C
chiro4
Guest
What martial art is taught in boot camp in the branches of the American services? Since time is short for training in boot camp what aspects of the martial art is being taught and what is left out ?
RRouuselot
Master of Arts
chiro4 said:
Funny you should ask since just today I was asked to teach "Army Combatives" by several units on the base where I work.
In the very near future it is going to be required for all untis to go through a "combatives" courses even after Basic Training.
The hand-to-hand combat portion of this manual is divided into basic and advanced training.
* PREFACE
* CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
* CHAPTER 2 - TRAINING
* CHAPTER 3 - BASIC GROUND-FIGHTING TECHNIQUES
* CHAPTER 4 - ADVANCED GROUND-FIGHTING TECHNIQUES
* CHAPTER 5 - TAKEDOWNS AND THROWS
* CHAPTER 6 - STRIKES
* CHAPTER 7 - HANDHELD WEAPONS
* CHAPTER 8 - STANDING DEFENSE
* CHAPTER 9 - GROUP TACTICS
* APPENDIX A - SITUATIONAL TRAINING
* APPENDIX B - COMPETITIONS
* GLOSSARY
* REFERENCES
Some of which I can see the usefulness but some other stuff just doesn't seem applicable to the "battle field".
Gee, where'd that idea come from Johnchiro4 said:
( great talking to you voice to voice btw).As far as I know the only branch that has a 'martial art' as named and not just something that is called 'hand to hand' or 'combatives' training is the USMC. By no means does that mean that the unnamed systems are inferior, just not referred to as 'art.' Oh as I think about it there were/are arts like DEFENDU and SCARS that were developed for/by military types as well, but those systems aren't generally taught in boot camp.
For the most part, I would say that the techniques are simple, mechanical motions that can be learned quickly and shouldn't (stressing the theoretical here) hinder from mission accomplishment (take you out of any formation too extensively, expose you to indirect/grazing/direct fire or ordnance...).
The elements that usually would not be included in a 'military martial art' would be the cultural/'ethos'/code of conduct stuff. That would already be part of the training regiment in the history/legacy building classes that are designed to show how you, as a new recruit are becoming part of a tradition.
Civilian martial arts, when taught in the paramilitary structure, would try to do this indoctrinal training with/during the 'martial art' training.
The other thing to consider is that you are living it when you are in boot camp. You whole routine is controlled by the schedule. What civilian training tries to cram into a 1-2.5 hour class 2/3 times a week (generally speaking) the boot camp environment would be able to do with greater depth (talking about the 'warrior spirit/ethical code' type of training) and intensity because of A)volutary service committment, B)Total control of the student/recruit, C)MISSION. Civlian training is not as clearly linked to the MISSION or application.
'Artistically' I think it is richer than civilian/recreational training in tradition because it is living and applied so the physical and moral/espirit de Corps stuff will manifest more deeply because of the shared misery mentallity.
Where it would lack would be in the sophistication and internal/individual 'mind body' experience that a civilian student has the luxury of devoting time to and a serviceman/woman would not because of the 'mission first' mentallity of the training.
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
We call the course CQC or in other words Close Quarters Combat. In I served in the USMC we were taught basic wrist locks and arm bars along with hip throws and leg sweeps just enough to take someone to the ground. We then were trained to use our K-Bars to finish the job.
However we were encouraged to seek MA training from other sources such as the local MA School in the community or from fellow Marines. At the Time I was in we had a fairly good sized club on Base that taught several different MA's at 29 Palms CA and when I served out in Okinawa Japan.
However we were encouraged to seek MA training from other sources such as the local MA School in the community or from fellow Marines. At the Time I was in we had a fairly good sized club on Base that taught several different MA's at 29 Palms CA and when I served out in Okinawa Japan.
RRouuselot
Master of Arts
As far as combatives manuals go the Army and USMC have pretty much the same thing......I have seen both books. They both borrow from Karate, BJJ, and Judo. Some of the techniques in both manuals need to be thrown out as they are rather unrealistic and not practical for "real self-defense".
However, the USMC has belt ranks to monitor the progress of each individual. Pretty good idea actually.
However, the USMC has belt ranks to monitor the progress of each individual. Pretty good idea actually.
I read up on the USMC Martial arts stuff when it first was really getting media attention and the idea was inspired by ROK/Israeli miltary ideas. The individual 'fighting spirit' development was part of the training/application goal as well.RRouuselot said:
From what I understand, your belt rank and promotions in the USMC martial arts also counts as points towards promotions as well.
In a day and age when low intensity conflict/peace keeping missions and limited engagement rules are fairly common, being proficient in these skills is probably more practical than when the military was primarily a crash'em and bash'em organization.
chinto01
Black Belt
When I went to bootcamp back in 1990 I asked my Drill Sergeant what style this was taken from. As with most things in the military it was taken from a field manual. A field manual is an instruction book written on an eigth grade comprehension level for people to easily understand. There is a manual like this for most things in the Army. He did inform me however that some of the techniques he was teaching came from his time in the Marines while stationed on Okinawa. His teacher was Sensei Eizo Shimabukuro
There was some rumor that the Army was also working with the Gracies to incorporate that component into an "ARMY Martial Arts" system as well.RRouuselot said:
I started a thread a while ago about the trend/impact of having a martial art that is essentially "American" because it is actively used/taught/recorded and archived within the military records on the civilian market when these guys start hitting the streets.
RRouuselot
Master of Arts
loki09789 said:
1) Just like PT scores.
2) I was refering to some of the actual techniques when I said they didn't seem practical.
RRouuselot
Master of Arts
loki09789 said:
Although some of the techniques look similar to BJJ and what the Gracies teach I dont' think they were a part of it. From what I heard the individual that put together the Army manual used most of what the Marine Corps had developed in their system. Both are pretty good straight forward systems without any jumping spinning back kicks with a triple summy or anything like that.
