What in Hell is this "Combatives" some of the lads ****e on about??

Musashi

I recently read some articles dealing with defining what "Combatives" actually is and where it comes from.Following Millionaires thread,but not wanting to hijack same,I thought I'd repost these articles here for review and discussion.
I haven't sought the authors permission to do so, but these were posted on public forums and I will be giving full credit to the authors and links to their sites so I hope this is not so much "stealing" their material as showing it to a wider audience and promoting their work if some folks like what they see.If you are interested in learning more, contact the authors or PM me and I'll try to help out.
Anyhow,here we go!


Originally posted by Mika of Get Tough.net Fame!


"COMBATIVES? ...... Don’t Tell Me. I Know What That Is!

Part One

By Carl Cestari





“Combatives” from the root word COMBAT – “to fight in direct contact”, “active fighting between enemies”, “any fight or struggle”.



Well, let’s see………………..There is ONE singular glaring absence in the above definition. Notice it? Absolutely NO mention of Fairbairn, Applegate, or Coach Hanley. No mention of Jiu-Jitsu, Boxing, Savate or any member of the Gracie family. No mention of World War Two, the Punic Wars or the Spartans. No mention of Juji-Gatame, a smashing overhand right, an edge of hand blow, or even a good old kick in the ass!



Get it? THERE ARE NO SPECIFICS that define what is or isn’t so-called “COMBATIVES”! So why do so many people feel such an overriding need to “define” combatives into a narrow scope of limited methodology? “I know what you do”…………………..”That Fairbairn stuff”. A month ago this same guy thought FAIRBAIRN was simply a decent suntan. “Yea, I base my combatives on Applegate”……………..six months ago this dude thought Applegate was the entrance to an orchard! Everybody’s an “expert”. At what exactly? I’m not sure even “they” really know.



I won’t presume to speak for ANYONE else that uses this term “combatives”. Actually I wouldn’t want to! All I can do is offer a CORRECT semantic observation and proffer my view on what encompasses my study, training and understanding of so-called “combatives”.



If you really do your research and homework you will see that even in manuals describing man to man combat that are CENTURIES old there exists a very COMPREHENSIVE survey and presentations of MANY forms of armed and unarmed combat. ALL in the same manuals! A vast array of weapon skills are shown and even the “unarmed” combat is a diverse mix of “techniques”. Before the use of London Prize Ring rules and the Marquis of Queensbury, “pugilists” used and relied on a great number of different grappling/striking/kicking and gouging methods. Ancient Greek Pankration was a combined system of “ALL POWERS” combat. The original Koryu Bujutsu of the Samurai included a comprehensive catalog of both armed and unarmed skills. The unarmed combatives of the Japanese Bushi also DIDN’T limit scope or method. Grappling was stressed when THAT was the best method of gaining tactical superiority. Striking, kicking and even BITING was resorted to when THAT was deemed the most appropriate method. The Chinese have ALWAYS maintained fully robust systems of combat that included all manner of striking, punching, kicking, throwing, strangling and joint-locking. Original Okinawan Te(Ti) included percussion methods as well as “tegumi” and “tuite”. Punch his lungs out if that did the job best. Kick his gonads out the top of his head if THAT worked best. Or grapple him into submission and control OR grapple him into a spine lock and neck break. Whatever was called for and whatever GOT THE JOB AT HAND DONE!



The 19th century saw many methods of “combined” self-defense systems develop in the West. The French combined elements of Chausson/Savate(Basque Zipota as well) with Boxe Anglaise, Parisian Lutte, and even the “new” Japanese Jiu-Jitsu. The British did the same. The “BARTITSU” of Barton-Wright is a classic example. In the US a number of “self-protection” methods became available to the public that combined methods from Boxing and Wrestling. EVEN before any “organized” systems were presented, men who “fought” even for “sport” used virtually ANY device to insure victory. Just read Elliot J. Gorn.



The Twentieth century saw even MORE “mixed” combat systems. It CERTAINLY didn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to figure out that in a REAL fight ANYTHING goes. Any and ALL manner of grappling, throttling, kicking, kneeing, butting, biting, punching, gouging, stomping and whatever other methods of mayhem could be employed were ALL “FAIR” when “fair” meant the difference between life or death. And it CERTAINLY didn’t just end at “unarmed” fighting! A “Gentleman” beset upon by a rough and tumble “footpad” on a lonely and desolate backstreet would feel perfectly JUSTIFIED in running said “footpad” thru and thru again with his swordcane or bashing his brains in with a “lifesaver”. Even when the highwayman wasn’t even armed with a lowly brickbat. What’s that old saying? All’s fair in love and war. Often it’s not a matter of who’s “right”, but simply who’s LEFT!



