Is Training MMA The Right Thing For Officers?

[MJS]

Came across this article and thought it was interesting. The comments are interesting as well.

Law enforcement training is usually slow to change. Unfortunately, most agencies provide training only after a tragic or near-tragic event. For example, at my agency we had not trained in any type of formal defensive tactics training for at least 10 years prior to an officer making the ultimate sacrifice when in 1996, he was disarmed and killed during a burglary. It wasn’t until after his death that we started conducting department-wide defensive tactics training. In teaching and training around the country, I have spoken with many trainers who can relate to this.
For the first time, we may actually be getting ahead of the training curve when it comes to the explosion of Mixed Martial Arts. In preparing for the onslaught of suspects that have either watched enough MMA fights on TV, or have actually trained MMA to be good enough to defeat an officer, we are training our officers to defend against these people. Many trainers are teaching how to work from the ground by getting suspects in their guard. They teach techniques when the suspect has the officer in their guard. Others teach how to counter other standard MMA techniques. I have participated in many of these classes, learned some great techniques.
The problem is, most of the officers we teach are not going to train long or hard enough to be able to perform these techniques when they are being attacked.

 

[seasoned]

This officer, P1, in the comment part, I feel, had some great comments. + 1 is always a good technique that must never be forgotten in the heat of battle. Getting all tied up in a one on one scenario is a prescription for failure that puts everyone around you in jeopardy. Things, at times, happen very fast, with no time to plan. This is why we should train often on our own so we can "own" our training. Things can be defused very fast with just the right words or actions in the initial stages, and this is where training comes in.
I just took a course recently in :Court Security Procedures Training" and there was a saying on the black board that said "Train hard, Fight Easy", Train Easy, Fight Hard".

I think this sums it up for me.

 

[Chris Parker]

There's one or two things that strike me pretty well immediately... chief amongst which is the idea of "Many trainers are teaching how to work from the ground by getting suspects in their guard." Is it just me, or does encouraging such ideas invite some pretty serious problems, such as putting your belt with all it's equipment (cuffs, capsicum spray, handgun) all in handy reach of the potential bad guy?

 

[Cyriacus]

There's one or two things that strike me pretty well immediately... chief amongst which is the idea of "Many trainers are teaching how to work from the ground by getting suspects in their guard." Is it just me, or does encouraging such ideas invite some pretty serious problems, such as putting your belt with all it's equipment (cuffs, capsicum spray, handgun) all in handy reach of the potential bad guy?

Additionally, its an Impractical Position. Since Your Opponent will be Fighting Back, You are Forcing a Situation in which You will probably end up having to Strike them to stop them not Succumbing to Your Attempt at Grappling. Its like giving a Cop a Baton, then telling Him it isnt Excessive Force to use it.
I mean, its better than nothing. But there are infinitely better options.

 

[Tez3]

I think the article itself hit the nail on the head with the last line. Unless you train full time or at least enough times to make what you do it instinctively there very few techniques in any style that you will be able to do in the heat of the moment.
I watched a programme last night on the advances of medicne in war time, it showed various techniques etc that were being pioneered and used in Afghan. One was a new tourniquet for use in the field, easier to put on but the British medic who was training the troops to use it, made them run in full kit around a circuit first then as they were putting it on the 'casualty' poured water over the limb to simulate blood pumping out while shouting to try and distract them The point was as he said, it's easy to put on in camp, but they would be used under fire, while trying to catch your breath and in a stressful situation. The same applies to any SD technique whether MMA or not.

However I know the American military as well as ours have woken up to the other training advantages of MMA not necessarily all the techniques used though. Perhaps MMA would be useful for police officers, the various takedowns, though not all, submissions etc.

 

[Cyriacus]

I think the article itself hit the nail on the head with the last line. Unless you train full time or at least enough times to make what you do it instinctively there very few techniques in any style that you will be able to do in the heat of the moment.
I watched a programme last night on the advances of medicne in war time, it showed various techniques etc that were being pioneered and used in Afghan. One was a new tourniquet for use in the field, easier to put on but the British medic who was training the troops to use it, made them run in full kit around a circuit first then as they were putting it on the 'casualty' poured water over the limb to simulate blood pumping out while shouting to try and distract them The point was as he said, it's easy to put on in camp, but they would be used under fire, while trying to catch your breath and in a stressful situation. The same applies to any SD technique whether MMA or not.

