Recently while surfing the net for Jiu-Jitsu news I came across an article on a website called The-CAPSprogram.com. The title of the article was “Ground Fighting for Law Enforcement Personnel. Our Dangerous Trend Toward Hitting the Deck” By Arnie Lipson. Lipson is a Law Enforcement trainer, with an expertise in Tae Kwon Do and Karate (Black Belts in both). He also states that he is ranked in “Judo and Jiu-Jitsu”.
The article is definitely anti-ground fighter and pro striker. I have taken out excerpts from his article so I can provide my counter opinion to his. If you want to read the entire article, it can be found at http://www.the-capsprogram.com/caps_articles_ground.htm
“Ever since the Gracie family started to dominate the “cage match” scene, I have noticed that many defensive tactics instructors in law enforcement have stated that “all street fights will end up on the ground.” I would have to disagree, unless of course one trains to go to the ground deliberately. This seems to be the case in some law enforcement circles lately. Some officers have resigned themselves to the fact that if they get into a physical confrontation; they will end up on the ground. “
Well, I disagree with the above statements. Not all fights go to the ground, just 95% of them. A police officer cannot resign themselves to anything. They have to prepare themselves for everything.
“As a result, they decide to train themselves to grab and hit the deck, instead of strike and stay on their feet. Ground fighting is very effective for those who practice it all the time and become experts. Yet even then, most are not performing the same techniques in the same way while dressed in full law enforcement garb. “
Well, I only partially disagree with this. First, you don’t have to train “all the time and become an expert”. The brilliance of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is that the basic techniques are simple and very effective. No matter what force option you may use in law enforcement the more you train in the technique the more effective it will be. This includes your gun, baton, punching, kicking, or grappling. If you trained only once to fire your handgun and never trained with it again, when you needed it you probably would not be able to hit the target. Grappling (Jiu-Jitsu) is no different. If a cop took a 40 hour grappling course and never trained again, he probably would not be able to remember the technique. The part I do agree with is that when a policeman trains Jiu-Jitsu he does need to train with his gun belt on. Not at first, when you understand the technique then you throw in the gun belt. The gun belt will make a difference. Some BJJ techniques are not compatible for use with a gun belt on.
Here are the “safety issues” that Lipson has identified concerning L.E. Jiu-Jitsu.
TRAIN THE WAY YOU FIGHT, AND FIGHT THE WAY YOU TRAIN
“Just as we do in our combatives classes, we dress in training as we will dress on the street. It is unrealistic for an officer to train in “pajamas” if he isn’t working in them. The hip and shoulder throws, as well as purposely locking oneself to an attacker on the ground is unrealistic when a gun belt and equipment are worn. All these techniques offer deliberate and easy access to an officer’s weapons.”
Of course you should always train the way you fight. As I said before you have to train with the gun belt on. If guys aren’t doing it they should. But, I can tell you that even striking training most of the time is not done wearing the full “Sam Brown” gun belt. But, you should!
No matter what defensive tactic you may employ, weapon access and retention should be the first thing you consider. Grappling is no different. If you are doing a technique that provides easy access to your gun, Don’t do it! Of course if you’re standing with a big guy and he knocks you out, I guess then he would have easy access to your gun.
THE PROBLEM OF MULTIPLE ATTACKERS
“If there are multiple assailants involved during a confrontation, it does not make sense for an officer to go to the ground to apprehend his subject. Reality is an officer grappling with his assailant, as the other assailants put the boot to the officer’s head, stomp his legs and body, or assault him with a weapon. Most likely his own.”
What does work against multiple attackers? The only for sure thing is running away. If you learn how to grapple it can help you avoid being taken down and having the boots put to you. Honestly, nothing works against multiple attackers. So, I would focus on something that will work on one attacker. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu!
LOSS OF MOBILITY
“We have less mobility to employ our weapons and unarmed skills, and we give up an easier escape should the arrest go bad. If an officer is tied up on the ground fending off one or more attackers, it is harder for him to employ power development techniques when he strikes”.