This IS “combatives” pure and simple. Whatever WORKS BEST at the time! A sort of “mixture” of varied fighting skills. HEY………………..wait a minute! A “mixed” fighting system? What a NOVEL IDEA!



Our next installment will look at “combatives” from the Russo-Japanese war and World War One thru to our “brandy new” millennium and all our new age “innovations”. Should be fun!"

Musashi

"“COMBATIVES”

A Rose by Any Other Name…....

By Carl Cestari

Part 2



The advent of World War One (the war to END all wars) brought warfare into a new and foreboding era of man to man killing and slaughter. Air power, mechanized warfare, chemical warfare and the general widespread use of machine guns changed the face of battle almost completely. However the solitary fact remained that in the end it was STILL man against man in a desperate, brutal and deadly struggle for survival. The static and stagnant lines created by entrenched warfare demanded new and innovative tactics and strategies. Among these was the advent of “raiding” parties. Small groups of lightly armed men who ventured out into “no man’s land” for the purpose of recon, probing, intelligence, prisoner grabs, and psychological “demoralization” missions. The nature of fighting under these conditions became popularized as “trench warfare”. This was close-in knife to belly hand to hand combat. All manner of expedient, purpose designed and improvised close-combat weaponry was employed. While technological advances were being made in all other forms of warfare, this particularly nasty and vicious man to man fighting reverted to the most barbaric, primitive and bloody “methods” imaginable. Just as it has been since Cain slew Abel and how it WILL be until the last two humans clench fists or seize stones in raging anger during the final melee of the Apocalypse.



Fostered by this, most military forces researched, developed and implemented fairly comprehensive and rigorous training methods specific to close-combat and “trench fighting”. The bayonet, the knife(especially the trench knife), and hand to hand combat became prime training doctrines along with advancements in general physical conditioning and battle preparation. The unarmed hand to hand methods were drawn from any and ALL sources of man to man combat. Boxing, wrestling, Savate, jiujitsu, and any number of “rough and tumble” gouge and kick back alley tactics were employed. Those charged with the task of developing such training programs were well AWARE of the fact that NO ONE SINGLE “approach” to combat was SUFFICIENT in REAL man to man kill or be killed battle!



Punching, kicking, striking, butting, stomping, biting, gouging, throwing, tripping, choking, strangling, bone breaking and the use of ANY and ALL weapons of close combat expediency were STRESSED! The foregoing should satisfy and fulfill anyone’s “definition” of MIXED martial tactics and techniques (even if Muay Thai or more accurately Siamese boxing and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu were not included). And to be fair, I do have English language books circa the late 1920’s – early 1930’s that detail Siamese boxing quite well. As an aside, one manual details the “favorite” attacks of Siamese style boxers as being directed at the liver with brutal kicks and at the throat while grasping the hair with one hand and smashing the throat with the other fist (gloves were NOT worn at this time). The liver attack was lethal in many cases because of the widespread epidemic of malaria which left the liver swollen and distended even if you survived and made it a deadly focal point of attack. DEATHS occurred DAILY in these matches and were considered just a routine hazard of the “trade”.



The years after WWI saw an increase in self-protection “systems” designed for and “marketed” to the average citizen. Law Enforcement organizations also began to pay more heed to this area of training. This was just part of a movement to increase the professionalism of law enforcement personnel in general. Virtually ALL of these “systems” advocated an all-around well-balanced approach to personal combat. Elements of boxing, wrestling, foot-fighting and jiu-jitsu as a “mixed” toolbox of personal defense tactics became quite popular. Even methods that relied primarily on western boxing and wrestling maneuvers acknowledged that a well rounded combatant MUST be able to BOTH strike effectively as well as grapple. Other methods that touted “jiu-jitsu” as a singular answer to personal attack and defense were advocating a “jiu-jitsu” THAT was quite comprehensive in it’s syllabus of blows, strikes, kicks and grappling methods. It would be VERY good to remember here, that for all the “talk” about W.E. Fairbairn, during this period the Shanghai Municipal Police academy trained their recruits in BOXING – WRESTLING and JIU-JITSU! OR as one veteran of the SMP put it…………………….”our training in this area was a MIXED BAG of physical skills”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



There was virtually NO “authority” or “expert” in this field who DID NOT advocate a “MIX” of striking/kicking and grappling either as a combined “method” or as found singularly as in “real” Japanese jiu-jitsu. When it was “for all the marbles” NO ONE would be as short-sighted as to negate ANY and ALL possible methods of attack and defense. As far an “aliveness” training goes, jiu-jitsu (NOT Kodokan Judo) “free practice” of this period allowed virtually ANYTHING. Including atemi to almost ALL kyusho points, including the testicles, base of skull etc. The ONLY “advisement” proffered was NOT to hit so HARD as to KILL your training partner, SAVE that for “matches” against OTHER jiu-jitsu schools!