However I know the American military as well as ours have woken up to the other training advantages of MMA not necessarily all the techniques used though. Perhaps MMA would be useful for police officers, the various takedowns, though not all, submissions etc.

That said, I for one prefer LINE over MCMAP

 

[Tez3]

That said, I for one prefer LINE over MCMAP

Tbh I know little to nothing about either.

 

[Bikewr]

In most every resisting I've ever had, some degree of "grappling" is involved. At the same time, I've never (in 40 years) had a "fight" with a suspect where one was reduced to trading blows.
I'm sure it happens... But in that case most would be better served by using a weapon rather than standing there fighting.
So it seems to me that generalized training in Judo-Jujitsu grappling, locks, and so forth would be useful under many circumstances, while many of the techniques employed in typical MMA would not.
One technique that should be taught to all LEOs is the "sprawl", since many attacks and "gun-grab" scenarios involve a low-level takedown attempt.

 

[Tez3]

In most every resisting I've ever had, some degree of "grappling" is involved. At the same time, I've never (in 40 years) had a "fight" with a suspect where one was reduced to trading blows.
I'm sure it happens... But in that case most would be better served by using a weapon rather than standing there fighting.
So it seems to me that generalized training in Judo-Jujitsu grappling, locks, and so forth would be useful under many circumstances, while many of the techniques employed in typical MMA would not.
One technique that should be taught to all LEOs is the "sprawl", since many attacks and "gun-grab" scenarios involve a low-level takedown attempt.

That however is the same thing, MMA isn't something different, it is Judo/Jujutsu, locks etc. I'm not sure what you think the techniques in MMA are?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

There's one or two things that strike me pretty well immediately... chief amongst which is the idea of "Many trainers are teaching how to work from the ground by getting suspects in their guard." Is it just me, or does encouraging such ideas invite some pretty serious problems, such as putting your belt with all it's equipment (cuffs, capsicum spray, handgun) all in handy reach of the potential bad guy?

Bingo Chris!

Here's the issues to be aware of when it comes to Officer training;

• Any situation we encounter has a firearm present...our own (at least).
• We need to remain on our feet until we decide to take it to the ground. The only reason we would take it to the ground is for ground stabilization for the placement of restraints. And we only do this if we're in control of the situation.
• The average duty belt is probably around 25lbs give or take. It is one thing to wrestle around in the mat room in sweats, and an entirely different thing to go to the ground on a hard surface (asphalt, sidewalk etc) wearing a crowded belt with sidearm, taser, cuffs, flashlight, baton, resuce tool, MTM mask, spare ammo, duty knife, glove pouch etc. Depending upon the positioning of the Officer's equipment, there is a REAL possiblility of screwing your back up trying to do some of the things in MMa training.
• An Officer needs training to regain his/her feet ASAP if they're not in control of the situation. Control does not entail having the suspect in a komorya or cross-body arm bar. That only puts you in a position where your stuck on the ground and unable to defend yourself from someone still on their feet i.e. perps buddies. Plus it makes it more difficult to scan the area for threats, be seen by responding back up, defend against a weapon the perp may still have on their person.
• Training such as S.P.E.A.R. or PCR or whatever is far more useful in controlling the situation than MMA-oriented movements designed to 'submit'.

Now keep in mind what I'm saying. Not all MMA training is useless for HL people. Some of it is viable and useful. But not the stuff that ties up an Officer on the ground. I can tell you for a firsthand fact that Royce Gracie had to change up the BJJ curriculum at S.E.P.S.I. where I teach academies. At first it was the MMA style stuff used in competitions. It proved not only useless but detrimental for Officer safety. He had to revamp the training to take into account what an Officer is likely to face as a threat. And that threat isn't likely to be a single, unarmed opponent in a well-lit, level, dry, matted surface where rules are agreed to beforehand and there is a referee on hand to enforce them. Submissions that tie you up on the ground, while leaving one of the perps hands free isn't sound Officer training. Keep what I'm saying in context.