Well, this is kind of the whole point of grappling. Its to have your attacker lose mobility. The fact is if you fighting a guy on the ground or standing up, the arrest has gone bad.
POSSIBLE UNINTENTIONAL PERSONAL INJURY
“It is bad enough sustaining an injury by falling, or getting knocked to the ground. By grabbing an assailant and deliberately going to the ground with him, the officer puts himself at unnecessary risk for injuries caused by hitting the ground with not only his own body weight, but that of his attacker as well.”
All personal injuries are unintentional. If you are training to slam an attackers body weight down on top of you, you’re doing something wrong. If you are training to slam your body weight down on top of your attacker, you’re doing something right. Keep it up.
DIFFICULT TO DISENTANGLE
“When an officer grapples with an assailant on the ground, he ties up his limbs trying either to wrap the attacker up to gain control, to gain a position of advantage, or to prevent himself from being put in a position of disadvantage. All of this hinders his ability to defend against other possible attackers or escape if necessary. Furthermore, depending on the officer’s physical condition, he may not be able to continue fighting for his weapons and his life while on his back.”
Lipson doesn’t seem to understand what Jiu-Jitsu for Law Enforcement is really about. No one should be training to just stay underneath an attacker. Cops have to learn sweeps for the purpose of getting into a superior position and for escape. And if they simply just can’t get out from under the bad guy, you need to know that you can still finish a fight from the bottom.
NO CLEAN FINISH
“Even if the officer succeeds in besting his attacker on the ground, he needs to untangle himself, maintain his advantage, and secure his assailant all at the same time. Whereas a good clean striking technique which succeeds in stopping the assailant, keeps the officer in a position of advantage while he secures the arrest.”
Lipson makes this more complicated than it is. He makes it sound as if you need the Jaws-of-Life to disentangle from your opponent. His point is that if you simply knock your opponent out it will be SO easy to hook him up. If it was just that easy, everybody would be Chuck Liddell.
SIZE AND WEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL
“Being 5' 5" tall and weighing 145 pounds, I can truly relate to this one. This would also apply to female officers as well. It doesn’t make sense for an officer to risk his or her safety by tangling on the ground with an assailant who is heavier, larger, or stronger. “
So, it makes sense to him that a smaller person should stand and trade punches with a larger person. I think one thing that the early UFCs proved were that a smaller person could defeat a larger opponent with Jiu-Jitsu. Even though Royce Gracie is a BJJ master, the techniques he employed in those early fights were fundamental techniques of Jiu-Jitsu. No flying arm-bars.
Here’s his summary:
“In summary, ground fighting is generally a dangerous game to play for a fully uniformed officer of average training. I believe that a 40-hour course with little to no follow-up training will teach an officer just enough to get hurt in a confrontation. As a veteran officer of almost 14 years, I believe staying on your feet makes you harder to beat. If you do get knocked to the ground, employ the same fighting principles on the deck that you employ on your feet. Your goal, however, is not to tangle on the asphalt, and pin your assailant. Your goal is to cause as much pain as you possibly can in the shortest amount of time, so that you can get to your feet, and get to your weapons.“
It’s crazy to think you can employ the same fighting principles on the ground as you do on your feet. It’s just not the same. Arnie Lipson is obviously biased against Jiu-Jitsu. One thing MMA has shown us, usually the most well rounded fighter is the victor.
Jiu-Jitsu works, I don’t think anyone can deny that. Although there are still doubters in the world, usually from the world of traditional martial arts , like Arnie Lipson. But, he's in the business of selling his product to law enforcement and I bet his system is based on striking.
The article is definitely anti-ground fighter and pro striker. I have taken out excerpts from his article so I can provide my counter opinion to his. If you want to read the entire article, it can be found at http://www.the-capsprogram.com/caps_articles_ground.htm
“Ever since the Gracie family started to dominate the “cage match” scene, I have noticed that many defensive tactics instructors in law enforcement have stated that “all street fights will end up on the ground.” I would have to disagree, unless of course one trains to go to the ground deliberately. This seems to be the case in some law enforcement circles lately. Some officers have resigned themselves to the fact that if they get into a physical confrontation; they will end up on the ground. “
Well, I disagree with the above statements. Not all fights go to the ground, just 95% of them. A police officer cannot resign themselves to anything. They have to prepare themselves for everything.
