[quote]yoitspmart wrote:
Iv heard good things about Sambo anyone?[/quote]
The club I train with does judo, sambo, and shingitai jiu-jitsu. Sambo’s basically judo with leglocks and a few other minor differences. At least the stuff you’ll learn at a club. The military version involves more striking and whatnot. [/quote]
Sambo is an acronym from Russian. During Stalinist times, any foreign affiliations were deemed subversive, so the judoka claimed that they had a suddenly created a national wrestling system based on native fighting systems from the various Soviet republics. Technically though, it is mostly judo with some pretty slick leg locks. Good stuff and Sambo players are really good.
– jj[/quote]
Yea Sambo sounds legit Leg Locks are crazy painfull plus the stand up throws from judo roots… Does anyone know of any good Sambo gyms in the States preferably in Arizona?[/quote]
I believe even the leglocks came from Judo. It’s just that they are not allowed in Judo competition and probably, over time, were practiced less and less.
[quote]yoitspmart wrote:
Iv heard good things about Sambo anyone?[/quote]
The club I train with does judo, sambo, and shingitai jiu-jitsu. Sambo’s basically judo with leglocks and a few other minor differences. At least the stuff you’ll learn at a club. The military version involves more striking and whatnot. [/quote]
Sambo is an acronym from Russian. During Stalinist times, any foreign affiliations were deemed subversive, so the judoka claimed that they had a suddenly created a national wrestling system based on native fighting systems from the various Soviet republics. Technically though, it is mostly judo with some pretty slick leg locks. Good stuff and Sambo players are really good.
– jj[/quote]
Yea Sambo sounds legit Leg Locks are crazy painfull plus the stand up throws from judo roots… Does anyone know of any good Sambo gyms in the States preferably in Arizona?[/quote]
I believe even the leglocks came from Judo. It’s just that they are not allowed in Judo competition and probably, over time, were practiced less and less. [/quote]
Wee bit of history… Judo had a leg lock called ashi garami (see pic). No straight leg bars, though they (and other locks, such as ankle locks) did exist in various jujutsu systems. Judo allows no leg locks now since they had several blown out knees and hips in competition (they also disallowed several other sweet techniques, like kubi nage). Any how, I used to have a buddy who did some Sambo and we used to show each other techniques. They have more of them and they are different, so from what I know of Japanese systems, I’d say they can claim an innovation.
Judo was the sportive combatant of japanese jiu jitsu, Brazillian jiu jitsu is the adaption of japanese jiu jitsu/judo that Helio created because He was frail and sick as a young man, He analysed jits and came up with a fighting system which made it easier for a smaller weaker man to overcome a much stronger opponent.
Yet most of the techniques of BJJ are JJJ/Judo, evolution in the martial arts is cool, you watch Rickson and Royce etc on VHS and their BJJ is more for the street, they close distance to avoid punches, elbows etc that sportive jits players do not need to worry about.
Any Jiu jitsu is awesome, very empowering, especially for women, there was this thing on youtube awhile ago about a womens abuse thing that had a Gracie teaching jits, was bad ass to watch.
[quote]yoitspmart wrote:
Iv heard good things about Sambo anyone?[/quote]
The club I train with does judo, sambo, and shingitai jiu-jitsu. Sambo’s basically judo with leglocks and a few other minor differences. At least the stuff you’ll learn at a club. The military version involves more striking and whatnot. [/quote]
Sambo is an acronym from Russian. During Stalinist times, any foreign affiliations were deemed subversive, so the judoka claimed that they had a suddenly created a national wrestling system based on native fighting systems from the various Soviet republics. Technically though, it is mostly judo with some pretty slick leg locks. Good stuff and Sambo players are really good.
– jj[/quote]
Yea Sambo sounds legit Leg Locks are crazy painfull plus the stand up throws from judo roots… Does anyone know of any good Sambo gyms in the States preferably in Arizona?[/quote]
I believe even the leglocks came from Judo. It’s just that they are not allowed in Judo competition and probably, over time, were practiced less and less. [/quote]
Wee bit of history… Judo had a leg lock called ashi garami (see pic). No straight leg bars, though they (and other locks, such as ankle locks) did exist in various jujutsu systems. Judo allows no leg locks now since they had several blown out knees and hips in competition (they also disallowed several other sweet techniques, like kubi nage). Any how, I used to have a buddy who did some Sambo and we used to show each other techniques. They have more of them and they are different, so from what I know of Japanese systems, I’d say they can claim an innovation.
