Best trained in Hand-to-Hand combat...

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 23 2003 @ 03:37 PM
link   
If its anybody I would say morhei usehiba? sorry i don't know how to spell his name.




posted on Nov, 23 2003 @ 08:10 PM
link   
For hand to hand, I'd probably say ROK/Spetznaz/SAS (UK or NZSAS)
With blades, - gurkhas are tough little buggers. Don't know if the filipinos have any SF's, but I've seen some of their weapons training in martial arts - damn effective!
just my $0.02

Or, as was said earlier - the gracies - train all the sf's in gracie jiu jitsu and no-one can be beaten without a gun



posted on Nov, 23 2003 @ 08:46 PM
link   
i always thought that the chinese were experts in hand to hand combat



posted on Nov, 23 2003 @ 08:48 PM
link   
"chinese" is to much of a generalization



posted on Nov, 23 2003 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by manoverboard
i always thought that the chinese were experts in hand to hand combat


are you talking about the armed forces here?



posted on Nov, 23 2003 @ 09:20 PM
link   
all chinese military are trained by the shaolin monks. so therefore i say the chinese



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by funlovincriminal
For hand to hand, I'd probably say ROK/Spetznaz/SAS (UK or NZSAS)


I agree that SAS and Spetsnaz are one of the or the best in hand-to-hand combat.



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Didn't Bruce Lee admit that a decent boxer and wrestler could beat most black belts?



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Theres a major flaw to alot of fighting methods. Alot (but not all of them) focus on traditional standing fights, but anyone whos been through the real deal will probably agree that it may start on your feet, but you quickly end up rolling against a wall or on the floor. As for all this knife fighting BS, its just that...BS. There are no secrets to it, you WILL get cut, no matter how good you have been trained or THINK you are. For an on-topic vote, I have to agree with the previous statements about the Russian special forces, as they seem to have a very rigorous PT regimen, and very strict training methods. Bottom line is that alot of armed forces dont spend much time on hand to hand because general infantry wont ever need it. I would think any CT group like Seal Team Six or GSG9 would probably have a very basic system focused around single quick hits to disorientate and stun someone long enough to either kill them or tap and stash them to stand trial at a later date.



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by alternateheaven
Theres a major flaw to alot of fighting methods. Alot (but not all of them) focus on traditional standing fights, but anyone whos been through the real deal will probably agree that it may start on your feet, but you quickly end up rolling against a wall or on the floor. As for all this knife fighting BS, its just that...BS. There are no secrets to it, you WILL get cut, no matter how good you have been trained or THINK you are. For an on-topic vote, I have to agree with the previous statements about the Russian special forces, as they seem to have a very rigorous PT regimen, and very strict training methods. Bottom line is that alot of armed forces dont spend much time on hand to hand because general infantry wont ever need it. I would think any CT group like Seal Team Six or GSG9 would probably have a very basic system focused around single quick hits to disorientate and stun someone long enough to either kill them or tap and stash them to stand trial at a later date.



Very well said alternateheaven.

I think most of the SFs dont waste alot of time on hand to hand.

Also the Spetsnaz training makes them very bruitle.

It is bruitality you need in fighting.

If you ever saw how they beat the living # out of the Spetsnaz to make them brutile.

After being beaten so brutily the Spetsnaz hate all people on earth and when they do their job they have no remorse for any people.

And thats what you need to have a effecint SF.



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Didn't Bruce Lee admit that a decent boxer and wrestler could beat most black belts?


That is very much true, no matter if it was said or not. It is still proven fact. After combining expert stand up fighting with ground techniques, a fighter becomes well rounded. Only after haveing the chance to learn through experience, of knowing first hand what works or not will a fighter become great.

It isn't a matter of who is better, or what form/art/style/tradition/school/dojo is the best. It all comes down to the moment and the timeing of therein.

I have seen a dungeon or lair trained Ninja Master lose to a street fighter, and personally seen a self taught martial artistist defeat a Bushido assistant with one perfectectly practiced kata.

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one.
Those who want to know what is better, try proven and tried, it's what works.

[Edited on 24-11-2003 by ADVISOR]



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR

Originally posted by THENEO
Didn't Bruce Lee admit that a decent boxer and wrestler could beat most black belts?


That is very much true, no matter if it was said or not. It is still proven fact. After combining expert stand up fighting with ground techniques, a fighter becomes well rounded. Only after haveing the chance to learn through experience, of knowing first hand what works or not will a fighter become great.

It isn't a matter of who is better, or what form/art/style/tradition/school/dojo is the best. It all comes down to the moment and the timeing of therein.

I have seen a dungeon or lair trained Ninja Master lose to a street fighter, and personally seen a self taught martial artistist defeat a Bushido assistant with one perfectectly practiced kata.

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one.
Those who want to know what is better, try proven and tried, it's what works.

[Edited on 24-11-2003 by ADVISOR]


That is why I like ultimate fighting championship. There are so many different techniques and it is interesting to see what is most effective. UFC shows that things like Tae Kwon Do are useless against another trained fighter. In the early stages there were some black belts in karate and other traditional stand up martial arts and they got their asses handed to them. They couldn't do anything once on the ground. The best fighters now are the ones who can punch and strike and can fight effectively on the ground.

I think it is unlikely that majority of GI's would ever get into a hand-to-hand situation, so they are not trained that well.

I could see special ops soldiers and police officers needing to be more skilled at hand to hand than the normal GI.



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 03:34 AM
link   
...yup...thats true. Having worked as door security in previous years, and kinda not been a stranger to the odd 'tussle' on the streets...training is all good, its great...but it can be matched with determination, with aggression, with ability to adapt rather than stay focussed on set styles, set forms.