“As a result, they decide to train themselves to grab and hit the deck, instead of strike and stay on their feet. Ground fighting is very effective for those who practice it all the time and become experts. Yet even then, most are not performing the same techniques in the same way while dressed in full law enforcement garb. “
Well, I only partially disagree with this. First, you don’t have to train “all the time and become an expert”. The brilliance of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is that the basic techniques are simple and very effective. No matter what force option you may use in law enforcement the more you train in the technique the more effective it will be. This includes your gun, baton, punching, kicking, or grappling. If you trained only once to fire your handgun and never trained with it again, when you needed it you probably would not be able to hit the target. Grappling (Jiu-Jitsu) is no different. If a cop took a 40 hour grappling course and never trained again, he probably would not be able to remember the technique. The part I do agree with is that when a policeman trains Jiu-Jitsu he does need to train with his gun belt on. Not at first, when you understand the technique then you throw in the gun belt. The gun belt will make a difference. Some BJJ techniques are not compatible for use with a gun belt on.
Here are the “safety issues” that Lipson has identified concerning L.E. Jiu-Jitsu.
TRAIN THE WAY YOU FIGHT, AND FIGHT THE WAY YOU TRAIN
“Just as we do in our combatives classes, we dress in training as we will dress on the street. It is unrealistic for an officer to train in “pajamas” if he isn’t working in them. The hip and shoulder throws, as well as purposely locking oneself to an attacker on the ground is unrealistic when a gun belt and equipment are worn. All these techniques offer deliberate and easy access to an officer’s weapons.”
Of course you should always train the way you fight. As I said before you have to train with the gun belt on. If guys aren’t doing it they should. But, I can tell you that even striking training most of the time is not done wearing the full “Sam Brown” gun belt. But, you should!
No matter what defensive tactic you may employ, weapon access and retention should be the first thing you consider. Grappling is no different. If you are doing a technique that provides easy access to your gun, Don’t do it! Of course if you’re standing with a big guy and he knocks you out, I guess then he would have easy access to your gun.
THE PROBLEM OF MULTIPLE ATTACKERS
“If there are multiple assailants involved during a confrontation, it does not make sense for an officer to go to the ground to apprehend his subject. Reality is an officer grappling with his assailant, as the other assailants put the boot to the officer’s head, stomp his legs and body, or assault him with a weapon. Most likely his own.”
What does work against multiple attackers? The only for sure thing is running away. If you learn how to grapple it can help you avoid being taken down and having the boots put to you. Honestly, nothing works against multiple attackers. So, I would focus on something that will work on one attacker. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu!
LOSS OF MOBILITY
“We have less mobility to employ our weapons and unarmed skills, and we give up an easier escape should the arrest go bad. If an officer is tied up on the ground fending off one or more attackers, it is harder for him to employ power development techniques when he strikes”.
Well, this is kind of the whole point of grappling. Its to have your attacker lose mobility. The fact is if you fighting a guy on the ground or standing up, the arrest has gone bad.
POSSIBLE UNINTENTIONAL PERSONAL INJURY
“It is bad enough sustaining an injury by falling, or getting knocked to the ground. By grabbing an assailant and deliberately going to the ground with him, the officer puts himself at unnecessary risk for injuries caused by hitting the ground with not only his own body weight, but that of his attacker as well.”
All personal injuries are unintentional. If you are training to slam an attackers body weight down on top of you, you’re doing something wrong. If you are training to slam your body weight down on top of your attacker, you’re doing something right. Keep it up.
DIFFICULT TO DISENTANGLE
“When an officer grapples with an assailant on the ground, he ties up his limbs trying either to wrap the attacker up to gain control, to gain a position of advantage, or to prevent himself from being put in a position of disadvantage. All of this hinders his ability to defend against other possible attackers or escape if necessary. Furthermore, depending on the officer’s physical condition, he may not be able to continue fighting for his weapons and his life while on his back.”
