# Martial Arts/CQC Trg in CAF (split fm Probe of WPG soldier's suicide)



## quadrapiper (28 Nov 2019)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> "Fight clubs' have been around for a looooong time ... they were fairly open in the 1960s, every unit had a boxing team until about 1966 or '67 and there were active sub-unit programmes that aimed to "foster" fighting spirit and produce regimental level boxers. We also had unarmed combat programmes that often got pretty aggressive. This was, usually, all overseen by Physical Training Instructors; sometimes the unit MO didn't approve, sometimes he did. The thing was that the institutional Arny, from the top down, "liked" rough, tough physical activity. There was a lot of angst when (mid to late '60s) boxing was done away with. Some people thought that was a serious mistake. There had, in my experience, always been some (maybe too much) tolerance of "rough and tumble," including settling disputes with fists.


Do you think a (re)introduction of some sort of martial art would be of value, whether something like the MCMAP, one of the "traditional" disciplines, or something MMA-ish?

Could see avoiding systems where blows to the head are a key feature.


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Nov 2019)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Do you think a (re)introduction of some sort of martial art would be of value, whether something like the MCMAP, one of the "traditional" disciplines, or something MMA-ish?
> 
> Could see avoiding systems where blows to the head are a key feature.



No. This is not something that will fix this problem. I served for many years in 'tough guy' units where there was alot of boxing (formal and informal), and bullying still occurred.

Good leadership, and ruthlessly well executed military discipline, is the best solution.


----------



## ballz (28 Nov 2019)

After many years of being repressed for some reason (shitty leadership), martial arts is making a comeback in the CAF. Largely led by the growth of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in Canada, it's grown a lot and finally after many years of "why do I have to convince people this is a good idea" it's growing and being hoisted aboard.

As a result of being a bit emboldened by this, there's a movement afoot to get legit striking competitions started again. Sadly our current system of CQC and PSP sports is set up poorly for this but people will eventually make it happen.

In fact, the Div Comd who was in place for this incident, BGen Cadieu, wanted to try to harness this into a useful and productive outlet by putting more focus into combatives. Why have underground fight clubs when we can pay soldiers to actually train and fight? It was toward the end of his tenure, we did make some strides in the right direction including having professional instructors teaching on base (BJJ, Judo, and Wrestling) and today I received an email that the large renovation we've been pushing for has been approved by the Base Comd, which will quadruple the size of the mat space here.



> Could see avoiding systems where blows to the head are a key feature.



If it's a striking art, then that's probably a very bad approach.


----------



## ballz (28 Nov 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> No. This is not something that will fix this problem. I served for many years in 'tough guy' units where there was alot of boxing (formal and informal), and bullying still occurred.



Bullying will always occur to some extent. My experience with martial arts is that people who train together usually respect each other. This underground fight club stuff manifests from a bunch of young troops who joined for this kind of thing, and they aren't having their needs met. You won't stamp it out, it's a symptom of a bigger issue.


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 Nov 2019)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Do you think a (re)introduction of some sort of martial art would be of value, whether something like the MCMAP, one of the "traditional" disciplines, or something MMA-ish?
> 
> Could see avoiding systems where blows to the head are a key feature.




I'm with daftandbarmy, 100%. Leadership and discipline are what's required; that's all that's required to address most issues.


----------



## Haggis (29 Nov 2019)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _My sense_, no proof, just bar chat at reunions and so on, is that modern COs are overloaded with _administrivia_ from too many HQs ~ stuff that, in my days in command, late 1970s and early '80s, would never have been allowed to leave Mobile Command HQ.



Edward your sense is correct.  A sample of the constant and often intrusive demands on a Class A leader's time can be found in  this thread.

I retired almost a year ago as the Ops O of a very busy little Reserve Infantry unit.  Before my commissioning, I was a unit and Brigade Battle School RSM.  I can say with some authority that had I attempted to do all the administration that was expected of me by my unit CO, the Bde and Div HQs on the six paid Class A hours I had each week I would have never gotten up from my desk. I was lucky in that I had, first, a DND Blackberry and, later, a DND laptop.  Without those tools which allowed me to stay in the loop and meet the often redundant and repetitive RFIs - "off the official clock" - I would never see my troops.

Unless things have changed in the last year, anyone in a Bde or higher HQ that still believes that Reserve unit and sub unit leadership is a "part-time job" that can be easily done in three to six hours a week has been making more than casual use of legalized cannabis.


----------



## Haggis (29 Nov 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> After many years of being repressed for some reason (shitty leadership), martial arts is making a comeback in the CAF. Largely led by the growth of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in Canada, it's grown a lot and finally after many years of "why do I have to convince people this is a good idea" it's growing and being hoisted aboard.



This is a bit of a tangent, but....

My former unit tried for at least five years - unsuccessfully -  to incorporate some type of combatitives/CQC into our training cycle.  Unfortunately, there is precious little white space in most unit calendars to do this once mandatory training, IBTS and Bde/TBG collective training is programmed in. 

Coupled with the Bde's insistence that CQC of any type only be taught by qualified CQCI and any sport martial arts overseen by PSP it became a non-starter as we are over 100 km away from our support base and most other Bde units.

