Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 104

Thread: Shooting from Retention

  1. #51
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    DFW
    Quote Originally Posted by Redhat View Post
    I am sure southnarc has done it already, but I would like to know the results of actual force on force training to see how these techniques hold up...both scripted and non-scripted.

    I'm sure the videos provided are just a part of options available, but for your average CCW holder, is it even preferred (realistic) to attempt to go to the firearm at that distance? What's the consensus on this?
    I have over 230+ hrs training with S’Narc and another 230+ hrs train with Cecil and. 100+ hrs training with Paul Sharp. If you take what they teach and apply it in a non-consensual/competitive FOF environment the material works. Especially if you do your part.

    For you average CCW the context and their training will determine if it’s realistic to draw a firearm at ECQC ranges.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    SATX
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackdog View Post
    I have over 230+ hrs training with S’Narc and another 230+ hrs train with Cecil and. 100+ hrs training with Paul Sharp. If you take what they teach and apply it in a non-consensual/competitive FOF environment the material works. Especially if you do your part.

    For you average CCW the context and their training will determine if it’s realistic to draw a firearm at ECQC ranges.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks. I wasn't actually referring to his techniques but rather the other stuff pictured and discussed in this thread. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

  3. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackdog View Post
    I have over 230+ hrs training with S’Narc and another 230+ hrs train with Cecil and. 100+ hrs training with Paul Sharp. If you take what they teach and apply it in a non-consensual/competitive FOF environment the material works. Especially if you do your part.
    If someone was a bit skeptical and wanted proof, what would you provide as evidence?

  4. #54
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    DFW
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister X View Post
    If someone was a bit skeptical and wanted proof, what would you provide as evidence?
    I’d have to dug up some videos from ECQC showing the techniques working under pressure of Non-consensual/competitive FOF training.
    Let me see if I can find some.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #55
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    DFW
    Quote Originally Posted by Redhat View Post
    Thanks. I wasn't actually referring to his techniques but rather the other stuff pictured and discussed in this thread. Sorry I didn't make that clear.
    You’re welcome. I probably should’ve reread the whole thread and watch all the videos before replying.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #56
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister X View Post
    Pretty good stuff no doubt, although I do have some concerns regarding the thinking that one individual or small group is the infallible authority or somehow the only reputable source on this issue. A heck of a lot of folks are very well versed and capable on the topic, most from a heavy martial art background rather than being gun centric. It's really nothing new, even if the presentation may be.
    Craig doesn't present it as anything new. If you attend his class he shows some paintings that are several centuries old demonstrating unarmed combatants against armed (mace or sword type arms) opponents doing very similar things to some of what he teaches.

    There are certainly lots of people who teach lots of things. I've been exposed to several types of what the hot newness for "officer survival" or "hand to hand" or whatever was at the time, some of which my department taught as a rookie but now doesn't even allow us to use (LA choke hold...) Craig's is better then most of what I had learned before, and it was readily apparent it was better for me given my abilities and fitness level. I've yet to have my ass whipped on the street, but I've been hurt a couple of times and largely because I fought stupidly for the context. Even with slipped disks in my neck, I could do most of what Craig wanted us to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister X View Post
    What's everyone's opinion on this....

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=stBfi_iru5M
    Assuming your opponent goes along with the program and fights you for the gun, it's probably great. But what if he goes for your exposed face/jawline instead? We had an officer shot with his own weapon fairly recently. He was not voluntarily using both hands to hold his weapon, his shoulder was dislocated early in the fight so he only had one working hand. He could not both protect his head and protect his gun, so he chose the gun. The suspect took that opportunity to use one hand to fight for the gun and one hand to gouge his eyes to temporarily blind him, strike him, etc. The suspect then gained control of the gun and shot the officer. That one shot did not end the officer's ability to continue to fight for the gun.

    If someone is willing to fight you over your gun, they are a dedicated attacker. They are not likely to be put to flight by a gunshot, nor are they likely to stop fighting for a non-incapacitating wound. I would prefer not to turn my pistol into a single shot and then have to screw around with malfunction clearance while entangled.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    Craig doesn't present it as anything new. If you attend his class he shows some paintings that are several centuries old demonstrating unarmed combatants against armed (mace or sword type arms) opponents doing very similar things to some of what he teaches.
    I was referring to the presentation itself(teaching method, terminology, verbiage, codification, etc..) being new and/or unique, not necessarily the material itself. It seems to really resonate with certain groups, somewhat reminiscent(at least to me) of Tony Blauer and his SPEAR system.

    In regard to the Gracie/"G-wrap" video, I find a lot of problems with this solution, but I do see some merit to it as well. At least certain elements of it in very specific limited applications. The Gracie's are generally well respected and considered "known goods", which gives them a great deal of credibility with many people, but they are in no way infallible(especially when venturing outside their speciality) and it's ok to disagree with them. I was kind of curious if anyone would.

  8. #58
    Member BaiHu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In front of pixels.
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthNarc View Post
    Hey guys thanks for the kind words and just so everyone knows I haven't taken offense to anything said in this thread at all.

    Some follow up video of John's private ECQC that might be helpful.


    https://youtu.be/CTwH-PS9ydM


    https://youtu.be/La56KNz9FFA


    Edited to add: I don't know how to embed these vids so if someone wants to do that feel free.
    Thanks so much for producing this content. Living in NJ sucks since I can't even host you here for ECQC (although we had a banner EWO in '15) but having the opportunity to run ECQC w/you back in CT '12 was invaluable. I learned so much that weekend that it's nice to see all the work again in full fun and color as a reminder. I still practice what you preach and even have a crew to work it with 7 years later.
    Fairness leads to extinction much faster than harsh parameters.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister X View Post
    In regard to the Gracie/"G-wrap" video, I find a lot of problems with this solution, but I do see some merit to it as well. At least certain elements of it in very specific limited applications. The Gracie's are generally well respected and considered "known goods", which gives them a great deal of credibility with many people, but they are in no way infallible(especially when venturing outside their speciality) and it's ok to disagree with them. I was kind of curious if anyone would.
    What elements did you find to have merit, and in what specific applications; as relates to this video description of a weapon in-hand retention technique?
    Jules
    Runcible Works

  10. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by runcible View Post
    What elements did you find to have merit, and in what specific applications; as relates to this video description of a weapon in-hand retention technique?

    Primarily covering the weapon with two hands. From a purely one dimensional "own the bone" perspective, two hands are generally better than one and there might be instances in a contact scenario where it would probably be a good idea to do so temporarily. Utilizing it momentarily to allow you to retain possession of your weapon and transition out to a better position or angle makes sense to me. I surely don't like it at all as a default or for effectively getting off rounds(although it's not bad to understand it), plus I'm more of a snub revolver guy. Not an ideal posture to defend against strikes and especially takedown attempts, but it could work well enough depending on the skill of the individuals involved. No absolutes.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •