pm

Hey Enech,
Out of curiousity Tank claims to teach military units formally. Do you know which units he trains? There is no full time (RF) Army at Dunedin worth speaking of. The nearest would be the 2/1 RNZIR at Burnham (about 5 hours drive away for you Americans). Is he training the 2/1? If not the only other front line combat units we have are the 1RNZIR at Linton (take a plane as an FYI for the Americans - its on another island) or the QMAR at Waiouru. Last I looked (and I could be wrong) all their CQC instructors were all currently serving. They were teaching (as mentioned previously) what is basically watered down BJJ.

The only ohter units that leaves are REMFs or SAS. Teaching REMFs would be strange - who flies in a specialist instructor to teach REMFs h2h? Teaching SAS - he should have some very firm backup to support that claim, given that most of our SAS guys are overseas instructing other people how to fight.

I'd just like some backup on this since claiming you "teach military" is easy. Meaning more than "someone from a unit came to my class" isn't.