Addressed Towards the Enlisted

**Guerilla Fists** · Posted On: 3/18/2006 9:08am

What do ya'll think of the GFT we get taught in the Army? I've gone through GFT 1 and wasn't too impressed. But I'm wondering if any of the other brothers in arms found it useful in any situation?

GF

**SFGOON** · Posted On: 3/18/2006 10:26pm

Well, I used to be enlisted so I'm gonna take a stab at this. They're pretty good. It's really just basic BJJ we learn. Most guys get their asses handed to them in GFT 1, and again in GFT 3 (if you are fortunate enough to go to that school.) What about it didn't you like?

**Matt Stone** · Posted On: 3/18/2006 11:30pm

Since when do they call it "GFT?"

The Modern Army Combatives Program (MACP) includes groundfighting, stand up/striking & kicking, and weapons techniques. None of it is intended to produce a "martial artist," or even a very competent "hand to hand combat fighter," but rather it provides tools for the Soldier to be familiar with in the event that a situation would call for them.

Certainly, the more practice the Soldier puts into developing them, the better he/she will be. The reality, though, is that outside of select units, there simply isn't much of an emphasis on the training... :sad3:

Bottom Line Up Front - The techniques are good for the purpose(s) the Army needs them for. Easy to learn, easy to "master," requiring little training time out of an already overtaxed schedule, and needing no special equipment or facility to conduct training with/in.

**SuperGuido** · Posted On: 3/19/2006 1:43am

I don't know about the Army hand to hand program, but the higher ranks of the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program are pretty sweet. The crap they teach you at Boot Camp for your "Tan Belt" is pure bullshit...but even the next belt brings cool stuff like how to do "Moving Bayonet Work" and groundfighting.

The MOST interesting factor with MCMAP, though, is that the existence of free medical and the inability to sue basically ensures that every MCMAP department trains balls to the walls and with full resistance and contact.

In addition, the Marines that would actually populate these training centers are pretty much guaranteed to have previous training...so you end up getting a wealth of knowledge to experience.

**SFGOON** · Posted On: 3/19/2006 2:50pm

Marines fucking rock, and I say that as a former soldier. If I had to do it all over again, I would have joined the USMC.

**SFGOON** · Posted On: 3/19/2006 2:52pm

Originally Posted by Matt Stone

Since when do they call it "GFT?"

The Modern Army Combatives Program (MACP) includes groundfighting, stand up/striking & kicking, and weapons techniques. None of it is intended to produce a "martial artist," or even a very competent "hand to hand combat fighter," but rather it provides tools for the Soldier to be familiar with in the event that a situation would call for them.

Certainly, the more practice the Soldier puts into developing them, the better he/she will be. The reality, though, is that outside of select units, there simply isn't much of an emphasis on the training... :sad3:

Bottom Line Up Front - The techniques are good for the purpose(s) the Army needs them for. Easy to learn, easy to "master," requiring little training time out of an already overtaxed schedule, and needing no special equipment or facility to conduct training with/in.

Were you absent for the BLUF block of instruction? It's supposed to be up front.:spanky:

I may be retired but I'm still an asshole!!

**HoratioHooah** · Posted On: 3/19/2006 4:42pm

As far as my weenie strategic unit goes, the biggest flaws in the Army's combatives course is the lack of implementation (one hour every three weeks in my company), the level one instructors who think they're super deadly, and just the utter lack of desire to participate.

The instructors I've had are just annoying. One is a guy who thinks having gone through level one certification makes him unstoppable and all knowing. Once, he tried to give a demo of an armbar, but the dude he was doing it on was facing down and it looked something like this:

Maybe it's just the instructor's I've been with, but they also teach the Gracie Gift as the end-all be-all of guard passing, only one out of three of them would believe that a person can get choked from that position, EVEN AFTER I DEMOSTRATED A TRIANGLE FOR THEM.

When that one hour one every third week rolls around, our platoon sergeant has to send out e-mails stating that attendance is mandatory, lest no one show up. We had someone just come back from the level two course at Benning, but he never wanted to go in the first place, hated being there, and as a result didn't really absorb a whole lot.

**VikingPower** · Posted On: 3/19/2006 9:39pm

Some of the MCMAP stuff can be useful, but too often you get a douchebag Admin clerk with a tan belt try and **** with some dude out in a bar and get his noggin banged off the floor. They start thinking they're too deadly or some ****.

**Guerilla Fists** · Posted On: 3/20/2006 1:31am

Originally Posted by SFGOON

Well, I used to be enlisted so I'm gonna take a stab at this. They're pretty good. It's really just basic BJJ we learn. Most guys get their asses handed to them in GFT 1, and again in GFT 3 (if you are fortunate enough to go to that school.) What about it didn't you like?

It was partly mentioned before the skewed dellusion that soldiers who have completed the rudimentary course maintain about the GFT making them more capable and prepared than they actually are.

Before the Army I did a solid decade of Judo training and even then I have come to learn from experience in civilian life that fights are unpredictable. No amount of training in a single discipline or aspect of combatives can fully equip one to handle all the possiblities. I imagine that those possiblities are exponentially increased when you add into the formula all the equipment and weapons maintained by the enemy element.

I can entertain the idea that training in advanced GFT can enhance a soldier's preparedenss. But as mentioned before I find the arrogance of soldiers who after completing one course and not having any martial arts experience before the military quite disconcerning.

But before I worry too much about the efficiency of our combatives training I ask myself and the rest of you how likely is it that close quarters/unarmed combat occurs in a combat zone? Do we even need it? And if we do shouldn't we train with all our gear on?

**SuperGuido** · Posted On: 3/20/2006 10:10am

Green Belt (MAI) and up in MCMAP had an interesting take on groundfighting...at least where I qual'd.

Basically, you'd hold a position only long enough to pull a knife and "end the encounter", or you'd go for a choke. Armbars/ankle locks/etc... were taught, but much of the higher stuff focused on choking and stabbing.

There was a bit of moving knife work as well. Basic stuff, but all knife strikes were practiced with bulldogging, i.e. chasing your opponent around palm striking the face while stabbing at various parts of the body. Stabs included your standard stab and "arm slice", and expanded to other angles of attack (Grey Belt "Trachea Hooking" was pretty sweet).

Interesting stuff...but just like Koto said, Marines get stupid. Your average Boot Camp "Tan Belt" doesn't know ****...but your average MAI knows a bit, and the average MAIT is a scary mother fucker with a crazy look in his eyes.

YMMV