Thoughts on the army rangers combatives manual from the man who wrote it

[Cougar Spirit]

Ranger Joe I agree with you, mostly due to similar experience. Yes, what Larsen did was pretty good, at the time. Hell, there was a time when there was a Judo or a Karate club on every Post. They are hard to find now. Combat Arms troops tend to tackle the Combatives more, but all soldier/sailor/airman and marine types need it. There is no one size fits all and it comes down to the versatility of the chief instructor to find something to help each skill level. Now a days, the PT time and the training schedule for combative type training are there. It has improved, but it is not "there", yet. When I retired from the Army in 2002, I went back to law enforcement. The defensive tactics scene there is more dicked up than the combatives scene, big time.

[DdlR]

The 2007 edition of Richard Strozzi Heckler's book "In Search of the Warrior Spirit" includes about 100 pages on the modern history of martial arts/CQC training in various branches of the US military. Heckler was part of a pioneering project in the mid-'80s to revamp the Green Berets' close combat, fitness and psychological training (the Trojan Warrior Project) and has remained on board as an advisor.

He makes the interesting point that in modern OOTW (operations other than war), traditional "phase-line" thinking simply does not apply. The "markers" of well defined enemies in identifiable uniforms, ordered units etc. are no longer reliable in NEO (non-combatant evacuation) and humanitarian aid operations. Basically, he says that the post-9/11 military actually has greater need of close quarters combat skills than was previously the case (re. non-lethal crowd control, prisoner restraint, military police operations, etc.) even as the actual "battlefield" application is less of a priority.

[C0WB0Y]

My MMA fight on July 31st is against a Canadian Special Forces Operative who has also completed the US Army Ranger Combatives Course.

Should I be worried??

[dwkfym]

Re: Chainpunch

Most people are not yudanja (same as yudansha, or BB holder) in TKD. A big number of them are, but definitely not the majority. Also, nowadays there are more TKD BB's walking around and as you've correctly pointed out, can't fight because their training was really subpar. Plus the style doesn't really lend itself to churning out fighters.

And from what I see today, the martial arts training in Korea's military isn't so great either. But then again I'm an AM fighter with way more fight experience than your typical battallion martial arts instructor in a Korea signal corps batt. I don't know how it would pan out against non-trained opponents. I can see group cohesion and spirit that comes from the reknown tough training helping out much more than martial arts techniques. (Bayonet training is still part of the training there, and I don't think it is going away anytime soon)

[gregaquaman]

It is one of those things that I when I read what your army is doing I automaticly like to see what mine is up to.
So we are keeping our bayonets.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1225847179104

[chainpunch]

Re: Chainpunch

Most people are not yudanja (same as yudansha, or BB holder) in TKD. A big number of them are, but definitely not the majority. Also, nowadays there are more TKD BB's walking around and as you've correctly pointed out, can't fight because their training was really subpar. Plus the style doesn't really lend itself to churning out fighters.

And from what I see today, the martial arts training in Korea's military isn't so great either. But then again I'm an AM fighter with way more fight experience than your typical battallion martial arts instructor in a Korea signal corps batt. I don't know how it would pan out against non-trained opponents. I can see group cohesion and spirit that comes from the reknown tough training helping out much more than martial arts techniques. (Bayonet training is still part of the training there, and I don't think it is going away anytime soon)

Maybe I exaggerated but I would think more than 50% of high school graduates are BB 50%+ is a majority right? Maybe its not >50% but sure seems like it.

[dwkfym]

Nope, not even close. Maybe 4% TOPS but to be honest, 4% is realllllly high! This was in Kangneung where I went to middle school, and it is a very athletic town. In Seoul, it was even less so and the training sucked. this is for class of 2004 aged people btw.

[chainpunch]

Nope, not even close. Maybe 4% TOPS but to be honest, 4% is realllllly high! This was in Kangneung where I went to middle school, and it is a very athletic town. In Seoul, it was even less so and the training sucked. this is for class of 2004 aged people btw.