 

[David43515]

I just think that it`s great that departments are devoting the time and funds to training, no matter the style. I assume that anyone training for work related incidents (soldier, LEO, healthcare worker) is going to have different demands in their job that mean they would need to alter the training to suit.

Are they likely to be carrying alot of equipment?
Are the likely to be able to expect backup right away?
Do they need to make weapon retention a big part of their curriculum?
How much force can they get away with?
And on and on.

 

[OzPaul]

I think the best "MMA" technique to work on from an officer's point of view is getting up off the floor if you end up there in a wrestle. I see little to no point in having a ground fight. All of the gear that you have to wear makes it a pain just to jog let alone have a fight. I practice this weekly against resisting opponents at the gym so i know if **** hits the fan and I'm on my back that I'm not staying there. I also believe that too much time (in officer training) is spent on defending attacks rather then attacking with punches, standing grappling etc. Sure we get given force options to use i.e. taser, baton but the time it takes to get them out and deploy them i reckon i could get at least 2 or 3 strikes in to atleast daze the "baddy" before taking control of the situation. Just my thoughts anyway.

 

[SavageMan]

I think MMA is perfect for Law Enforcement. You can customize MMA to fit your needs. For example. As an officer I could use Pressure Point Control techniques, and compliance techniques from Jiu Jitsu. The stand up game of Muay Thia for its Boxing, knee & elbow strikes and low kicks. As far as take downs Jiu Jitsu, Hapkido or Roman-Greco. But no matter what is being used they also have to tweak the styles for weapons retention and the use of force without it becoming excessive force. As far as MMA goes there isn't a set style so it can be easily adaptable. That is something we look for in our computer systems, our uniforms, vehicles, gear, and weapons. Why not in our self defense and use of force curriculum? The only issue I see would be setting up what you would putting together and not without watering it down for LEO's. That has happened to many systems so that the agencies circumvent liabilities.

 

[WC_lun]

Any training, MMA or otherwise, must possess the realities of the goals of the officers and the goals of the criminals they are encountering. You may be an awsome MMA teacher, but if you do not understand things like a cop must protect his firearm, then your training is not the proper training for a police officer. I have seen a lot of martial artist of all stripes claim to teach good stuff for LEO's, but the truth is very few do.

 

[ballen0351]

I think someone in my admin staff read that article as well because now. My department is having a BJJ inservice training. I had several issue with this:
1. 5 hours of training once a year will only teach someone enough to get themselves hurt.
2. It totally focuses on being on the ground and when I asked the teacher who runs a local BJJ school how they will get to the ground in class he said well we start on the ground. I asked him again in real life how will you teach the officer to get the suspect to the ground and he said thats not what hes there to teach.
3. It turned into 5 hours of the teacher and the 3 guys he had with him showing off and putting officers in to submission moves making them tap.
4. everyone was in gym clothes and no gun belts for the training so it did not good for weapons retention training.


It was a good thought but bad execution on the training program.
Cops get limited training time to begin with so if they are not willing to train on their own its better to not try and teach them MMA it will only make them think they know more then they do and will get them hurt.

 

[punisher73]

That however is the same thing, MMA isn't something different, it is Judo/Jujutsu, locks etc. I'm not sure what you think the techniques in MMA are?

I agree. What many people talk about when they talk about MMA and LEO is the ground aspect alone. To that, I have my reservations as an officer. I think that there are certain skills that need to be addressed and taught if an officer does end up on the ground in a bad spot. Our department uses Ground Avoidance/Ground Escape, which is basically how to get up safely and quickly, how to escape the mount etc.

I know some officers that train and compete in MMA, and when they were first starting off their BJJ training they would often attempt to employ some of that stuff into an arrest. Their use of force went up and they were doing tactics that if the suspect would have sued would have lost them an excessive force lawsuit. They would take the guy down and literally slap on an armbar in some cases! To break an arm is not justifiable unless deadly force is authorized, that technique does NOT fit into most use of force continuums. I think this is one of the places that officers can get into trouble by mixing the two. They need to understand and differentiate the goals of what they do.

