BJJ Defensive Lock-Down

[ps1]

You want the person to stand. Just unlock you legs and do a basic ankle grab sweep...you're now on top.

Unless they botch it

True, but the same can be said of anything. What if they botch their overhooks? What if they're not strong enough to hold the guy's arms? There's always a what if.

If they truly take their work seriously. If they truly treat it as serious as it is. They'll practice the skills necessary to survive. If they don't, they were probably a statistic waiting to happen anyway. I get chills every time I read about a LEO drawing their weapon and firing their entire clip at a suspect; only to find they missed with every shot. That's someone who wasn't prepared for the worst. That's the same person who's gonna botch an ankle grab sweep.

[Liver Punch]

You want the person to stand. Just unlock you legs and do a basic ankle grab sweep...you're now on top.

Unless they botch it

True, but the same can be said of anything. What if they botch their overhooks? What if they're not strong enough to hold the guy's arms? There's always a what if.

If they truly take their work seriously. If they truly treat it as serious as it is. They'll practice the skills necessary to survive. If they don't, they were probably a statistic waiting to happen anyway. I get chills every time I read about a LEO drawing their weapon and firing their entire clip at a suspect; only to find they missed with every shot. That's someone who wasn't prepared for the worst. That's the same person who's gonna botch an ankle grab sweep.

If they botch the overhooks, they just try again. Buck and overhook requires a lot less training than does just about any sweep. The idea is that it's much more simplistic that "go learn a martial art."

[Liver Punch]

Also, I think this discussion probably highlights the existence personal preference. I'm large, and nullifying people works pretty well for me. If you look a random cross section of the top 10 absolute-class grapplers in the world, there's a good chance that most of them won't function the same.

[tallgeese]

ps1, I don't have any stats on what second officers will do when faced with a partner in the guard. I'm not sure LE as a whole has been adequately trained in ground fighting for the time needed to establish that documented stat. That said, I'd agree with your assumption 100 percent. As to the increased of injury to the first officer by the addition of the second, I don't know that either, but I'll agree the potential is there.

Those possibilities are why we added that to our ground portion of the curriculum this year. I think that the guard should be taught as a "oh, crap" position in LE as a whole. It does work wonders for a lot of things.

Again no hard stats, but more and more dash cam footage is showing up with cops being taken down. The guard is much preferable to other negative options. For us, it's built into a learning progression going from bad to worse and taught after takedown defense work. As for the second man, we've gone to a lateral motion for bring the bad guy off. It seems to work well.

It's a good point to bring up here, since we've skirted the topic. LE training in general (not just ground but all aspects) have ignored the fact that we hunt in packs for far too long. So much time is spent training one on one and yet we operate with multiple officers whenever possible. Hence, a whole lot of pulling people in opposite directions occurs. It makes us less efficient and causes more work an injuries on both sides. And we all know how much I hate to do extra work. Every CT program in the country needs to be looking at this and only a handful really are.

Even we've just got it added after years of arguing with management over it's inclusion.

[ps1]

ps1, I don't have any stats on what second officers will do when faced with a partner in the guard. I'm not sure LE as a whole has been adequately trained in ground fighting for the time needed to establish that documented stat. That said, I'd agree with your assumption 100 percent. As to the increased of injury to the first officer by the addition of the second, I don't know that either, but I'll agree the potential is there.

Yeah. The stats were not "guard" specific. It was a paper written, in Ohio I think, about officers attempting to help their partners and accidentally harming/killing them.

The basic idea of it is:

-Partner approaches and sees a suspect on top of his partner.

-Partner jumps into action and would often end up pushing the suspect onto the bottom partner.

-In some cases knives were driven into the partner, in others they were suffocated. Most ended in injury only. Regardless, they were considered avoidable and corrective action was mandated.

-SOP was changed/altered to avoid injury in this situation in many departments.

It was back in the early 2000's that I saw it.

Recently, I had a friend get his ACL torn in a prison scuffle in the same manner. He was putting a prisoner on the ground and three other COs did a pile on. My buddy ended up on the bottom. 6 months off work and jiu-jitsu because of it.

[MasterPain]

As for the second man, we've gone to a lateral motion for bring the bad guy off.

This seems like a point to expand upon, as the whole polyester pile concept just seems awful for everyone involved. Although I do consider rugby to be a great spectator sport.

[bushido_man96]

As for the second man, we've gone to a lateral motion for bring the bad guy off.

This seems like a point to expand upon, as the whole polyester pile concept just seems awful for everyone involved. Although I do consider rugby to be a great spectator sport.

I've been involved in one of those piles. Not fun at all, and the one I was in on started standing, and ended up in me getting partially tased...not fun at all.

Coordinating defensive tactics with multiple good guys to one bad guy should be a priority, that way we can practice communication and better coordinate our tactics.