Modern Army Combatives Program

Discussion in 'General Self Defense' started by LoneRider, Jul 9, 2009.

  1. LoneRider

    LoneRider Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2008
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Inland Empire, CA
    As a Navy Individual Augmentee the subject was part of our training at FT Sill, OK before we deployed almost a year ago. I recall our instructors stating that 90% of fights go to the ground.

    Now I have trained in various MAs throughout my life, the most practical training received thus far before MACP was at Centerline Martial Arts Academy in Neptune Beach, FL. I recall one teacher of mine there, a former cop, saying that statistic of ground fights is true if the combatants don't know what they're doing.

    MACP tends to start with training in groundfighting first then working up to standup fighting, based on the above logic. Far be it from me to question Army training methods, but wouldn't it be more practical to teach how not to go to the ground (i.e. practical takedown defenses and the like) before teaching groundfighting? Any thoughts on that?
     
  2. seasoned

    seasoned MT Senior Moderator Staff Member

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    10,687
    Likes Received:
    675
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Somewhere out there
    I like the logic, teach ground first so you know why you want to stay up. Ground people get very involved, your hands and feet can be used up, or down. Stick with the natural. [​IMG]
     
  3. J Ellis

    J Ellis Green Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Georgia
    90% of fights go to the ground...if you are a LEO trying to handcuff a suspect who is resisting. Otherwise...

    You have a better idea for training progression.
    • Teach students how to establish a base and maintain it throughout the application of technique.
    • Teach students how to defend against takedowns and how to extricate from as well as enter and exploit standing grappling positions.
    • Teach students how to get up after going down while maintaining a defensive profile and offensive positioning.
    • Teach students how to fight while on the ground.
    Joel
     
  4. MBuzzy

    MBuzzy Grandmaster

    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    West Melbourne, FL
    When I went through the Army Combatives course, I thought that they had the right idea in teaching the material, but the curriculum and training order was a bit off.

    I would agree that the training should begin from standing postion and as it would in combat. I firmly believe that it should begin (of course, all training done in IBA and battle rattle) with M16 in hands, then go to unarmed, then go to the ground. There is no need to teach the ground first, since the first objective is to stay up.

    Plus, I don't buy the statistic that 90% of the fights go to the ground....
     
  5. Nolerama

    Nolerama Master Black Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,228
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    Why not be proficient in the standing, clinch, and ground ranges? That way, transition to another range is smooth, and you can fight just as well in the next range.
     
  6. LoneRider

    LoneRider Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2008
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Inland Empire, CA
    I agree with you. Standup should be taught first then the progression to SHTF, i.e. groundfighting.

    That is the stated goal of MACP, which is largely BJJ/MMA in terms of execution. However the execution could use a little work. I believe, as previously stated, level one training should teach standup and how to avoid going to the ground as well as groundfighting for a well rounded and fairly well trained soldier.
     
  7. seasoned

    seasoned MT Senior Moderator Staff Member

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    10,687
    Likes Received:
    675
    Trophy Points:
    263
    Location:
    Somewhere out there
    This is a good observation and statistically correct, but keep in mind that LEO in a non-compliant hand cuffing try to take the person to the ground 100% of the time. So it may go to the ground, but the officer is directing the individual there.
     
  8. searcher

    searcher Senior Master

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,317
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Kansas
    I am currently helping a few guys at my gym that are getting ready for boot camp and a couple that are getting ready to deploy. I am working their fitness and standup. Why? Have you tried to grapple with someone wearing a vest and a ton of stuff you are going to be carrying? It is extremely difficult. I am not against the ground game. Quite the contrary. But if it were me, I don't want to grapple in a combat zone.

    Rifle first.
    Pistol second.
    Knife third.
    Hands and feet, a very distant fourth.


    JMO and I am sticking to it.
     
  9. FearlessFreep

    FearlessFreep Senior Master

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,088
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Phoenix, Arizona
    "
    Plus, I don't buy the statistic that 90% of the fights go to the ground...."

    IIRC, the stat was based on a police study but the context of the study was police officers dealing with suspects. So naturally the police officer in question was trying to get the suspect to the ground in order to restrain/cuff them. So the context of "90% of fights go to the ground" was fairly skewed by the data, not an indicator of the average altercation.

    Or as I like to say "90% of fights may go to the ground but 100% start standing up"

    However, in all situations, gravity is there. So regardless of what you want to do, when anything slips or anything fails, gravity will reassert it's prerogative
     
  10. astrobiologist

    astrobiologist Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    418
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    York, Pennsylvania
    I was checking out a book on MACP, and it made me wonder why there was such a strong focus on grappling. Don't get me wrong, I love grappling and the ground game is important, but it would seem logical that in a war-zone (or in a dark alley even) that going to the ground is the last thing you want to do.

    About that 90% of fights go to the ground stuff...

    1.) They say 87.845736% of statistics are made up on the spot. I've seen figures posted here and there about these numbers, but they're always taken out of context. For instance, as was mentioned earlier, LEOs tend to lead perps to the ground for handcuffing when said perps are not cooperative; so in their case it may be same large ratio. Heck, I bet law enforcement organizations can even significantly quantify the number of times this happens since LEOs have to report on their arrests. But, there's really no way to get legitimate numbers from street fights since most of those fights aren't ever reported to any group that could collate the data, and even if said altercations were reported there's a good chance that one or more involved parties would exagerrate the truth. Simply put: that "'whatever percent' of fights go to the ground" stuff is just someone reaching for a figure to make their personal belief sound significant when it truly is not.