ONLY in the arena of sporting combat did this division of method, pitting one against another, become a somewhat popular past time. Matching wrestlers against boxers, either of the two against jiu-jitsu men, or Savate fighters against boxers (Biddle fought in such a match while in Paris) was done under a constantly varying set of rules so that it became virtually impossible to ever really determine what “method” was superior, and even then, as some sportswriters of the time pointed out, what did ANY of this have to do with REAL fighting when NO rules applied. Even Jigoro Kano’s nephew got involved in promoting these types of matches between western boxers and native Japanese Judoka. They were called “JU (as in Judo/Jujutsu) – KEN/KENTO (as in fist or fist-fighting)”. Even Choki Motobu when asked if his Kempo-Karate was “superior” to boxing (after his KO of a western style pugilist) said that in order for his “method” to be used against a boxer specialized training specific for that type of match would have to be undertaken. Judoka interested in these JU-KENTO bouts sought out SPECIFIC instruction in just HOW to make Judo work against boxing. An entire book on this subject was published in Japan in the early 30’s. It is of the UTMOST importance to remember that ALL of these bouts had strict rules and regulations of engagement! Few if any of these mandates would have had much bearing on what one could do in a real pier-six back alley brawl. As an example: Judoka were almost ALWAYS forbidden to use any methods of ATEMIWAZA (striking, punching, kicking, butting and smashing). However, Judo “experts” of the time have advocated often and in their writings that ATEMI would be the MOST preferable method of attack and defense in a serious engagement.



The bottom line here is simply this: for use in a REAL violent assault NO ONE, but an utter FOOL, would suggest an attitude or method approaching anything LESS than that of an ALL-IN “anything goes” doctrine. In regards to “sporting combats” NOTHING was ever, or could ever be, conclusively proven to be superior to anything else. At one time or another ANY of these various “methods” had BOTH big and impressive WINS and equally impressive FAILURES.



Next installment we’ll look at the World War Two era and define the true meaning of the term “combatives”………………"

The Truth About Self Defense.com

Musashi

"World War II and Beyond
by Carl Cestari



This is our last installment on “defining” the parameters of COMBATIVES. The point, I am sure, will be missed by some but it must be emphasized that this material is historical fact and is accurate in substance and detail. It is an objective view of combatives and NOT a subjective opinion or personal “definition” designed to fill an agenda of one sort or another.



The Battle of Britain began in early July 1940. England was isolated, cut off and alone. The miracle retreat from Dunkirk and the German “Blitzkrieg” across Europe, including the crushing tactical defeat of the famed French “Maginot Line” proved the Third Reich war machine to be virtually unstoppable. Hitler’s plan for the invasion of England, named “Operation Sea Lion” was a daily focal point of danger and concern for the British.



Dunkirk had decimated the British forces and moral was at an all time low. Two recently returned veterans of British colonial rule in Shanghai, China approached the War Office and offered their services at this desperate time. William Ewart Fairbairn, retired as a ranking officer of the Shanghai Municipal Police force and his partner Eric Anthony Sykes, a private arms dealer who served as a “volunteer” in the SMP and who headed the “sniper” unit of the famed Shanghai Riot Squad promised the War Office that their training and methods could in short order make “any one man the equal of ten”. After the debacle at Dunkirk this was a MOST important and dramatic statement. Initially dismissed, these two men went on to PROVE the veracity of their words and convinced the power that be as to absolute effectiveness of their methods. If that meant that an over middle aged W.E. Fairbairn had to place several young bucks in the hospital to prove his point in an impromptu, but VERY realistic “demonstration”, so be it. Those who “tested” Sykes fared NO better. So the methods that these men had developed during decades of very dangerous work in Shanghai now became a highly valued and integral part of training for all British forces and Special Operations personnel.



The attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941 coupled with the Imperial Japanese military’s coordinated assault on all American and British forces across the Pacific Rim pulled the United States firmly in this world wide conflagration. We were now fully at war with the Axis forces. Fairbairn who was now in Canada, assigned to the infamous “Camp X” (where along with “unarmed combat” experts WEF and George de Relwyskow was a BRAZILIAN JUDO/JUJUTSU EXPERT, Hmmm…….Colonel Carl Eifler was ALREADY undergoing training here) was ordered to assist the US government agency known as the “The Office of the Co-coordinator of Intelligence” the precursor of the OSS. Eric Anthony Sykes remained in England and found the need for his services in great demand. He also found himself working under the auspice of the British covert force known as the Special Operations Executive.



The history of these men from the early days of Shanghai, up to and thru the war years is an entire story unto itself and beyond the scope of this article. However it must be clearly understood that the contribution of these men had a profound effect and influence on close-combat methods, tactics, and techniques for DECADES after the war. Despite the often heard “argument” that we have somehow “evolved” beyond these methods, we will in future articles put this notion to rest. They were however, certainly NOT the only “experts” involved in this field! An example (one of many) would be A.J. Drexel-Biddle who studied and trained extensively in boxing, Savate, jiu-jitsu, swordplay, knife-fighting and various bayonet methods.



As the United States geared up for war, a major factor began to be publicized. Both here and in Australia the press made a great deal about the superiority of the Japanese fighting man. Part of this was, to be sure, rooted in fact. The Battle of Port Arthur, the turning point in the Russo-Japanese war, several decades earlier, had shown the world the tenacity and ferocity of the Japanese soldier, particularly in the area of close-in man to man combat. Much was made of the large Russian soldier finding abject defeat at the hands of his smaller Japanese adversary when engaged in hand to hand combat(hence a very obvious boost for the creation of Sombo). Jiu-jitsu was given world-wide attention and notoriety in this regard. The Japanese conduct of their war in China also showed the world a seemingly invincible and unstoppable force. A force that was brutal and deadly in the extreme.



So much attention was given over to the training of US and Allied forces in methods that would enable the average soldier to meet the Japanese fighting man on a somewhat equal footing. EVERY branch of the Armed Services began an intensive physical training program designed to meet these needs. Much of the “expert” instruction needed, particularly in the arena of close-quarters man to man combat, came from the civilian quarter. Men with tremendous and varied life-long experience in all forms of “combatives” were tapped to create training programs that would give the Allied soldier sufficient means by which to engage their enemies at close-quarters. The Axis did the same of course, Japan being the obvious factor in this regard, BUT even Adolf Hitler proclaimed the absolute need for boxing and jiu-jitsu in military training as it imparted courage and daring to the average soldier to close with his enemy!



In the US there were a PLETHORA of varied methods and training systems. ANY attempt to narrowly define the methods extant in this era is FOOLISHNESS! Though the contribution of Lt. Colonel Fairbairn is GREAT, as is the influence of Colonel Applegate, there were DOZENS upon DOZENS of different close-quarters battle systems developed. From wrestling, boxing, savate, judo, jiu-jitsu, Chinese boxing, and even football and rugby methods were NOT only drawn upon, but entire “systems” were advocated based on these individual methods. It may come as a surprise to many, but here in the US, even Japanese KARATE was used!



Many of these “unarmed combat” courses were highly complex and technical as they were rooted in the favored methods of the men tasked with their “creation”. Wrestlers tended to rely on that method, Judo men on that system, Boxers on their expertise and so on and so on. Each method also could claim stunning success in actual combat! True after action reports showed that ALL of these methods had merit and COULD be used effectively in the rigors and stress of real battle. However, as the war progressed two major factors began to influence and change these training protocols. One was the fact that more and more men from ALL sorts of varied backgrounds being were drafted into military service, the other was that as demands for more and more replacement troops began to rise the amount of training time became by necessity reduced and limited.



The approach that seemed MOST feasible and useful was one that COMBINED the “best” or most effective, efficient and quickly learned methods as well as those most well RETAINED! The rudiments of boxing and wrestling were made part of an overall general physical conditioning program and “unarmed combat” became a specialized block of instruction. These courses in “unarmed combat”, “hand to hand combat”, “combat judo” and so forth again sought to COMBINE the most advantageous holds, throws, trips, locks, strangles, blows, strikes and kicks from all the varied methods available. The ONLY truly limiting factor here was the TIME element. Other considerations were also important. The O’Neill (another Shanghai veteran and ranking Kodokan Yudansha) method is a classic example of a system specifically tailored for both the training environment available as well as the NATURE of the combat engagement expected. There were even attempts made to instruct the military in actual Koryu Jujutsu systems here in the US! However the MOST effective systems still sought to MIX ALL the varied methods of physical combat.