Despite asking year after year after year, my unit was never able to secure either CQC or CQCI seats and those CQCI in the Bde tended to not want to travel inconvenient distances to help their brothers out.  I had three LEA use-of-force instructors in my unit and one was an ex-JTF-2 guy (a plank holder, no less).  I even tried to get a CQC/CQCI equivalency granted to my ex- JTF-2 guy but that fell through as well.

Tangent ends.


----------



## Remius (29 Nov 2019)

We are lucky enough to have two CQCI instructors.  We also have equipment, pads, tatami mats and redman suits etc. 

It is inexpensive, easy and relevant training to fit in if you can.  It is also very motivating. 

it would be good if it could be the norm and not the exception.


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Nov 2019)

Haggis said:
			
		

> Unless things have changed in the last year, anyone in a Bde or higher HQ that still believes that Reserve unit and sub unit leadership is a "part-time job" that can be easily done in three to six hours a week has been making more than casual use of legalized cannabis.



This was exactly my experience as well. The militia is focused on putting the Officer back in the Office.

There is little focus on requiring leaders to go into the field, or spend time watching or even (shock horror) participating in training activities. 

But you just try not responding to one of the over 100 emails per month that you get (I counted them so that I could tell my CO approximately how much 'off the clock' work he was passing on to us) and you're doomed.


----------



## quadrapiper (30 Nov 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> If it's a striking art, then that's probably a very bad approach.


Was thinking of boxing, primarily.





			
				E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I'm with daftandbarmy, 100%. Leadership and discipline are what's required; that's all that's required to address most issues.


Certainly; however, you'd mentioned prior use of boxing. Interested in your thoughts on whether or not something similar should be reintroduced.


----------



## ballz (30 Nov 2019)

Haggis said:
			
		

> This is a bit of a tangent, but....
> 
> My former unit tried for at least five years - unsuccessfully -  to incorporate some type of combatitives/CQC into our training cycle.  Unfortunately, there is precious little white space in most unit calendars to do this once mandatory training, IBTS and Bde/TBG collective training is programmed in.
> 
> ...



Exactly what I was talking about*:



			
				ballz said:
			
		

> Sadly our current system of CQC and PSP sports is set up poorly for this but people will eventually make it happen.



The Army can't even get out of its own way. This is relevant to this conversation because I can be the best leader in the world, if I'm not enabled to provide my troops with good, hard, challenging training (not just combatives... marksmanship, urban ops, raids, defensives, etc), the kind of stuff they are starving for, guess what.... troops are going to find a way to satisfy that hunger in less positive ways.

Or we can keep making the troops do IBTS stands and scratch our heads wondering how underground fighting clubs manifest....




			
				ballz said:
			
		

> but people will eventually make it happen.



*By this part I was meaning that eventually training safety / CQC PAM is going to be forced to be updated through sheer grassroots pressure. Sadly, like the boot allowance, it may take 20 years.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Nov 2019)

One of the biggest problems with CQC courses, which might explain the oversight, is when these Royce Gracie Cobra Kai wannabe instructors run off the rail CQC courses and get off on students trying to murder each other. Everyone gets hurt and there's either investigations or, more likely, shit gets swept under the rug. Seen both.

Fight clubs aren't necessarily a bad thing. For the most part I think they're positive. The problem is when someone gets pressured to partake in them and it turns into a big joke that the unpopular guy is getting the shit knocked out of him instead of a skill and confidence building thing.

CQC et el is doomed to fail because brigade cares more about what % of the brigade is at 100% IBTS and everyone is GBA+ qualified even though many can't articulate what it actually means.


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Nov 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> One of the biggest problems with CQC courses, which might explain the oversight, is when these Royce Gracie Cobra Kai wannabe instructors run off the rail CQC courses and get off on students trying to murder each other. Everyone gets hurt and there's either investigations or, more likely, crap gets swept under the rug. Seen both.
> 
> Fight clubs aren't necessarily a bad thing. For the most part I think they're positive. The problem is when someone gets pressured to partake in them and it turns into a big joke that the unpopular guy is getting the crap knocked out of him instead of a skill and confidence building thing.
> 
> CQC et el is doomed to fail because brigade cares more about what % of the brigade is at 100% IBTS and everyone is GBA+ qualified even though many can't articulate what it actually means.



The main issue for Class A units is, of course, there is no time, given 30 man days per year if you're lucky, to do even the minimum acceptable amount of training for your trade and position, as well as for the new 'Mission Taskings'. And then just try and find enough properly qualified instructors to make it work...

Adding a formal boxing/ combatives component to the training schedule is likely a non-starter when we find it hard to even squeeze in the FORCE / BFT tests we have to complete annually. And it won't stop the bullying, as I mentioned earlier, either.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (1 Dec 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> After many years of being repressed for some reason (shitty leadership), martial arts is making a comeback in the CAF. Largely led by the growth of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in Canada, it's grown a lot and finally after many years of "why do I have to convince people this is a good idea" it's growing and being hoisted aboard.
> 
> As a result of being a bit emboldened by this, there's a movement afoot to get legit striking competitions started again. Sadly our current system of CQC and PSP sports is set up poorly for this but people will eventually make it happen.
> 
> ...



