The catch or to catch in military CQC is in reference to aspects of clinching or stand up grappling with one’s enemy.
As a tactically correct primary practice in military close quarter’s combat catch CQC increases risks and dangers and as such is tactically flawed.
It can be defeated with deadly outcomes by armed military battlefield threat neutralisation as per the depictions in this article.
It takes very little training time to instruct a formidable military combatant in catch or grappling counter engagement for life or death military actions on encounters than to have to instruct combatants in traditional or competitive grappling that prolongs the encounter exposes the combatant to the risk of decentralisation on the battle field and installs a take on mentality over a takeout correct military CQC mentality.
Catch/Clinch counter by a military CQC means.
An important consideration for military CQC in primary catch skills counter engagement is body armour battledress loadbearing and weapon carrying considerations that make clinching and grappling in most actions on encounters difficult and risky.
Combatants can use dirty or deadly grappling threat neutralisation in a stand-up catch situation or under ground combat conditions. They require sound balance and stability capabilities including real time adjustment proficiency to hold change or regain position and enable dirty and deadly threat neutralisation.
I have trained rugby and rugby league players that have high level capabilities standing in the tackle to maintain their footing that would enable military CQC deadly skills employments with better commonality to CQC requirements than some traditional fighting arts clinching techniques. You only have to check out the NRL rugby league to see what I mean.
Greco Roman wrestling and other wrestling codes with their origins from ancient European combat sports and ancient European military CQC before that provide high level catch clinch capabilities.
Skills where you turn your back on your enemy are suicidal against a deadly-minded, armed and capable combatant as in throwing techniques.
The dangers of turning your back on your CQC trained enemy to throw them.
If you look at the depictions in this article for military battlefield CQC actions on encounters to eliminate catch clinching grappling and honestly ask yourself if you would still want to grapple a combatant bent on taking you out by such means, the answer from any realist is a no brainer. There are considerably more risks and dangers than advantages with the catch in military CQC so I will cover firstly the probable use of the catch in military CQC.
If your vision is impaired using your sense of touch to locate both enemy extremities for seizing and securing them and locating enemy bodily targets and destroying such targets as quickly as possible is a primary practice under such conditions and circumstances.
To prevent the drawing and using of weapons may require enemy seizure catch skills combined with disarming, disabling and disposing of the threat.
Under assault, up against a formidable striker, suffering the effects of punishing strikes may require immediate catch skills employment combined with immediate CQC threat neutralisation.
The reality of employing catch skills for military close quarters combat kill or get killed actions on encounters is that you are providing time and opportunity for your enemy to target your major bodily vitals and or use a weapon against you.
Even being head-butted with a helmet or stomped with a combat boot can cause not only disengagement but also incapacitation leaving you vulnerable to continued assault.
So while employing catch skills is certainly not a primary option and does present increased risk and dangers there are situations as previously outlined as part of quick and quiet threat disposal where you may decide to close to point blank body contact range and employ catch skills as part of increasing safety reducing risk in the immediate set up of threat neutralisation skills.
Never should catch grappling skills be used for taking on or submitting an enemy that could get you killed in military CQC actions on encounters by providing the enemy time and opportunity.
To understand why the catch or grappling as it is known in civilian fighting arts is a high risk practice in military battle field CQC you need to understand the realities, roles and common outcomes of battlefield close quarters combat actions on encounters.
First of all, battledress, body armour webbing boots packs helmets primary weapons backup weapons daggers tools improvised weapons are all important considerations.
Then you need to understand that unlike combat sports there are no rules safeguards gender categories or weight divisions.
In kill or get killed unarmed combat its life or death not a winner and a second place getter.
Terrain injuries wounds fatigue can all increase risk by considerable and make CQC dirty and deadly anti and counter catch/clinch the primary best means of threat neutralisation.
One of many military unarmed combat Catch/clinch counter skills.
The environment and terrain presents risks and dangers of its own and going to the ground from the catch can cause injuries including incapacitation or be fatal.
Ground fighting is another negative situation on the battlefield, especially with your enemy’s comrades around to stomp or bayonet you on the ground not to mention your enemy being at point-blank bodily contact range with you on the ground providing the opportunity of drawing a weapon and using it against you.
The reality is in a catch situation there is a high chance of ending up on the ground with your enemy increasing risk and dangers.