– jj
[/quote]
From what I’ve seen of Sambo’s leg locks, they look like they are largely based on Catch-As-Catch-Can leg locks. I know that there were some matches between Japanese Judoka and English Catch wrestlers during the early 20th century.
My understanding of Sambo is Judo/Jits meets Russian Folk wrestling. Kinda a hybrid of all the various grappling systems in the Russian area which is huge and multicultural. I could be wrong but thats what I believed it to be.
[quote]punchedbear wrote:
My understanding of Sambo is Judo/Jits meets Russian Folk wrestling. Kinda a hybrid of all the various grappling systems in the Russian area which is huge and multicultural. I could be wrong but thats what I believed it to be.
[/quote]
Yes, russian judokas tend to be more aggresive and have a wrestlers crouch and use a “russian” grip much more “muscle” used in this grip. Where as Japanese are more go with the flow you push they pull , to as where erupean style would be probably, you push they push harder.
Also the japanese stand upright. Russian players tend to crouch.
You also have to put into consideration how the jiujitsu guy trains. You see so many BJJ BBs in MMA hit the ground and have their guards passed with ease. Not only that but they also have no offensive attack from the ground whether it be from the top or bottom. Jiujitsu does help in a fight if you train properly but it is not the determining factor of the outcome. Like the guy said earlier if it’s Marcelo Garcia, or Andre Galvao then yeah the jiujitsu guy will have a really good chance of victory. Personally in a street fight I wouldn’t depend solely on JJ for victory. I’ve seen plenty of guys mount someone then get soccer kicked from another guy.
[quote]punchedbear wrote:
My understanding of Sambo is Judo/Jits meets Russian Folk wrestling. Kinda a hybrid of all the various grappling systems in the Russian area which is huge and multicultural. I could be wrong but thats what I believed it to be.
[/quote]
Yes, russian judokas tend to be more aggresive and have a wrestlers crouch and use a “russian” grip much more “muscle” used in this grip. Where as Japanese are more go with the flow you push they pull , to as where erupean style would be probably, you push they push harder.
Also the japanese stand upright. Russian players tend to crouch. [/quote]
That’s a bit too much of an oversimplification, but totally agree about the Russian (and European/Westerners) using a more crouched style than the upright “traditional” Judo taught by many Japanese masters. Most of the competitive Japanese Judo players now utilize a crouched position as well though. That’s the thing about specificity and the nature of sporting techniques adapting to the specific conditions encountered within that sport.
Let’s not forget that Judo was an offshoot of Jujutsu which the Samurai developed for use on the battlefield in life or death situations many times against armored and armed adversaries. Thus their stance needed to be more upright and mobile and they certainly didn’t want to be leaning forward sticking their head and neck out towards their opponent. The difference between the stance of today’s MMA fighter where punches and kicks are permissible and that of a pure grappler (be that Judo, Wrestling, BJJ, etc…) is an illustration (though less obviously less drastic) of the differences that such differing conditions result in.
As Judo has moved further and further away from it’s battlefield origins it has become more and more specialized to the rules inherent in the sport. The same has happened to BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing, or any combat sport. The less limitations/more arsenals allowed that a Combat Sport has on it’s participants though, generally the closer the techniques and skill sets will resemble real combat skills.
In regards to the OP’s original scenario, I can only say this:
It isn’t the style…it’s the fighter. An untrained brawler has as much chance of winning a fight as a trained BJJ fighter if the brawler has more skill or more killer instinct.
Even the vaunted UFC has shown us that on any given day, a fighter always has a striker’s chance. Anyone can get caught with a hard shot or a lucky hit, and the fight is over.
BJJ is a very good grappling style. Is it the “best” for self defense?? I don’t know. I don’t personally think so, but I’m sure some people have successfully used it. It does well in competitions, but as someone else mentioned…when the competition is designed so that only BJJ moves are allowed, that kind of weakens the argument.