I'll be perfectly honest, I like fighting and I think it's good for soldiers to fight for fitness and aggression but also to train the mind, especially with grappling and striking as there is a certain science to it.  Being an effective grappler, particularly when setting up submissions and passes, requires you to chain attacks together much like chess, you can also use feints and plenty of deception to bait your opponent.

Striking adds more complexity and is even more useful than grappling in some ways because it is the quickest way to end any fist fight and is less "sporty" and more a reflection of what would happen for real, striking also adds another dimension to grappling, particularly clinch fighting.  One of my favorite ways to get a takedown is to use simple 1-2 combo punches to setup underhooks for an attempt at a sweep/throw or to get the opponent to lift their arms and worry about their head so I can go for a single or double leg takedown.  

I train BJJ but am less of a fan of grappling with the Gi than NoGi as you are never going to be fighting someone wearing a super tough Gi that doesn't rip or tear.  Many of the techniques some BJJ fighters use aren't very effective with someone punching you in the face, particularly BJJ practitioners who always pull guard and try and fight off their backs.

As for striking without targeting the head, complete waste of time to train that way for actual fighting.  It's not fighting at that point, it's simply a sport like Taekwondo which doesn't allow punches to the head (only kicks).  Taekwondo practitioners generally have some bad standup habits for actual fighting because many of them train with their hands down by their chests/stomach due to the rules of Modern Taekwondo heavily favouring point scoring as opposed to trying to KO/TKO your opponent.

The CAF should absolutely have boxing, kick boxing, wrestling and combatives as recognized sports.  

We have even had a former member of the CAF fight for the UFC Middleweight Championship.  He won't talk about his time in the CAF though or his service in Bosnia because the CAF wouldn't give him any time off to train so he was forced to release to fight in the UFC.  They will give time off for Officers to go running though :









			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> One of the biggest problems with CQC courses, which might explain the oversight, is when these Royce Gracie Cobra Kai wannabe instructors run off the rail CQC courses and get off on students trying to murder each other. Everyone gets hurt and there's either investigations or, more likely, crap gets swept under the rug. Seen both.
> 
> Fight clubs aren't necessarily a bad thing. For the most part I think they're positive. The problem is when someone gets pressured to partake in them and it turns into a big joke that the unpopular guy is getting the crap knocked out of him instead of a skill and confidence building thing.
> 
> CQC et el is doomed to fail because brigade cares more about what % of the brigade is at 100% IBTS and everyone is GBA+ qualified even though many can't articulate what it actually means.



CQCB & CQCI have to be two of the dumbest courses because the people who have the "quals" aren't actually qualified to teach anything.  

The idea that you can give a soldier a couple of months of training and call them an instructor is laughable. Especially in something as complicated as unarmed combat.

What the CAF should do is create a Martial Arts system like the Marines have with the only way to gain ranks being mat time and actually fighting.  



			
				daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> The main issue for Class A units is, of course, there is no time, given 30 man days per year if you're lucky, to do even the minimum acceptable amount of training for your trade and position, as well as for the new 'Mission Taskings'. And then just try and find enough properly qualified instructors to make it work...
> 
> Adding a formal boxing/ combatives component to the training schedule is likely a non-starter when we find it hard to even squeeze in the FORCE / BFT tests we have to complete annually. And it won't stop the bullying, as I mentioned earlier, either.



I agree that this wouldn't have stopped the bullying. This unfortunately seems to be a classic case of the Pack eating one of their own who couldn't keep up. How many courses or training have you done where you've seen this play out?  It's human nature to isolate the weak link and you see it in every organization, not just the CAF.  

As for Reservists training unarmed combat, if we had a belt system with legitimate gradings, this wouldn't be an issue.


----------



## ballz (1 Dec 2019)

I'd recommend a threat split on this, as I will happily discuss these issues for a long time.



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Striking adds more complexity and is even more useful than grappling in some ways because it is the quickest way to end any fist fight and is less "sporty" and *more a reflection of what would happen for real*



I doubt that to be honest, but these discussions we have are akin to the discussion that started the UFC. The debate was always "which martial art is the best," and so they created the UFC to find the answer. The truth is what they did was create an environment... and the martial art that worked best in that environment prevailed. And of course, the transcendence occurred / is occurring. People took parts from every martial art, created new techniques, etc. and what you have is a a product that is greater than the sum of its parts. The key here is, the environment determines what is effective.

So for example, Judo, which as you know is pure grappling and no striking, came from the environment the samurai fought in. They had helmets, armour, chainmail, etc. So punching wasn't very useful because you'd break your hands, kicking wasn't very useful because you were so top heavy you'd lose balance. The best way to win in that environment was to throw your opponent on his back, get on top and control him, long enough to take a knife out and stab him in a vulnerable area (which you could now do because you had control unlike when you were standing).

If you think about it, what I just described sounds a lot like how our soldiers and conventional enemies are dressed now..... so I tend to think punches and kicks between two soldiers fighting in full kit would be very ineffective. But it's all opinion, we need to create the environment and let competitors find out what works the best (and they will).