If you opt for grappling or clinching over your dirty deadly and primarily armed option capabilities this decreases your weapon retention requirements and offers your enemy access to your carried weapons and equipment that could be used against you.
Grappling on the battlefield with someone in full, battledress and body armour with combat boots is considerably different from grappling in a gi, grappling shorts and rash guard on a mat.
The protective battle helmet at close quarters is also an effective combative capability in its own right.
Body armour and webbing provides weapons and tools carriage and concealment that can be accessed quickly.
To struggle with someone in a catch situation provides time and opportunity for them to draw a primary secondary emergency or improvised weapon and use it against you with devastating effects and potentially fatal outcomes.
The modus operandi of military CQC in the battlefield where it is kill or get killed is simply not to take the enemy on but take them out.
Grappling with someone is taking them on destroying their major bodily vitals by armed or unarmed target destruction is taking them out.
If you need to catch and seize an enemy in military CQC actions on encounters it must be part of enemy incapacitation or elimination and should be not more than several seconds in duration.
The most highly skilled and determined fighter will be stopped in their tracks by means of penetration of life-support vitals or delicate human sensory capabilities.
Such sensory capabilities can provide direct lines to the brain and other vital organs depending on targeting selection.
There are no take on submission type techniques employments for battlefield close quarters combat in the Todd systems of CQC and all unarmed tactic’s and skills are employed to dispose of the threat or disarm, disable and dispose of the threat if immediate threat neutralisation is not applicable.
We have a commitment to the people we train and a duty of care to train them only in skills that provide the best chance of defeating a highly trained formidable enemy combatant in a kill or get killed actions on encounter.
In the unlikely event that a combatant does not have access to any primary secondary emergency or improvised weapons capability, then the unarmed skills are designed to destroy delicate human sensory capabilities and life-support bodily targets by over kill aggressive ravaging.
No matter how proficient you are at the catch clinch and grappling it becomes in an instant the last thing you want to do when you are being stabbed, or under assault with other weapons capabilities or unarmed assault targeting of your cervical spinal cord and column, airway eyes or other delicate bodily targets.
The military CQC instructor has limited time to ensure exponents are best prepared to defeat highly trained formidable enemy personnel and to do this must instruct sound basic proven principles tactic’s combined with dirty and deadly methods of enemy incapacitation and elimination by means of battle proven controlled ruthless aggressive overkill means.
Obviously there is more than one way to neutralise a threat dependent on the individual combatant’s capabilities and situational specifics.
You could strangle choke or break an extremity of your enemy but think about how much luck is required to ensure you are not targeted by other enemy per or by taking so much time and effort you put yourself at increased risk including the use of carried or improvised weapons against you.
Why would you consider methods that take increased time put you at increased risk and can get you killed over the quickest, quietest, most dirty and deadly means of stopping your enemy in their tracks.
The effects of a dagger penetrating vital organs including via orifices penetrating your brain are immediate and terminal and will eliminate the most skilled enemy combatant grappling with you.
More reasons why it is not a good plan to grapple with CQC trained combatants.
If you have hunted game you will be well aware of this.
Sudden aggressive shock action overkill maximum CQC firepower and a confident controlled ruthless aggressive combative mentality are more valuable than complex skills when you are facing a life or death battlefield actions on encounter.
Through my work as a military CQC Master instructor and through connections as being a director and member of the International close combat instructors association, I get to discuss such matters as grappling in battlefield close quarters combat encounters and the previous is the general consensus.
I was recently speaking to an instructor from overseas who reiterated that when they developed their combative program based on a grappling combat sport the first thing he said to the civilian subject matter expert instructor was go away and come back with something that does not involve grappling and works with battle dress and body armour.
This makes sense but often today instructors have never been trained in military CQC primary methods at close quarters and base their techniques on traditional fighting arts or combat sports including bastardised versions of such styles or codes.
Orders are orders and if you must accept non-CQC primary trade craft practises then it may well come down to taking only what could work and discarding the rest.
My outlook is it is best to instruct military battle field proven primary practices from the outset. The right tools to get the job best done.
The longer an actions on encounter takes the greater the risk of being wounded or killed.
Even if you defeat an enemy by such means the more physically adversely affected you will be which can reduce your immediate continued CQC capabilities.
