For those of you who may not know, these are 3 hand to hand combative schools. MCMAP is the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program, Army Combatives is what it sounds like, and Krav Maga is the Israeli version.

I've studied 2 of the 3 (Army Combatives (level 3) and Krav Maga) but have 0 experience in MCMAP. The things I know to be true about each that I really appreciate are as follows:

1.)They all draw on the best of every martial art out there. Little bit of everything.
2.)No ego involved. That means, if it is effective and works, it's included and counts.
3.)Situational awareness is stressed. The use of any object around can be made into a weapon.

I have learned that Krav Maga really focus' on fighting from a disadvantage. What I mean by that is it's designed to be at it's best when you are out numbered, unarmed against armed assailants, ambushed, etc. Army Combatives tends to focus on one on one combat a bit more.

For any of you that have any experience in the modern MCMAP, what are your thoughts on it, and if you have experience in multiple combative arts (any of these 3) could you please compare and contrast them for me?

As it stands right now, it is my firm beliefe that an expert in Krav Maga would mop the floor with an expert in Army Combatives. I'm curious about how MCMAP and Army Combatives compare.

wish something like krav maga was taught around here.....would love to see my wife and daughters go through it....

I'm lucky that it's taght in Huntsville. 2 schools actually. Guys that have gone to Israel to actually train there.

It's really quality. Most arts are deffensive in nature, Krav Maga is very offensive based. Least movement, maximum damage. EASY to learn because it's all natural moves, works a lot on natural instincts.

MCMAP

aka

Semper Fu!

im familiar with it enough to figure it would prolly be some good stuff for some pretty girls to know how to implement, especially given they weight bout 120 is all.....

A female friend of mine took an introductory lesson offered here in Boise and had the same thoughts.

Obviously more training is better but she figured even the few simple techniques they showed would be good for a woman to repel a mugger or at least disable one enough to be able to get away.

Never heard of any of them. When I was in, the Army trained you in about 12 techniques. They figured by than you had either killed the SOB or the SOB had killed you.

I try never to be involved in a fight because all I know how to do is kill people. I guess today's modern Army is different.

Trust me DD, all three of these are LETHAL.

I mean, I did say that every move is designed for MAXIMUM damage.

In a real life and death struggle all you need is one move and you live or die. Learning a whole system is a waste of time. But heck, if it makes you new generation Army types feel better by all means learn it.

I'd be curious to see how these techniques compare to Fairbairn's "Get Tough". That book covers the training given to British commandos and US troops during WWII. Mostly simple strikes and how to use available weapons, even a small stick, to incapacitate and kill an enemy.

The book is illustrated with drawings demonstrating the techniques. In one a soldier is showing the "Pony kick", which is jumping with both feet on the chest of the enemy to cave his ribs in. A tommy is shown in mid jump about to deliver the death blow to an German soldier. I always enjoyed how nonchalant both of them seemed about the whole thing.

If you honestly believe one single move will apply and work in any and every combative situation, then you are slower than I thought.

There is no secret ONE move that will handle any and every attack. I'd like to have more than one in the chamber if needed. I sure hope this theory of yours doesn't apply to your carry weapon.

Anythings possible in fairie land.

There is, but I can't really go into specifics. I call it "The Evinrude". Wait, that only works on guys... . Forget it, I'll have to go back to the mountains of Tibet.

George