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> you are never going to be fighting someone wearing a super tough Gi that doesn't rip or tear.



I've never understood why people think this, as every fight I've seen people have clothes on. But particularly for the military, they will also have tac-vests, helmets, etc and the ability to establish the dominant grip gives you control of their upper body and likely determines who lands on top. Put a wrestler against a judoka _in full battle kit_ and I'm definitely putting my money on the judoka. But hey, it's all talk until we actually create the environment and try it.



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Many of the techniques some BJJ fighters use aren't very effective with someone punching you in the face, particularly BJJ practitioners who always pull guard and try and fight off their backs.



Again, environment dictates what works. The environment created by IBJJF rules doesn't punish you for pulling guard, and for some people it helps them. You likely wouldn't see any guard pulling in an environment that does not favour guard pulling. The CAF Combatives rules rewards your opponent 2 points for a takedown if you pull guard, and you really never see it because of the points and because our combatives culture frowns upon it (reinforced by the points).



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> As for striking without targeting the head, complete waste of time to train that way for actual fighting.



Agreed. Again, it's just training for an environment... and then we switch the environment to one where targeting the head is allowed and you're now hooped.



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The CAF should absolutely have boxing, kick boxing, judo, wrestling and combatives as recognized sports.



Technically under the CAF Sports Program, only boxing and kick boxing out of that list is not allowed. However, we don't have a culture that values it. We have a culture that values curling instead. Judo and wrestling are CISM sports and we actually have some really strong athletes in both in the CAF, but the CAF doesn't even participate in CISM Judo or Wrestling. Thanks to the grassroots movement and the hard work of some key individuals though, PSP across the country is 100% trying to support combatives. It's just difficult because it's not like PSP generally knows anything about it* so rolling it out is not straightforward.

*I'll add a shout-out here that Edmonton PSP actually has legit judoka, wrestlers, and BJJ players on their staff, but that's a lucky anomaly.



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> CQCB & CQCI have to be two of the dumbest courses because the people who have the "quals" aren't actually qualified to teach anything.
> 
> The idea that you can give a soldier a couple of months of training and call them an instructor is laughable. Especially in something as complicated as unarmed combat.



Agreed. That's the Canadian Army's box that it constrains itself to though, and it doesn't know how to think outside the box. We think we need to create our quals and run our own training, and we create a basic course and then an advanced course, and then you are an "expert." It's insane. The only reason it works for things like Recce and Snipers is because before you ever go on Advanced Recce, you've already gotten lots of experience. And even then we don't treated ARP grads like they've been ordained by God and make it so you're not allowed to practice an OP unless an ARP grad is supervising. The whole CQC/CQCI thing is poison in the well as far as I am concerned.

And CQC/CQCI combined is 25 training days, let's not exaggerate by saying "months"  



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> What the CAF should do is create a Martial Arts system like the Marines have with the only way to gain ranks being mat time and actually fighting.



If you look at the CQC program, we actually have created a martial arts system, hell it's even got ranks (basic and instructor... kinda like Judo belts started out when it was just white and black!). We've just done it very poorly. You don't just "invent" a martial art, martial arts develop organically by people who are thrust into an environment and must find the best way to win in that environment. What we need to do is create an environment that mimics unarmed combat, and allow the competitors to find the best way to win.


----------



## Singh47 (1 Dec 2019)

Should we have an un geared and geared martial art thing? Like fighting in ffo to get used to it. That would probably be forward thinking of most armies. Time is always a problem


----------



## ballz (1 Dec 2019)

Singh47 said:
			
		

> Should we have an un geared and geared martial art thing? Like fighting in ffo to get used to it. That would probably be forward thinking of most armies. Time is always a problem



I proposed providing training on base in judo, wrestling, muay  thai, boxing, and BJJ*.... and a few others... depending on what you had available. The challenge is most bases are not positioned next to a large city like Edmonton, where access to that kind of skillset is very easy, and so that's a big constraint.

And then, create our own environment (i.e. sport) to as closely mimic unarmed combat as possible. Those people training would find out which parts of the other martial arts are still useful and which parts aren't.

This has historical precedent, this is exactly how the Sambo was created. Primarily, one person trained in catch wrestling and the other trained in Judo, and so they taught wrestling and Judo to the soldiers, but the soliders trained in their kit. Eventually, people threw out some techniques and combined others, and the product was Sambo.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Dec 2019)

Singh47 said:
			
		

> Should we have an un geared and geared martial art thing? Like fighting in ffo to get used to it. That would probably be forward thinking of most armies. Time is always a problem



There's a long history of unarmed combat training in the military, usually centred on the use of various knives as a last resort. If I can mix metaphors, when the chips are down, six inches of cold steel can turn the tide quickly if used properly. It calls for the adoption of a system of training that is likely beyond our ability to sustain, mainly because I doubt the current 'sunny ways' regime would endorse anything like this:

https://hroarr.com/article/the-ka-bar-and-the-fairbairn-sykes-two-fighting-children-of-different-philosophies/

The other problem is, of course, when you train teenagers to 'gutter fight', they'll use it on each other. Don't ask me how I know


----------



## brihard (1 Dec 2019)

Another thought, something that comes out of the professional world I’ve found myself in- training for a fight, especially a ground fight, is a good way to build a survivor/victor’s mentality. Getting smoked on the mats and finding yourself surviving it is a good way to build an attitude of don’t give up, and survive at any cost.