The fact that the US armed forces have gone to BJJ as opposed to true combatives is NOT a step in the right direction or proof of BJJ’s efficacy. Combatives is about killing your enemy quickly and efficiently with something other than your rifle, because it has failed you, or you lost it. It’s about learning how to kill your enemy with your helmet, your entrenching tool, your bare hands, etc…NOT how to fucking arm bar someone. Don’t be fooled into thinking that “because the Army does it” makes it a good choice. Any veteran, myself included, can tell you that the Army makes a LOT of dumb fucking decisions. Same for the other services. Teaching BJJ as combatives was one of them.
There is so much more to “self defense” than the art you practice. I’m not sure what the OP was trying to get at with this whole hypothetical situation, but if it was to prove that the BJJ guy would always win, I think we have established that’s not the case. As Sento said…too many variables.
[quote]mapwhap wrote:
In regards to the OP’s original scenario, I can only say this:
It isn’t the style…it’s the fighter. An untrained brawler has as much chance of winning a fight as a trained BJJ fighter if the brawler has more skill or more killer instinct.
Even the vaunted UFC has shown us that on any given day, a fighter always has a striker’s chance. Anyone can get caught with a hard shot or a lucky hit, and the fight is over.
BJJ is a very good grappling style. Is it the “best” for self defense?? I don’t know. I don’t personally think so, but I’m sure some people have successfully used it. It does well in competitions, but as someone else mentioned…when the competition is designed so that only BJJ moves are allowed, that kind of weakens the argument.
The fact that the US armed forces have gone to BJJ as opposed to true combatives is NOT a step in the right direction or proof of BJJ’s efficacy. Combatives is about killing your enemy quickly and efficiently with something other than your rifle, because it has failed you, or you lost it. It’s about learning how to kill your enemy with your helmet, your entrenching tool, your bare hands, etc…NOT how to fucking arm bar someone. Don’t be fooled into thinking that “because the Army does it” makes it a good choice. Any veteran, myself included, can tell you that the Army makes a LOT of dumb fucking decisions. Same for the other services. Teaching BJJ as combatives was one of them.
There is so much more to “self defense” than the art you practice. I’m not sure what the OP was trying to get at with this whole hypothetical situation, but if it was to prove that the BJJ guy would always win, I think we have established that’s not the case. As Sento said…too many variables.
[/quote]
Excellent post and I especially agree with #4. I think one of the major factors that gets lost in these threads is the level of violence being dealt with. In the OP original post he stated “came across a really strong dude”. So , he’s strong, big deal. What’s his experience in handling violence? What’s his mindset? Has he fought assholes on PCP, crack, or meth? Has he ever fought a terrorist soaked to the gills on religious extremism or religious hatred? Yeah, an arm bar is just what you should be thinking about.
Just so we are clear. This is thread was necroposted form 2012.
[quote]idaho wrote:
[quote]mapwhap wrote:
In regards to the OP’s original scenario, I can only say this:
It isn’t the style…it’s the fighter. An untrained brawler has as much chance of winning a fight as a trained BJJ fighter if the brawler has more skill or more killer instinct.
Even the vaunted UFC has shown us that on any given day, a fighter always has a striker’s chance. Anyone can get caught with a hard shot or a lucky hit, and the fight is over.
BJJ is a very good grappling style. Is it the “best” for self defense?? I don’t know. I don’t personally think so, but I’m sure some people have successfully used it. It does well in competitions, but as someone else mentioned…when the competition is designed so that only BJJ moves are allowed, that kind of weakens the argument.
The fact that the US armed forces have gone to BJJ as opposed to true combatives is NOT a step in the right direction or proof of BJJ’s efficacy. Combatives is about killing your enemy quickly and efficiently with something other than your rifle, because it has failed you, or you lost it. It’s about learning how to kill your enemy with your helmet, your entrenching tool, your bare hands, etc…NOT how to fucking arm bar someone. Don’t be fooled into thinking that “because the Army does it” makes it a good choice. Any veteran, myself included, can tell you that the Army makes a LOT of dumb fucking decisions. Same for the other services. Teaching BJJ as combatives was one of them.
There is so much more to “self defense” than the art you practice. I’m not sure what the OP was trying to get at with this whole hypothetical situation, but if it was to prove that the BJJ guy would always win, I think we have established that’s not the case. As Sento said…too many variables.