 

[jks9199]

Any training, MMA or otherwise, must possess the realities of the goals of the officers and the goals of the criminals they are encountering. You may be an awsome MMA teacher, but if you do not understand things like a cop must protect his firearm, then your training is not the proper training for a police officer. I have seen a lot of martial artist of all stripes claim to teach good stuff for LEO's, but the truth is very few do.

The first thing I look at when someone claims to teach a tactic for police DT is whether or not they're doing it in a REALISTICALLY loaded duty belt. Then I look for body armor. Considering that a gun belt and body armor adds about 30 pounds, and restricts movement in some ways -- if the technique doesn't take that into account, it's not likely to work.

MMA training has some relevance for police training, as does most other martial arts training. However, you can't simply take a martial art or even MMA, and just relabel it DT.

 

[SavageMan]

I was actually assisting in teaching the annual self defense training today at the prison where I work. One of the Chaplin's who work with me approached me as I was talking with the lead instructor who I believe is a black belt in Kenpo Karate. The Chaplin happen to be a black belt in Judo. He asked what I studied. When I told him Muay Thai, & Jiu Jitsu with elements from Tae Kwon Do and Hapkido the sour look on his face told me what was coming. The next thing he said I have heard time & time again from "traditionalist martial artist". First it was "Oh your one of those rage in the cage fighters." Next it was "Don't you think MMA is a little aggressive for Law Enforcement?" One thing I thought I pointed out in my last post was that MMA is just that, it is a mixture of different styles. Bruce Lee did it and he becomes an Icon. Anybody else does it and they get labeled as to lazy to stick to one art or as some sort of raging lunatic whose out to break bones and choke or knock out their opponent with all the finesse of a caveman. I take my martial arts very seriously. My life & others depend on me knowing how to react and handle a violent situation. I have an incredible amount of respect for those who stick with and perfect the individual traditional arts. And as a Mixed Martial Artist I take all those perfected techniques and use them. MMA's get a bad rap. We have the reputation of the pit bull. I don't consider BJJ an MMA. It's not. There are no strikes or kicks in BJJ, it's grappling. If your administration wanted to go with a form of Jiu Jitsu aimed at Law Enforcement they would have been better off with Goshen JJ or a style of Traditional Japanese JJ which still practices stand up, strikes, kicks, and take downs from standing. MMA is slowly falling victim to the McDojo syndrome. Anyone who wants to make money throws MMA at the end of their schools name and tries to pass it off. It takes the right mix to be real MMA. Just because you can grapple doesn't make you an MMA practitioner. You should be studying kicks, strikes, defensive techniques, locks, chokes, ect, ect. That's what makes MMA work. That's why I think MMA is the way to go with LEO's. Take what works & put it to muscle memory then leave out what doesn't. Use the effective techniques that are simple to use and don't jumble it up with a lot of traditional forms. Now that I think about it I believe there were some Israeli fellows who got it right. I think they call it Krav Maga a true MMA.:mst:

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Here is a consideration;

Our agency adopted S.P.E.A.R. almost 20 years ago. Now I don't know how many here are familiar with that system, but it is brutal, it is bloody and it is likely to break stuff on bad guys.

And that is a good thing.

Oh, I know it isn't politically correct to say that. And it makes it sound like a Rambo mind-set. However, that is only a superficial understanding on the part of those that are more of the politically correct mindset. Let me explain. In today's world, drugs play a HUGE role in making people 'bad guys'. Many of these people have been abusing their bodies for years. Many are right there on the razors edge. Now we have a fight with L.E. or Corrections. The chances of positional asphyxiation, a heart attack or a brain aneurysm goes up dramatically from a medical standpoint when you've got a bunch of Officers struggling with an out-of-control perp or inmate. Now you've got a dead person. Not real good P.R.

S.P.E.A.R. (or any take-them-down-and-out now system) may break bones or be a bloody mess, but it tends to stop a fight RIGHT NOW! From a medical, and thus a liability standpoint, it is much better FOR the perp than six Officer's piling on and trying to control him. These types of systems are recognized and upheld in court and a part of the force matrix i.e. it's legal and a good thing.

Just tossing this out there.