Ok, I take your word for it. I was told by a few of my Korean friends that it had surged in the high schools and from what more than a few people told me I took it as truth.

[dwkfym]

I'll keep what you told me in mind; I am starting to lose touch with what is happening in Korea and seeing how quickly that place changes, 2004 Korea may very well be that much different than 2010 Korea. Thanks for the heads up!

If that is true, Koreans further perpetuate a stereotype .. asians all know krotty/kung fu..

[ranger joe]

Ranger Joe I agree with you, mostly due to similar experience. Yes, what Larsen did was pretty good, at the time. Hell, there was a time when there was a Judo or a Karate club on every Post. They are hard to find now. Combat Arms troops tend to tackle the Combatives more, but all soldier/sailor/airman and marine types need it. There is no one size fits all and it comes down to the versatility of the chief instructor to find something to help each skill level. Now a days, the PT time and the training schedule for combative type training are there. It has improved, but it is not "there", yet. When I retired from the Army in 2002, I went back to law enforcement. The defensive tactics scene there is more dicked up than the combatives scene, big time.

I agree with you 100%. In Law Enforcement we barelly learn an acceptable level of defensive tactics to begin with and there is almost no upkeep. And yet they wonder why there are accusations of excessive force.

[fights4peace]

Is it fair, then, to say that no one in the world was taking untrained conscripts and turning them into proficient unarmed fighters without some kind of widespread youth training?

Makes you wonder why Lacedaemonians started training their kids at 7...

And if the Japanese Judo school system and the Korean TKD school system were examples of doing that, what was the difference between those things and the widespread prevalence of wrestling in American schools? Was it simply that American recruits weren't being taught enough wrestling for the school wrestling background to help them very much?

I think so. How many recruits actually take wrestling in high school? But then again how many soviet recruits learned wrestling in their schools....?

[DdlR]

I agree with you 100%. In Law Enforcement we barelly learn an acceptable level of defensive tactics to begin with and there is almost no upkeep. And yet they wonder why there are accusations of excessive force.

Exact same problem in mental health institutions, with the added difficulties that:

* violent psych. patients may literally not be responsible for their actions; they're ill, not criminal

* there are unbelievably restrictive and often completely unrealistic regulations governing what a psych. worker can do in self defense, let alone in restraining someone who might be attempting suicide or murder.

* psych. workers (doctors, nurses, orderlies) generally are not the sort of people who want to get involved in combatives training and there seems to be very little institutional will to support the training that they do get; more a matter of "tick the 'self defense class' box and move on"

The real tragedy is that so many psychologically disturbed people, including kids, have died at the hands of well-meaning psych. workers who simply haven't been properly trained in restraint techniques.

[Soldiermedic]

Exact same problem in mental health institutions, with the added difficulties that:

* violent psych. patients may literally not be responsible for their actions; they're ill, not criminal

* there are unbelievably restrictive and often completely unrealistic regulations governing what a psych. worker can do in self defense, let alone in restraining someone who might be attempting suicide or murder.

* psych. workers (doctors, nurses, orderlies) generally are not the sort of people who want to get involved in combatives training and there seems to be very little institutional will to support the training that they do get; more a matter of "tick the 'self defense class' box and move on"

The real tragedy is that so many psychologically disturbed people, including kids, have died at the hands of well-meaning psych. workers who simply haven't been properly trained in restraint techniques.

Yeah...therapeutic crisis intervention training with on a completely compliant subject does not prepare you for the realities of a program or institution.

[ranger joe]

Most agencies that I know of now do not allow "blood chokes". I cant tell you how many times I have been wrestling on the ground with a guy and saw a RNC or guillitine(SP?) and not been allowed to use it. Simple, Effective, and I cant use it unless its "deadly force". Sad really.

[2Many]

It's understandable from a legal liability perspective. But very limiting for those who have to do the nasty work.

With adequate level of training it should be about as safe as injecting sedatives, but I don't suppose agency investment in adequate training is quite high enough.