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Dec 2019)

Combat effectiveness aside, martial arts and contact sports are an awesome way to build real team spirit and esprit du corps. One thing working with someone, but totally different when you know they'll drop the proverbial gloves and have your back. Played rugby before joining, and there were people that you didn't even like but would jump into it because they were on your side. In my personal experience, something like an extended work ups for a ship's company tends to develop kind of the same thing for when you're ashore, but those are complex, expensive exercises that cost millions.  Why not keep it simple with something like martial arts training, that only needs the pers and some knowledgeable instructor?

Similarly, with some a good coach that has a positive attitude, have seen the same thing develop very quickly in a boxing club. Punching stuff was good exercise and great for blowing off steam, but also in the right atmosphere, great for encouraging others and building up a lot of positive vibes while working hard. Discipline and trust are both key elements in safely training in contact, so seems like a natural fit for an organization that needs people to be fit and work together in teams.

I think sometimes we get so wrapped up as an organization in processes and SOPs that we lose sight of the fact that we ask people to spend a bunch of time working/living cheek to jowl doing unpleasant stuff. That's where time spent doing small stuff like section breakfasts or whatever pay off. Needing the CQC qual seems like needless CYA when there are martial arts places in pretty much every small town. Surely with the level of responsibility COs have, they can exercise a bit of oversight and set up some kind of 'unit PT' sessions doing boxing, kickboxing, whatever. Pretty sh*t simple to show people how to do some basic punches and kicks and run them through some drills hitting the pads, and you can do lots of stuff without anyone actually getting hit in the head.


----------



## Haggis (2 Dec 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Another thought, something that comes out of the professional world I’ve found myself in- training for a fight, especially a ground fight, is a good way to build a survivor/victor’s mentality.



But ground fighting is not "cool".  You never saw Bruce Lee, Chuck Norris or JVD in a ground fight on film.  In my organization we know and train that most fights are going to end up on the ground and that you may not always be on top.  So, IMO, it's good to see grappling growing strength in the CAF.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Dec 2019)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Combat effectiveness aside, martial arts and contact sports are an awesome way to build real team spirit and esprit du corps. One thing working with someone, but totally different when you know they'll drop the proverbial gloves and have your back. Played rugby before joining, and there were people that you didn't even like but would jump into it because they were on your side. In my personal experience, something like an extended work ups for a ship's company tends to develop kind of the same thing for when you're ashore, but those are complex, expensive exercises that cost millions.  Why not keep it simple with something like martial arts training, that only needs the pers and some knowledgeable instructor?
> 
> Similarly, with some a good coach that has a positive attitude, have seen the same thing develop very quickly in a boxing club. Punching stuff was good exercise and great for blowing off steam, but also in the right atmosphere, great for encouraging others and building up a lot of positive vibes while working hard. Discipline and trust are both key elements in safely training in contact, so seems like a natural fit for an organization that needs people to be fit and work together in teams.
> 
> I think sometimes we get so wrapped up as an organization in processes and SOPs that we lose sight of the fact that we ask people to spend a bunch of time working/living cheek to jowl doing unpleasant stuff. That's where time spent doing small stuff like section breakfasts or whatever pay off. Needing the CQC qual seems like needless CYA when there are martial arts places in pretty much every small town. Surely with the level of responsibility COs have, they can exercise a bit of oversight and set up some kind of 'unit PT' sessions doing boxing, kickboxing, whatever. Pretty **** simple to show people how to do some basic punches and kicks and run them through some drills hitting the pads, and you can do lots of stuff without anyone actually getting hit in the head.



Devil's advocate: But what about the concussions?

Happens alot with full contact sports (oh yes it does!), and the consequences aren't appealing, either physically, mentally or politically.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Dec 2019)

Sure, concussions happen, but you can do a lot of grappling, bag exercises etc without ever hitting anyone in the head. Plus we let folks play hockey and football, and easy enough to wreck knees or whatever doing non contact sports, so we already accept a certain level of risk for people participating in sports.

 Even outside the army troops doing CQC training though, think there are a lot of benefits to things like boxing clubs and other types of PT that involve hitting the bags, as there is a huge spectrum between basic boxing/kicking drills and hand to hand fighting that we could do, with a lot of benefits other than just knowing how to handle yourself in a scrap.

If things go terribly wrong and you do end up fighting for your life, probably a bad time to be the first time to be punched in the face though. My $0.02, but should be within a CO's wheelhouse to approve some kind of martial arts training session for the units without having someone with the official qual if it's not feasible to get it and there is interest. If there is a qual for conducting the training, assuming that has built in guidelines. Not really rocket science to apply those, and it probably is based on good MA training practices anyway. The MA schools don't make money if their students keep getting broken or discouraged, and a good one will focus on discipline, self control and respect for the other students. I'm sure there are cobra kais out there, but the few different boxing/kickboxing and TKD clubs I've been to over the years have been the exact opposite, and would have kicked you out for those kind of shenanigans.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (2 Dec 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Devil's advocate: But what about the concussions?
> 
> Happens alot with full contact sports (oh yes it does!), and the consequences aren't appealing, either physically, mentally or politically.



