I get a lot of questions about civilian publications, especially of yesteryear, on military unarmed combat.
I have trained and instructor qualified under several World War II army CQC instructors and the following is based on my hands-on experience.
Most of the publications include individual skills, often primary skills, but not the full instruction in information around the employment and contingency options. There are many more combative skills that I have been instructed in and observed on military courses than I have ever seen in the books printed by former military instructors on the subject of unarmed combat/hand-in-hand combat/CQC.
The important thing to remember is the employment of an individual skill, as provided in many books, without the full set up employment and contingency options that may be required against a formidable threat is very different to hands-on instruction in all the tactics and contingency options required for the skill to be effectively employed in wide ranging threat situations.
Hands-on instruction under a qualified military CQC instructor will also include advice on skills selection fitting to the individual’s physical and psychological capabilities and skills execution, critiquing, and correcting.
You cannot base a high level of knowledge and claim expertise, if your only source of information has been a civilian publications without undergoing extensive and intensive training from a highly qualified instructor.
Interestingly, many of the so-called subject matter experts have in fact never attended, completed, and passed testing on even a basic military CQC, let alone undergone assistant instructor and instructor courses of instruction and pass the test phases. Hardly a sound recommendation for claiming expertise in military CQC.
Facts are facts and to be of a high knowledge and capability in any field. You must have undertaken the required learning training testing and proving yourself.