    2.) In my experience, when it comes to fights in the street, except in cases of pugilism (i.e. two guys square up and fight with their friends in a circle watching but not interveining), fights rarely go to the ground. I've never gone to the ground in a fight, and I hope to keep it that way. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I have a lot of friends who've worked as bouncers. Most of their stories involve altercations where a few punches or shoves happened and not much else. Honestly, that's usually the extent of most physical violence. When it does go beyond that, it is usually in the best interest of the defender to avoid going to the ground.
     
  11. CuongNhuka

    CuongNhuka Senior Master

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    2,596
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    NE
    Well, some of the people here seem a little unhappy with what the Army does, but what about the Marines? Anybody got any complaints about MCMAP?
     
  12. MBuzzy

    MBuzzy Grandmaster

    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    West Melbourne, FL
    The title of the thread is Modern Army Combatives Program, so please stick with that. If you want to discuss MCMAP, feel free to open a new thread or revive one of the old ones.
     
  13. Tez3

    Tez3 Sr. Grandmaster

    • Supporting Member
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    27,031
    Likes Received:
    4,448
    Trophy Points:
    308
    Location:
    England
    We have some tank regiment guys in the same position though they reckon that if they have to use their personal weapons let alone have to actually fight hand to hand they are in very big trouble!
     
  14. LoneRider

    LoneRider Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2008
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Inland Empire, CA
    searcher, Lord knows I agree with you. But my progression, since I'm with a cavalry unit and will be part of an Engineer unit would be thus:

    1. Vehicluar weapons (M2, M240G, M249, Mk.19)
    2. Rifle and Sidearm (If I have to dismount)
    3. Knives/Improvised Weapons.
    4. Fists, feet, shins and knees
    5. Ground dead last.

    And with all the crap we wear outside the wire there's no way in hell I'd want to grapple. I'd want to know how so I could prevail in such a situation, but there is no way in hell I'd want to end up on the ground.

    The concept behind MACP is a good concept, of preparing soldiers for hand to hand fighting, but I think the execution: e.g. 'curriculum' as it stands, could use a tweak or two to make it better.

    astrobiologist, the book wasn't titled H2H by Kid Peligro by any chance, was it?
     
  15. searcher

    searcher Senior Master

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,317
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Kansas
    LoneRider, you make a very good case for your progression.

    I also often forget that people havethe vehicle they MIGHT be in as a potential weapon. I would much prefer letting the BG grapple with the tire/track then with myself. Is this not taught in the MACP? If not, it should be.
     
  16. LoneRider

    LoneRider Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2008
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Inland Empire, CA
    Not that I recall, searcher, it is taught by the NCOs in that unofficial course they teach called 'dirty fighting 101' to any personnel newly arrived to the unit who will listen to them.

    Yeah, if I can use my vehicle/vehicle weapon systems before I dismount I damn well will do so...
     
  17. MBuzzy

    MBuzzy Grandmaster

    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    West Melbourne, FL
    I would agree, although I don't think that "vehicle fighting" will ever become part of the curriculum. Starting at weapons and working from there might happen though - at least in a better order.

    I don't know if the Army has their own version or if it is unit training, but when we deploy with the Army, we go to a 4 week Convoy course where they teach stuff like that, i.e. how to leverage your vehicle against the enemy.
     
  18. BLACK LION

    BLACK LION Black Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    551
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    CA
    very good points made above...

    From what I have seen its not based on the "practical soldiering soldier"...If it was, the ground would be the last place they want to go... On top of that, traing should be orchestrated with the gear that the "standard soldier" will have donned during battle. M-16,ACH, OTV(SAPIS INCLUDED), NODS, PISTOL, DROP LEG PUCHES,HOLSTERS ETC .... It seems as if the training is more "plain clothes" geared and not for the soldier who is actually "soldiering".... The training can still be combat fucused even without incorporating less lethal rifle-pistol techniques or going to the filed knife... lets just say there are no tools and its straight hand to hand... one has to still consider the gear and everything else that will still be attached.... I am a firm believer in being able to fight on your back or stomach or sides but the end goal is to get back on your feet and ultimately stay there... trying to incorporate a "ground game" or "grappling game'' into battlefield combatives is not very good news to me....
     
  19. punisher73

    punisher73 Senior Master

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,544
    Likes Received:
    597
    Trophy Points:
    248
    As many of you have pointed out, it is VERY hard to grapple with what a modern soldier has to wear and carry as part of their normal duty gear.

    The one aspect that has been neglected of the WHY so much emphasis placed on ground combatives for newer soldiers is one thing. MINDSET....

    The military uses the grappling to allow soldiers to go as full tilt as possible and create in them a fighting mindset of "never give up, no matter what". This mindset will carry over to all the other areas of training as well.
     
  20. yak sao

    yak sao Senior Master

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,105
    Likes Received:
    696
    Trophy Points:
    213
    the information that i've seen said that that 90% statistic comes from the cops.
    When a study was done on street self defense, they went to the group of people who had seen the most fights: cops.

    But realize that as a cop, 90% of your fights would go to the ground because 1) you are trying to get the bad guy to get down on the ground
    and 2) if he resists you can't (officially) punch or kick him, so it becomes a grappling match123
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

army combatives used against bouncers

,

forum on modern army combatives program