I wasn't able to find any CF specific studies of injury rates due to military combative sports/training and there were few such from the US military (which surprised me as I thought it would be fertile ground for study).

One report from the May 2014 Medical Surveilance Monthly Report (MSMR)
*Injuries associated with combat sports, active component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2010-2013*.


> Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC).
> 
> Abstract
> 
> The practice of combat sports creates a potential for training- and sports-related injuries among military members. During the 4-year surveillance period, there were 12,108 cases of injuries associated with combat sports among active component service members; the overall incidence rate was 21.0 per 10,000 person-years (p-yrs). The rates were higher among service members who were male, Hispanic, in the youngest age groups, in the Army, junior enlisted, and in combat-specific occupations. The rate among recruit/ trainees (779.4 per 10,000 p-yrs) was more than 165 times the rate among all other active component service members (non-recruits) (4.7 per 10,000 p-yrs). Sprains, strains, and contusions accounted for more than one-half of the primary (first-listed) diagnoses associated with combat sports cases. More serious conditions such as concussions/head injuries and skull/face fractures/intracranial injuries were reported among 3.9% and 2.1% of all cases and were more common among boxing-related cases. Hand/wrist fractures were also common among boxing cases. Wrestling had comparatively greater proportions of dislocations and open wounds. Although the combat sport training provides many physical and mental benefits to the individual, safety practices should be enforced to reduce the most frequent and serious injuries.


The full report can be searched for (May 2014 report) and found for PDF download at https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Combat-Support/Armed-Forces-Health-Surveillance-Branch/Reports-and-Publications/Medical-Surveillance-Monthly-Report

I could cherry pick and post snippets of data in hopes of a WTF/OMG reaction but there is nothing so damning (or congratulatory) that makes it worthwhile so I'll  use the report's "editorial comment".  The one thing about the report that disappointed me was no mention of lost time, hospitalization days or category changes resulting from such injuries. (As a former staff officer in the SurgGen branch that was always the bottom line when studying illness and injury trends)



> Editorial Comment
> 
> Service members are at risk for musculoskeletal injuries due to the physical nature of their training, occupations, and deployments.  Specific injuries associated with combat sports are discussed in this report.  This report likely underestimates the true number of injuries associated with combat sports and does not distinguish between injuries occurring during training, competition, or while on or off duty. The surveillance case definition relied on E-codes and STANAG codes. E-codes are supplementary codes that are not required and their use depends on the detail of notes taken by the clinician and their interpretation by the coder. STANAG codes are used exclusively by the military health system for hospitalizations; they are also not required. Therefore, many injuries that may have been the direct result of combat sports may not have been captured by this report.
> 
> ...



For those who look at the full MSMR, it may amuse you to see the above study followed by a chart titled "Surveillance Snapshot: Cauliflower Ear, Active Component, U.S. Armed Forces, 2004–2013".  You can extrapolate that the increase of incidence somewhat correlates to the introduction of military combative programmes. 


And in this study published in Military Medicine it is looked at from the perspectives of injuries that occurred during organized tournaments.

https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/183/9-10/e378/4840555


> Injuries Sustained During Modern Army Combatives Tournaments.
> 
> INTRODUCTION:
> 
> ...



The discussion in that study may be more interesting (well, maybe at least for those of us who sometimes geek out on that sort of thing), but one comment that particularly caught my attention was  "In the two MAC tournaments, 34.4% of competitors sustained injuries and 14.8% of competitors sustained injuries leading to occupational duty limitations.".


----------



## ballz (3 Dec 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Devil's advocate: But what about the concussions?
> 
> Happens alot with full contact sports (oh yes it does!), and the consequences aren't appealing, either physically, mentally or politically.



That argument goes out the window when you've got Taekowndo as a national CAF sport, including sending a team to CISM every year, when it's probably the highest rate of concussions among any sport out there (makes sense... kicks to the head are the most points and end up being the main goal of the each competitor). Let's be serious, nothing about our current set-up is out of any actual thought or competence...

I don't even know how there are people in the CAF against martial arts. If we're afraid to let soldiers do stuff that we let our 5 and 10 year old kids do, what fucking good are we?



			
				Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Sure, concussions happen, but you can do a lot of grappling, bag exercises etc without ever hitting anyone in the head.



We actually need to separate what is martial arts and what is just exercising. If you are hitting heavy bags / focus mitts / etc. but are not using "aliveness" (a principle of effective martial arts training), you are not training in martial arts.... you are just exercising.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Dec 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> That argument goes out the window when you've got Taekowndo as a national CAF sport



So that exposes a few dozen people a year to concussions. What happens when you integrate 'punching each other in the head' into a CAF wide training program, and then expose thousands of people to concussions every year as part of a training requirement?