I've seen a number of well-trained Martial Artists of high ranking get their azzes handed to them by someone who is just a very experienced street-brawler...done it myself on occasion. A Martial Art ranking sometimes means jack when it comes down to just brutal raw smash and crash, rip and tear type entanglements...


Personally I'd say the SAS...



posted on Nov, 24 2003 @ 10:03 PM
link   
The SAS are probably one of the top Special Forces teams as well as Hand to Hand combatants. We are talking about a Group that was trained to go in with little more than a knife and steal their enemies weapons.



posted on Nov, 26 2003 @ 07:31 PM
link   
In the world of martial arts it's rarely ever the art it's the ability of the practitioner and how much they get to use it.

With that said HTH combat isn't very practical for many modern militaries. Most are trained in the rudiments, but more training is put into weapons. The general mission is to kill not to disable or maim. HTH combat is potentially lethal, but not practical on the greater scheme of things for an Army.

One would have to look at the military forces that have the potential of NON-LETHAL missions that interact with people for the true martial artists. Because the israelis do so many more"snatch and grabs" of individuals I would say they are exceedingly practiced in this field, and are the default best at HTH combat.The Brits SAS are also highly trained as are certain Seal teams, Deltas, Force Recon Marines etc.

Just remember, you don't get good without practice and practical application.

hrxll



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by bourbon
all chinese military are trained by the shaolin monks. so therefore i say the chinese


Thats funny the chinese are only up to 1.000.000 soldiers then the monks are very busy, no time for prayer



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 04:18 PM
link   
Does the Brazilian military get any training in Brazilian Jujitsu Gracie style? If so I would say they are the best.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 05:05 PM
link   
My vote goes to the IDF. They've taken great pains to synthesize a number of styles and theories into one workable set of moves. The IDF definitely has the finest gun disarm I've seen, for what it's worth, the move is simple, reliable, and almost impossible to counter. I'ev heard good things about the North Korean methods, but I've yet to face one of those guys, so I couldn't say for sure.


The Russians may have more intense training regimens, I don't know for sure, but one thing I've found to be true regarding martial arts is this: simplicity is divine.

That's the reason I appreciate Aikido so much, it's a very refined distillation. Various styles of Kung-Fu look very impressive to the uneducated observer, but they're usually highly impractical for a number of reasons.

I actually like the Marine stance, for whatever reason, it's interesting, but I wouldn't use it myself. I was schooled in fencing from a young age, and so it's that stance that feels most comfortable for me, I slip into it naturally, and I find it offers excellent mobility. Still, the particulars are relatively unimportant, as other posts have said, the most important attributes are agility, durability, and intelligence, and of course nothing beats experience.

Ferocity is fine and all, but it won't win fights against seasoned opponents. Don't place too much stock in brutality alone, because it can't hold a candle to poise and mental/physical discipline.

Then again, sometimes all it takes is a good knuckle punch to the inner thigh.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
My vote goes to the IDF. They've taken great pains to synthesize a number of styles and theories into one workable set of moves. The IDF definitely has the finest gun disarm I've seen, for what it's worth, the move is simple, reliable, and almost impossible to counter. I'ev heard good things about the North Korean methods, but I've yet to face one of those guys, so I couldn't say for sure.



2 questions


1) is the IDF gun disarm move you speak of the one where you pretend to surrender, begin to put your arms up, but about 3/4 of the way up you grab the gun and push it over your head?? Do you have any pics, video or even drawings of the move you are refering to??

2) Who have you heard good things about the N Korean methods from?? I hope it wasnt the N Koreans themselves. Kim is the best golfer in the world considering he got 11 hole in 1's in 1 game of golf


[edit on 4-8-2005 by warpboost]



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 06:38 PM
link   
warpboost
That's the one, yeah. I used to have several videos of it on my old PC, but I'm on a borrowed computer, and don't have access to any of my files, unfortunately.

Gun disarms are actually fairly easy, but you have to make the decision to attempt a disarm quickly, preferably in the split second when your opponent is still bringing the business end of the firearm to bear on you. Distance also limits engagement, you would have to be insane, or very fast, to attempt a disarm on an opponent more than a few steps away.

Of course, sometimes it's in your best interest to play it cool. I made a decision in Chicago once that cost me forty bucks, and saved me a lot of pain. A guy pulled a little automatic on me as I was filling up my car at the gas station. He was about three feet away by the time I saw the gun, so, close enough to attempt something, but he had the thing right against his hip, and he was half turned away from me, and he had a partner about three yards behind me (didn't know if he was similarly armed) so I made a judgement call. I figured he would probably get a shot off, or his buddy would, and I would probably take it in the stomach, and I was fairly sure I could finish him, and probably his partner too, but I really had no interest in getting shot, so I gave up my wallet.

I still wonder to this day if I could have schooled them and taken the sweet little automatic as a trophy, but you know what? Better safe than sorry. I'd rather lose forty dollars to a crackhead than get killed by one, I'd never live it down in the spirit realm.


Of course, every situation is different, which is why thinking is so important. You have to analyze the situation to figure out the right course of action. It's when people stop thinking that they get hurt in fights, generally.

As far as the NK techniques, there was a video of their training methods floating around the net for a while, it made its way briefly onto ATS I think. It could be all hype, trying to intimidate their enemy. Like I said, I don't know for sure.

Edit: I can, however, vouch for the usefullness of the IDF gun disarm. It does work in real life situations.

[edit on 4-8-2005 by WyrdeOne]






top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join