[/quote]
Excellent post and I especially agree with #4. I think one of the major factors that gets lost in these threads is the level of violence being dealt with. In the OP original post he stated “came across a really strong dude”. So , he’s strong, big deal. What’s his experience in handling violence? What’s his mindset? Has he fought assholes on PCP, crack, or meth? Has he ever fought a terrorist soaked to the gills on religious extremism or religious hatred? Yeah, an arm bar is just what you should be thinking about.
[/quote]
I don’t disagree in the least.
I will state that however that if I have to deal with a PCPed up Bath Salt Zombie with sudden jihad syndrome I would rather he have a dislocated elbow than not, so I will continue to train joint locks along with everything else. Not that I think you or mapwhap are dancing anywhere near the “joint locks don’t work in the streetz” fallacy.
Actually, I think I like them better at the “high” level of violence. Someone trying to “tap out” when there is no ref and then deciding on a near instant rematch (often having armed themselves) is damn near a cliche. On the other hand if you are really fighting for your life take the limb home with you. I have written it before.
Glow Stick Rule
There will be a pop…and then a scream.
The first pop doesn’t mean it’s finished. It just means you have “activated” the glow stick. Now all the bending, twisting, and shaking will yield results.
Absolutely, sir…train joint locks. As my instructor says, the term joint lock is actually code for “fracture”. When dealing with the Bath Salt Zombie or the enraged jihadist, having an option to bring the body to a state of “mechanical failure” is going to be the best way through it.
I’m just personally of the opinion that the American fighting man should be learning how to fight his way back to a better weapon platform to shoot his enemy in the face…not worrying about getting a submission from his opponent.
I actually have a friend who was on sniper overwatch on a checkpoint in Afghanistan. Some “native” fella decided to approach the soldiers at the checkpoint and started fighting with them. One of the soldiers (a private first class, if I’m not mistaken) jumped in the air and pulled the haji into his guard…and then tried to work a submission on him.
My friend ran down to the checkpoint and buttstoked the haji in the head with his rifle, rendering him unconcious, then asked the PFC what the hell he was doing. His response was, “Combatives, sergeant!”
That’s the kind of BS training scars learning that stuff can induce.
I wasn’t in when the Modern Army Combatives Program (MACP) was instituted. My understanding is that it teaches a LOT of BJJ, and that is absolutely horrifying to me. I’m told the SOCP program (Special Operations Combatives Program) is much better as it teaches exactly the mindset they should all be learning…I’m fighting hand-to hand in order to fight my way back to my weapon…or ANY weapon to kill my enemy with. I’m not down here looking for an armbar.
BUT…as we have discussed in another thread…equipping them with crossbows and coiled white rope renders the whole argument moot anyway…
I’m not really against the US forces learning Jiu-Jitsu/Gracie Combatives per se; damage and destruction (joint destructions) are absolutely legit ways to end combative situations. Rendering someone unconscious via a strangulation or killing them via a choke are of course also quite effective. Such training also allows soldiers to compete full force without too much risk for serious injury.
Like you guys said though, teaching them that their go to should be jumping guard or making the mistake of getting them to think like sport fighters and not soldiers engaged with enemy combatants is a very real danger and should be addressed.
Teaching soldiers “here are some effective ground fighting skills (not limited to grappling) should you ever wind up on the ground or should you have to restrain someone (if in more of a security force situation)” but also teaching them that their first priority to to end things as fast as possible, “cheat” (gain superior firepower, superior numbers, or superior position) whenever possible, use any means/weapon/tactic to win, and be ready to escalate the level of violence faster than your opponent, then that would be great.
As it is though, the two guys who I know who’s opinions and experience I really trust and have fairly recently gone through the program haven’t been very impressed with the Army’s combatives program. There are some skilled guys involved in it no doubt, but as a system it left something to be desired or at least didn’t stack up to some of the other RMA systems out there today. Truth be told though, both of those guys are absolutely legit badasses who have been privy to some World class RMA instruction (one for pretty much his entire life) so their standards are pretty high.