In the Parachute Regiment we did 'milling'. Everyone had to pass it or they'd get binned from selection. The risk of concussions, broken noses, etc etc has been a well acknowledged risk of the selection process since WW2: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpAHByFgBG4

(As you can probably tell, I did it before we had to wear head gear  ).

In Canada, now, I'm pretty sure that any large scale martial arts training program would be shut down pretty fast once the injury claims started flowing in....


----------



## ballz (3 Dec 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> In the Parachute Regiment we did 'milling'. Everyone had to pass it or they'd get binned from selection. The risk of concussions, broken noses, etc etc has been a well acknowledged risk of the selection process since WW2:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpAHByFgBG4



That right there is exactly why we need proper martial arts. That isn't two people training to fight, that's pure idiocy. Much like our current CQC program.

I won't say where in public, but I recently watched a CQCB course, run by CQCIs.... you have the blind leading the blind, and zero institutional direction/oversight, which had manifested into what was really just hazing new guys that hadn't even reached OFP yet.  It had an insanely high rate of concussions and other injuries. We're okay with this... yet not actual martial arts, in which injury rates are on par with any other sport?

What you are depicting in that video is not indicative of what martial arts training is.



			
				daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> So that exposes a few dozen people a year to concussions. What happens when you integrate 'punching each other in the head' into a CAF wide training program, and then expose thousands of people to concussions every year as part of a training requirement?
> 
> In Canada, now, I'm pretty sure that any large scale martial arts training program would be shut down pretty fast once the injury claims started flowing in....



That assumes that martial arts training has a high rate of injury (albeit concussions or other)... which I'm not sure there is any good data to support. Taekwondo does (at least... during the actual competition), but I have never advocated for it. It's sport form has turned it into a very ineffective martial art.

The problem with trying to measure any of this is that, as alluded to above with MAC, the rates of injuries *might* be high in competition... but the nature of these activities is you compete a limited times a year. So for the MAC example, 14.8% of competitors had an injury that led to some kind of work limitation... which would have been all kinds of owies such as jammed fingers and toes, twisted ankle, etc.

What about the injury rate over the duration of a of five years, including training and competition? You obviously don't have a 14.8% injury rate every training session, or else you'd have nobody very quickly... I've been training for a long time, I rarely see an injury in practice, and serious martial artists are some of the healthiest people out there.



			
				daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> In Canada, now, I'm pretty sure that any large scale martial arts training program would be shut down pretty fast once the injury claims started flowing in....



They said that about combatives grappling and in 5-6 years there has been almost no injuries and now PSP is taking it up as a CAF sport.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Dec 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> That right there is exactly why we need proper martial arts. That isn't two people training to fight, that's pure idiocy.



I have to agree. This isn't martial arts training, it's weeding out people who can't take a few hits in the face and keep moving forward.

But any martial arts training can degenerate into 'milling', and worse, without the proper oversight. Given the difficulties we have staffing the FORCE tests with trained people right now.....


----------



## ballz (3 Dec 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> But any martial arts training can degenerate into 'milling', and worse, without the proper oversight. Given the difficulties we have staffing the FORCE tests with trained people right now.....



I agree, as noted in my story about the CQCB course... which was way worse than milling to be honest.

We need to change our approach, we can't be experts everything and we don't have to be shitty at everything. We waste human resources because we don't know how to manage resources (like money and time). For example, wasting human resources by running Basic First Aid, Basic Mountain Ops, Driver wheel, air brakes, etc.... all courses that we can pay a civilian expert to run for much less, as they have nothing about them that necessitates having them run by the CAF.

Which is why when I started a program on base, I didn't go running around looking for CQCIs who 1. might not have the expertise 2. might not have the time 3. might be posted out next month. I hired professionals to run it and it was dirt cheap and didn't eat up our leadership's constrained resource of time.


----------



## Singh47 (3 Dec 2019)

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/35/5/308

Not a lot of per 1000 hours stuff for martial arts.

Around 10 injuries per 1000 participants per year is around the average-ish for that muay thai study.

Essentially, if we're running hard we're probably more at risk of injury vs martial arts.

We need to stop viewing injuries as a freak occurrence and instead as a regular part of training.

The things the guys like to do: lift and fight are in fact, statistically, among the safest things they can be doing.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Dec 2019)

Singh47 said:
			
		

> https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/35/5/308
> 
> Not a lot of per 1000 hours stuff for martial arts.
> 
> ...



Not to start a 'my stats are better than your stats' thing, but this Kingston study has some alarming findings:

"The popularity of martial arts has flourished over the past fifteen years [2]. Consequently, the number of injuries attributed to martial arts has also escalated [3]. Sport injuries result from acute trauma or repetitive stress associated with participation in athletic activities and can range from acute trauma to long-term disabilities [4]. Injuries in martial arts are common [5], especially amongst young adults [6], and thus may pose a potential public health concern."

"The participation-based rates indicate that a substantial number of martial art participants require emergency room care due to injury."

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-10-795


----------



## marekbjj (3 Dec 2019)

In convincing me to submit my application to join the military, my sar tech friend that trains at the same brazilian jiujitsu gym I do, says to me "You get time off to do PT, I come at lunch and train. Come on man! Get paid to do jiujitsu" LOL.

