Page 1 - Page 2

As demonstrated in the movements in patterns, karate and Taekwondo were developed as brutal martial arts. There are few controlling techniques, some throws, and virtually no pins. The techniques use kicks, punches, gouges, pokes, crushes, etc. that were designed to end a fight quickly and efficiently. When a fight went to the ground, the strategy was to kick and punch until you could get back to your feet.

Until recently, no modern military fighting system is based upon ground fighting. Captain Fairbairn, who developed a system of unarmed combat that was used by the Shanghai Municipal Police, British Commandos, U.S. Marines, British Special Operations, and American OSS during World War II, wrote in his 1942 combat manual "Get Tough!" that, "You will have noted that no holds or locks on the ground are demonstrated. The reason for this is: THIS IS WAR." No soldier wants to go to the ground where rocks, mines, or bobby traps may be present. Visibility range is limited and one is helpless against another attacker.

Beginning in 1995, the U.S. Army began a revision of its combatives (hand-to-hand) training program. The program begins with the basics of Brazilian Jujitsu ground fighting and progresses into the throws and takedowns of Judo and Wrestling and the strikes of boxing and muay thai. All this training is combined with marksmanship and contact weapons training from Kali and the western martial arts into yet another integrated system of close quarters combat. I have not seen the entire training course, but from what photographs that are available on the Internet, the program seems to stress ground fighting. For details on the new combatives program see the U. S. Army field manual at  http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-25-150/. See the following link for other links to U.S. Army Combatives articles: http://www.moderncombatives.org/pages/5/index.htm.

I find it difficult to believe that ground fighting would be effective method of combat for a U.S. Army soldier, wearing full-combat equipment, who is attacked by an Iraqi insurgent who is wearing practically nothing. Due to the combat equipment, the soldier's movements are very limited, especially while on the ground. When in a combat situation, who would want to be on the ground fighting one attacker while other enemy are all around. If taken to the ground, a soldier needs know how to fight from the ground, but a soldier would rarely choose to go to the ground.

As in other types of military training, soldiers train for a short time in combatives and then rarely train in it again. When ground fighting is stressed during training, especially during the beginning stages, a soldier in a hand-to-hand combat situation would tend to revert to the techniques that were first taught, and stressed the most, during training. If these techniques were ground fighting, then, during an individual attack in a combat situation, the soldier is most likely to go to the ground. I for one would not want my fellow soldiers on the ground grappling with the enemy during an attack. In combat, the goal is not to kill one enemy to protect yourself, but to kill as many of the enemy as possible before you are killed.

Remember, a good grappler knows how to grapple, a great fighter knows when to grapple. Grapple when you have to, but on the street it is strategically safer and wiser to remain on your feet.

So what does an ordinary person do when attacked on the street, usually by a thug who has no rules and would just as soon kill you as not? Thugs do not grapple, they attack in the quickest, easiest way they can, usually with a weapon. In this case, you do what your art has trained you to do!

Grandmaster Jhoon Rhee, the 10th degree black belt who introduced Taekwondo to the United States in 1956 was asked in an interview "What types of martial arts training will get me in shape and boost my confidence?"  He answered "If you had asked me this question 30 years ago, I would have said Taekwondo was the best to keep you in top shape and build confidence, but now I say the differences are not in the styles but in the individual instructors. If an instructor as the knowledge, integrity, and takes the students sincerely, the results will be good."

The martial art you choose is similar to insuring your house. Hazard insurance for your home is expensive, so when you insure your house, you only insure it against reasonably expected calamities. Every homeowner insures against fire, but if you live on a hill, you do not need flood insurance. If you live in Maine, you do not need wind insurance. However, if you live in Florida, you do need flood and wind insurance. You only need to insure against reasonably expected calamities. You may insure against more if you choose, but it is basically a waste of money.

Risking your time, money, and injury to train for a situation that is not likely to occur, is as waste; most people have never been in a fight and will never be in a fight. Train in a martial art that serves your purpose, not the martial art's purpose. This does not mean you should not be prepared for the unexpected. Every martial art teaches self-defense techniques as a part of its curriculum. These techniques may be used under extraordinary situations. You should choose a martial art that fits your lifestyle and likelihood of using it for its intended purpose.

So which martial art is best? According to Walter Eddie, the United States heavyweight Taekwondo champion in 1981 and a 6th degree black belt, "Under proper instruction, an individual develops the key elements of focus, balance, coordination, speed, and power." As long it is learned from an experienced instructor, who is respected amongst other local, regional, or national martial artists, and is accredited by some legitimate organizations, any martial art may be the best.

Do you even need to be proficient at a martial art to be an effective fighter? Many traditional martial art weapons began as farm or work implements used by pheasants. To defend themselves against attackers, they learned to use the implements as weapons, for example the nunchaku and tonfa. Pick any type of modern profession that uses a lot of physical effort and you will find a fighting style amongst the workers that uses the movements or tools of that profession. Farmers who use shovels, hoes, pitch forks, etc. developed a style of fighting with those implements. Railroad workers, mechanics, truckers—no matter the profession—they all have a style of fighting that uses the motions and tools that they use on the job every day. When you work at something every day you become good at using the motions and tools of your job.

While in the Navy, I lived in Iceland for four years. The Icelandic economy revolves around fishing and sheep products. Icelandic fisherman work everyday for months at a time fishing in the North Atlantic, pulling nets, lines, etc. Some do not look physically threatening, but they are still very powerful and hard as rocks. Every time I responded to fight in a club that involved sailors and Icelandics, I found the sailors had gotten their butts whipped by the Icelandics. I played Judo with Icelandics many times. Their arms were similar to steel pipes. Even with the inexperienced players,  it was impossible to get an arm bar on one of them. I trained an hour or two a day five days a week, while they had been pulling nets and lines 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, for months.

The bottom line is—any fighting style is better than no fighting style, and a fighter who is good at his or her fighting style is better than one who is an average fighter in his or her style.

See a Karate Versus Grappling Clip

Reference

• Abernethy, I. (2004). Karate on the Ground.

Page 1 - Page 2