As the war progressed more and more after action “intelligence” gathered from the reality of actual battle helped shape and determine training priorities. Many methods of close-combat began to be “trimmed” down to those fundamentals that proved MOST effective OVERALL and most applicable to ALL TRAINEES across a wide and varied spectrum of physical attributes and skill.



Applegate was perhaps the most vocal of these advocates owing to his exposure in the INFANTRY JOURNAL and the publishing of “KILL or GET KILLED”. And he was NOT without his critics, as was Fairbairn.

Musashi

Some courses were so short in duration that they involved ONLY SEVERAL HOURS of instruction. Others were quite involved and very complete in their syllabus content. Many are familiar with the Navy V-5 programs and the training at Benning, but lesser known is the very EXTENSIVE training at places such as Fort Meade and at the Hawaii Jungle Warfare complex, just to name two! Here at these locations, and such training was conducted from Brooklyn to California, a very complete and MIXED program of “combatives” was taught. From the CIC training center in Chicago to the Army training camps in Colorado, from Parris Island to the Ranger/Commando schools in the Hawaiian Islands, from the training bases in England prior to D-Day to the “Killing” school in Palestine, the METHODS taught ran the FULL gamut of man to man tooth and nail “combatives”. From the complex to the “instinctive kill” (a method designed to take FULL advantage of so-called natural “animal” killing instinct) ALL these methods, systems, and approaches FALL under the definition of COMBATIVES! Even the OSS personnel training at Area B were shown the methods of SIAMESE boxing (read Muay Thai)! From Anglo Boxing, wrestling and grappling, French “foot-fighting” (including Assaut Vite savate), Indian Varma-adi/Varmannie, Chinese boxing, “Roman” boxing, Japanese Judo/Jujutsu and Karate, Siamese boxing, Burmese boxing-Bando (remember the CBI), western fencing, Filipino edged weapons and ANY and ALL other systems (including almost every weapon known to man) deemed effective in DISPATCHING one’s enemies to the hereafter were STUDIED, RESEARCHED. IMPLEMENTED and TRAINED! One WWII era US hand to hand combat manual makes reference to INDONESIAN “methods”!"



This IS the legacy of COMBATIVES! This is the TRUE DEFINITION of COMBATIVES! And to those who need to “pigeon hole” others into the “box” of “only” doing World War II “combatives”………………………..well, applying the above definition based on the TRUE historical RECORD, then HELL YES!…………………I do follow the LEGACY of WORLD WAR TWO “COMBATIVES”!



Note: If there is sufficient interest we will also be pleased to cover ALL of these topics in FULL detail based on OBJECTIVE historical facts.



Future newsletter articles will go into depth on history, training and method covering armed and unarmed combat as well as topics on various subjects from Shanghai to “Shangri-La”(for those still wandering around in La-La land)."


These are articles by Carl Cestari posted by Mika of Get Tough .net up in Sweden,hosts of the training camp Millionaire was on about in another thread.
I think this should show folks that we are all working toward the same type of thing from different sides.This is also why I want to learn Pressure Points from Paul at PMA or Clinch and Ground from Colm/Colum/John or Mick at SBGi,Thai from Paddy or Krav from Millionaire.
I'm counting nothing out,at least until I personally try it,not taking anyones word for stuff.I will decide on the best "fit" for me and train in stuff I like or feel is useful and drop what may work fine for others who are fitter or slower or younger or older!
Mixing Martial Arts goes way back so I don't think "I'm a TKD guy,I hate all Karateka". They were all the same thing once upon a time,possibly in China or India..............Who cares? We do what we have always done,analyse and adapt,take what works for ourselves and drop what we can't work.Bruce Lee may have written it down or codified the idea but this kind of analytical approach to one of the basic human endeavours has always been around.
When the broadsword ruled on the field of combat smaller lads worked the Foil into the equation, so when a huge fooker wound up to cleave a lad in twain he found himself stabbed through several vital bits in short order! We work to our particular strengths, and I'll cull from any style if it'll open up new areas of study for me.
Thanks for taking the time to scroll through this,I'd welcome any comments,thought or even well thought out abuse! Lets hear it boys!

pma-ire

Nice one Mush

But I fell asleep half way down the second post

Millionaire

yeah good articles. thats from the Get Tough lads up in sweeden.

I love training in combatives now, right up my area of specific interest.

plus mixed in kickboxing and muay thai, u got a good combination.

in Thailand right now in thaio camp getting hammered. wish I was back down in Pattaya on the beach! this is hard to hack after 3 fun filled days down there!