Lipson doesn’t seem to understand what Jiu-Jitsu for Law Enforcement is really about. No one should be training to just stay underneath an attacker. Cops have to learn sweeps for the purpose of getting into a superior position and for escape. And if they simply just can’t get out from under the bad guy, you need to know that you can still finish a fight from the bottom.
NO CLEAN FINISH
“Even if the officer succeeds in besting his attacker on the ground, he needs to untangle himself, maintain his advantage, and secure his assailant all at the same time. Whereas a good clean striking technique which succeeds in stopping the assailant, keeps the officer in a position of advantage while he secures the arrest.”
Lipson makes this more complicated than it is. He makes it sound as if you need the Jaws-of-Life to disentangle from your opponent. His point is that if you simply knock your opponent out it will be SO easy to hook him up. If it was just that easy, everybody would be Chuck Liddell.
SIZE AND WEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL
“Being 5' 5" tall and weighing 145 pounds, I can truly relate to this one. This would also apply to female officers as well. It doesn’t make sense for an officer to risk his or her safety by tangling on the ground with an assailant who is heavier, larger, or stronger. “
So, it makes sense to him that a smaller person should stand and trade punches with a larger person. I think one thing that the early UFCs proved were that a smaller person could defeat a larger opponent with Jiu-Jitsu. Even though Royce Gracie is a BJJ master, the techniques he employed in those early fights were fundamental techniques of Jiu-Jitsu. No flying arm-bars.
Here’s his summary:
“In summary, ground fighting is generally a dangerous game to play for a fully uniformed officer of average training. I believe that a 40-hour course with little to no follow-up training will teach an officer just enough to get hurt in a confrontation. As a veteran officer of almost 14 years, I believe staying on your feet makes you harder to beat. If you do get knocked to the ground, employ the same fighting principles on the deck that you employ on your feet. Your goal, however, is not to tangle on the asphalt, and pin your assailant. Your goal is to cause as much pain as you possibly can in the shortest amount of time, so that you can get to your feet, and get to your weapons.“
It’s crazy to think you can employ the same fighting principles on the ground as you do on your feet. It’s just not the same. Arnie Lipson is obviously biased against Jiu-Jitsu. One thing MMA has shown us, usually the most well rounded fighter is the victor.
Jiu-Jitsu works, I don’t think anyone can deny that. Although there are still doubters in the world, usually from the world of traditional martial arts , like Arnie Lipson. But, he's in the business of selling his product to law enforcement and I bet his system is based on striking.
1 comments:
My name is Arnie Lipson. I am writing in response to the blogger from LTCC. In reference to my article "Groundfighting for Law Enforcement on April 10, 2008 I think the LTCC blogger is exactly correct. This article was written in response to a specific class under a specific circumstance. The class was being taught to a group of guys who had not worked out in years, and had no formal martial arts training. After speaking with some of the guys during breaks, it was evident that they had no intention of doing anything with the material at the end of the 40 hours. What these guys needed was a few simple techniques that would help them out of a few of the most common street attacks on the ground. Something basic. The stuff that they were getting was advanced, and way too complicated with too many moving parts to be practical for this group. They also mentioned nothing in the class about striking. When I said that they need to fight on the ground the same way as standing, I meant that elbows, hammerfists and other strikes should be incorporated on the ground, just as MMA fighters do today. I train regularly with BJJ guys today, and I am not at all anti-grappling. I trained in judo for 3 years, and jiu-jitsu for 4. My business, CAPS Program LLC, incorporates groundfighting for the street as a regular part of the curriculum. If you view the video on the bottom of the homepage of my website, www.the-capsprogram.com, you'll see a little of it. I would also like to add that the article is 5 or 6 years old, and some of my opinions have changed due to more training with different guys and more experience. Dave Young's "Ground Defense Systems" is a fine example of groundfighting for L.E. I'm glad that the article was referenced though, as it brought out some good discussion so that we can all learn and grow. Good luck to in all you do Lake Tahoe Combat Club. I wish you guys all the best.
Sincerely,
Arnie Lipson
CAPS Program LLC
Post a Comment