View Single Post
Old 06-04-2008, 10:38 PM   #47
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: Akuzawa Sensei Seminar in the DC Area/Aunkai

Mike wrote:

Quote:
I have never heard of "side mount" being a great consideration on the battlefield; I *have* heard of a quick and immediate finish due to massive power being a positive factor.
Yes, I think this is a good example of our different perspectives. Your paradigm filters out side control as a factor in combat. it is infact a factor...not necessarily a desirable one, but a factor.

In CQB you run into side control.

There is a hierarchy in fighting. To soldiers it is a common sense one. If you have a gun and range you shoot it, why would you consider empty hand if you hand a rifle? Seems logical I know.

You use the most lethal and effective means you have at your disposal. Again, hierachy.

In a CQB environment, there are scenarios in which you lose your weapon and are off balanced taken down and are in a bad position on the ground.

We can break those positions down into several generic ones. Rear mount, Mount, Side control, and Guard. (listed in order of hierachy of "least favorable to favorable),

So it is important to know how to maintain integrity and improve your position. Inject weapons and things get even more interesting.

Anyway, it is a factor and one you must train.

In a perfect world the good guys use their guick and effective means to incapacitate, but in reality it is not always that easy.

So, in this area, to dismiss side control as a martial consideration is of a limited paradigm on your part.

Again, though, the difference as you and I come at a common ground from two different paradigms or strategies for implementation.

I don't think that either position is wrong, we have different focuses.

  Reply With Quote