I have helped teach the program in Iraq. IMHO, while any type of training in combatives, if taught correctly, is good. However, ACP is far, far too reliant on “sport” techniques instead teaching someone to kill. Part of this may be due to the current military culture of possessing a fanatical devotion to MMA, especially the UFC. I dont know how many times I have heard, “well, this fighter does this or that fighter does it this way”. Really? and what does that have to do with surviving on the battlefield? Do you think the Taliban, Boka Haram ,or Russian Spetsnaz gives a shit about a fighter in the UFC? Get your head in the game or have ISIS cut it off.
Mapwrap,
You are correct, the SOCP is much better.
Sento,
Your friends are correct, ACP is not geared (IMHO) to combat survival. I just wish RMA was taught to the average warfighter.
Absolutely Idaho, I honestly just think the UFC and Gracie family have outstanding marketing and have convinced the average person who doesn’t have actual battlefield/on the job experience or been exposed to real RMA that what they are showcasing is RMA/“As real as it gets”. Even the first few UFC’s and Vale Tudo matches in Brazil, which were far more realistic than today’s MMA, were not true combat but instead very rough sporting matches.
No doubt they deserve credit for awakening the larger Martial Arts world’s eyes to the gaping hole which was many system’s ground fighting skill set though and I’m definitely not taking anything away from their skill in that area. It’s just too bad that as a result of the first few UFC’s that people suddenly dubbed their system unbeatable/the “Ultimate” Martial Art and thus even the Armed Forces have bought into the hype.
Like you said though at least the Army/Armed Forces does bring in some true RMA people to train their more elite personnel/teach RMA to their more elite fighting forces.
[quote]idaho wrote:
I have helped teach the program in Iraq. IMHO, while any type of training in combatives, if taught correctly, is good. However, ACP is far, far too reliant on “sport” techniques instead teaching someone to kill. Part of this may be due to the current military culture of possessing a fanatical devotion to MMA, especially the UFC. I dont know how many times I have heard, “well, this fighter does this or that fighter does it this way”. Really? and what does that have to do with surviving on the battlefield? Do you think the Taliban, Boka Haram ,or Russian Spetsnaz gives a shit about a fighter in the UFC? Get your head in the game or have ISIS cut it off.
[/quote]
Good post, as always.
To the first bolded comment:
I don’t have your experience to be sure, but accomplishing this with “empty hands” is a hard row to hoe. Most of the empty handed deaths I am familiar with involve either stomping the shit out of a downed person over a period of time or strangling the shit out of someone. I have written before about how not all cervical fractures are instantly debilitating, actually most aren’t. There are reflexive defenses to most of the “lethal” techniques I have learned. Not that they shouldn’t be practiced, but that in reality they won’t be the “one strike”/one movement kills they often get hyped as.
I will seriously echo mapwhap’s statement about getting to a tool. Then the ability to do neutralizing levels of damage go way, way up.
Something I picked up in my years of gi-faggotry/pajama fighting (thanks for those terms Ranzo, wherever you are) is to work in “weapon access”. If you are stuck with a more “MMA” style combatives, than work/reward/try to hold positions where the dominant man can/could access his weapon. Something as simple as being able to hold mount/knee on chest with your strong side hand rubbing the area where your side arm/knife would be for 3-5 seconds with no interference can be included with little effort. Make this as much of a “win” as a joint lock, sweep, ect.
I am also fond of telling people if your partner could tap out on your forehead(face/eyes) or cup or inner thigh(groin) than that submission would have been a lot more sporty without a ref.
To the second bolded:
I am told pro wrestling/WWE is really, REALLY popular in the middle east and a lot of the material I have seen being sold as Spetsnaz in origin seems to be from the “looks awesome in demo’s” department so it wouldn’t surprise me if they did. On the other hand, the folks like yourself who are tasked with either making bad folks die bloody or teaching others to do the same most likely have different priorities.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Absolutely Idaho, I honestly just think the UFC and Gracie family have outstanding marketing and have convinced the average person who doesn’t have actual battlefield/on the job experience or been exposed to real RMA that what they are showcasing is RMA/“As real as it gets”. Even the first few UFC’s and Vale Tudo matches in Brazil, which were far more realistic than today’s MMA, were not true combat but instead very rough sporting matches.