Also as a side note I recall there being a grappling tournament for that was streamed on CAF facebook, was really cool.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (3 Dec 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> In the Parachute Regiment we did 'milling'. Everyone had to pass it or they'd get binned from selection. The risk of concussions, broken noses, etc etc has been a well acknowledged risk of the selection process since WW2:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpAHByFgBG4
> 
> (As you can probably tell, I did it before we had to wear head gear  ).



Seems that they have a slightly more heightened awareness these days.

https://www.britisharmyboxing.com/information/medical/


> THE MEDICAL MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE BOXING
> . . .
> 
> Milling
> ...


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Dec 2019)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Seems that they have a slightly more heightened awareness these days.
> 
> https://www.britisharmyboxing.com/information/medical/



They still do it ... and for a good reason. They don't tend to talk about the casualties though which, based on my experience, are at least about 1 in 5.

Army boxing is still a big deal in the UK, and involves a couple of hundred troops I would guess. I saw the results of that policy on our regimental boxers, most of whom looked continually shell shocked. Some were invalided out of the Army. I boxed myself a bit, for awhile, but quickly realized that military parachuting is much safer, so stuck with that  .

Requiring activities like this to be part of the regular training experience for thousands of troops would swamp the healthcare system, I'm guessing.


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Dec 2019)

ballz said:
			
		

> We actually need to separate what is martial arts and what is just exercising. If you are hitting heavy bags / focus mitts / etc. but are not using "aliveness" (a principle of effective martial arts training), you are not training in martial arts.... you are just exercising.



Sure, and it's great exercise. My point was, you build up to actual contact, and wait until you have enough control and accuracy to do safely spar. Some people might want to just stick to the exercise parts, but I think punching/dodging focus mitts, speed bag, and whatever is still better than doing no kind of fighting training. Learning how to throw a punch/kick accurately and properly is a lot more interesting then running on a treadmill or picking things up and putting them down.

Concussions are definitely a concern, but you can do all kinds of useful things without head shots, so that shouldn't be the big stop sign preventing us from doing something.


----------



## PuckChaser (3 Dec 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> In Canada, now, I'm pretty sure that any large scale martial arts training program would be shut down pretty fast once the injury claims started flowing in....


If injury rate was a concern, we would have replaced the CT1/2 parachute decades ago.


----------



## dapaterson (3 Dec 2019)

Years ago at CFSME in Chilliwack, our unarmed combat instructor seemed to take delight in demonstrating techniques on officer cadets.

He seemed much less interested in transferring knowledge than in transferring pain.


----------



## Singh47 (7 Dec 2019)

Give guys something to do or enjoy the retention problems is my only response to injuries (from marital arts etc).

:shrug:


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Dec 2019)

One thing I've always admired about the USMC is their commitment to the hand to hand stuff. They seem to have  a pretty slick Corps-Wide martial arts program ('One mind, any weapon') that might be worth looking at. At least it sounds like they've adapted the traditional martial arts to a suitable military purpose:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Corps_Martial_Arts_Program

If you read the books on which they based the series 'The Pacific', ('Helmet for my Pillow' and 'With the Old Breed') there are several accounts of fairly significant H2H stuff with the Japanese. I assume this is one of the historical reasons they maintain the capability.


----------



## Haligonian (7 Dec 2019)

Ballz has the relevant points all wrapped up.  I will only add that after a few months of cajoling we've managed to get PSP to buy mats for CFC, so we will have a grappling program running here after Christmas with a BJJ black belt instructing and me supporting. We're moving in the right direction.


----------



## Singh47 (8 Dec 2019)

First, let’s update the bayonet. We continue to issue every soldier a bayonet that does not justify its own weight. Replace it with a sturdy, well-honed utility knife with a high-quality steel blade. Leave the bayonet mounting hardware on the hilt for the rare cases in which it becomes necessary. Teach the soldier how to handle a rifle and bayonet, but let’s bring in a professional in improvised fighting techniques to help develop a useful combat system for it. Parade square parries and thrusts are only appropriate if the enemy has had similar instruction and is willing to fight by mutually understood rules. The Military Manual of Self-Defence (55) offers a series of aggressive alternatives to traditional bayonet fighting movements, its focus more on disabling the opponent than parrying until a clean point can be made. While not necessarily offering a full replacement to classic bayonet training, it does show that more options exist.

On possible approach is to incorporate in Army physical fitness training a structured martial arts program. A discipline can be selected to develop confidence, balance, reflexes, and close combat tactics. This program could include combat techniques; both unarmed and with a variety of weapons, including the bayonet, within a progressive format. This program could lead to every field soldier having recognized skill levels in a close quarter combat system that supports rather than confines reflexive responses in hand-to-hand combat. It should also provide advanced training and continuous skill maintenance throughout a soldier’s career.

We must continue to train our soldier in close quarter combat techniques, but it should be based on a rational analysis of the purpose and components of that training untainted by the romanticism of tradition.

http://regimentalrogue.com/papers/bayonet6.htm


----------