No doubt they deserve credit for awakening the larger Martial Arts world’s eyes to the gaping hole which was many system’s ground fighting skill set though and I’m definitely not taking anything away from their skill in that area. It’s just too bad that as a result of the first few UFC’s that people suddenly dubbed their system unbeatable/the “Ultimate” Martial Art and thus even the Armed Forces have bought into the hype.
Like you said though at least the Army/Armed Forces does bring in some true RMA people to train their more elite personnel/teach RMA to their more elite fighting forces. [/quote]
I think a lot of that is just the over-reaction that goes with changing “paradigms”. You have written before that the jujutsu your teachers espoused always had a fairly high amount of training time alloted for working against resistance. I think the success of the “sport” forms in the early UFC’s and Vale Tudo has more to do with this than the notion that somehow working a juji gatame in a BJJ school is awesome, but if I trained it with one of the Lysaks 25 years ago it was somehow B.S. In another decade or so everyone might be hip to the idea that at least occasionally it might be a good idea to drill/train on grass/sand/cement. I know you have done it enough that you aren’t so much looking forward to doing “something different” as “Great now I am going to be all scraped up” or “Fucking sand is fucking everywhere.” Right now a lot of folks teaching self defense have never done so.
I think the U.S. Military jumping into a more sport oriented training program now instead of the mid 90’s when everyone else was forced to deal with the “maybe we should do some rolling” notion has as much to do with institutional inertia as anything else.
How long did it take for “Run it Wet!”(lots of lube on the carrier group) to become the de-facto standard for M-4’s/M-16’s/AR pattern guns as opposed to the minimum lube/run it dry advice?
I’ve written about this before - hell, I probably did it on this very thread a couple years ago when it first came up. But now that I’m a little better at the sport end, and a little more educated about the combative end, I can see that there’s just not much in common.
Boxing, Muay Thai, BJJ, Judo - these all give you a good base for combatives. You know how to shift your weight, what footwork is, how your feet affect what your hands are doing, etc. But it’s not the same, even in its focus - in fighting you want to get into it, in combatives you’re trying to disengage and find a weapon. BJJ or grappling is terrible in this regard, and most of what it teaches will get you maimed or seriously hurt in real confrontations. I’ve said this often.
But I’m not surprised. The armed forces have taken a new direction as a whole, and America is fighting battles now that rely on detaining a suspect for arrest and intelligence gathering, as opposed to straight up killing him and moving on. We’re peacekeepers, not killers. MCMAP fits into that, it seems.
Also, there’s 2 things that I always here from guys when I talk about this:
The military is not expected to fight at that range, but it’s more important that they have the willingness to do so. BJJ instills that without fucking them up during practice, which makes the unit combat ineffective.
The place they’re most likely to get involved in “hand-to-hand” scraps is on base or in a bar. Teaching thousands of guys combatives is way more hazardous than teaching them BJJ - as long as they know how to grapple, that’s what they’ll reach for, and they won’t really hurt each other with it.
All that being said, MCMAP still sucks a bunch of dicks, and the stuff they’re teaching to the special ops guys - as previously mentioned - tends to be the actual combatives shit that’s meant to break necks and bust bodies.
We’re doing our guys a disservice by having them learn BJJ, but in reality, who gives a fuck, because everyone spends like an hour every tenth week learning this.
Agreed Robert. To be honest though, we LSM guys are a little crazy and the thought of training in real environments is more likely to ilicit excitement than dread.
Regarding unarmed killing techniques, pretty much the only ones that I would classify as “likely to cause death” are those involving trauma to the throat/breathing mechanism. “Kill chokes” and braced strikes to the throat (for instance from side control where the body cannot move away from the force of the strike due to the ground creating an “anvil” effect) if done correctly and with enough force will have a fairly high likelihood of causing eventual death due to lack of breathing.
I think the focus as an unarmed combatant would be better placed on “ending the fight” (be that due to subduing/restraining the adversary in a security scenario, rendering them unconscious, causing enough damage that they were unable to continue to effectively fight, or killing them) as quickly as possible rather than purely focused on killing techniques. After all, it’s pretty easy (at least tactically, mentally and emotionally is another story) to access a weapon and kill someone who you have already knocked unconscious and definitely easier if you have damaged them severly or have restrained/controlled to where they cannot fight back effectively.
