I am a Martial Arts/Combatives instructor with 25 yrs exp. I teach Aikibugei/Kenjutsu to civilians, but I have designed a teaching system for LE/MILS that incorporate the natural reactions of most human beings, the off balancing and throwing principals of Aikijujutsu, and the linear striking principals of Wu Wei Gung Fu. Its called the Combined Hand to hand and Armed Operation System, (C.H.A.O.S.). I have found a way to suit the tactics to any departmental policy or rules of engagement in order efficiently defend yourself, or defend a third, but stay out of court...(U.S. or Foreign)
I have taught individual officers and soldiers, but cannot get any of the local depts. to take the training seriously, except for one chief in a 2 man dept. I dont have the state "Stamp of approval" because I could not get my former Chief to sign off on my attending the state Instructor's school.
I am looking for a PSD/EP/LE training school to give me a chance to showcase my system and give me an honest review, and if satisfied, let me teach these principals. I use principals instead of techniques because techniques and tactics are concrete in application. Principals are abstract and can be applied to any situation without having to "scan the log of techniques" in your brain to find one that fits.
My system is based on Geometry and Kinisilogy. Its scientific and fits any gender or size. This is not traditional martial arts nor is it MMA ground and pound. If anyone can help me out please let me know. My passion is teaching and I really believe that this system can help save a lot of operators, soldiers, officers and even suspects in the right situation. I just need an avenue to show what I have.
Hope this doesnt come off as an infomercial. I dont have a box set of DVDs im trying to peddle and Im not claiming to make anyone an uber-ninja. I dont even have a website, just sound principles based on science and proven battle field tactics that I have used while on patrol, in life or death conflict. I want to have the support of an established entity that can verify the effectiveness of my system before I try to market it in any way. I feel like once it becomes a "product" it will lose a lot of its integrity.
Anyone have any suggestions here?

I hate to burst your bubble but your martial arts background is going to make it hard for you to get anyone interested in your program. Your styles are traditional and they are not in demand with agencies right now. Modern styles that have groundfighting or ground control are what LEO agencies are looking for. Also Krav Maga is being sought out by the military as well. You say your program is not traditional but you only mentioned traditional arts for your MA background. If you have other training go ahead and mention it.

I suggest you offer some free training with a couple of departments then have them write some reviews for you. If they are good this will open the doors for you and the word will get out.

I own and operate my own tactical training company and it was hard in the beginning but it now it has paid off. My MA background is in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, Muay Thai, Kali and boxing and because of this I get inquiries all the time.

Good luck man.

blackknife,

Just so you know, Krav Maga incorporates traditional MA elements.
For LEOs, ground-control is implied, yes.
Groundfighting from an LE stand point is a HORRIBLE idea, generally, unless you have a "cover" officer.
Number one scenario for gun grabs and officers losing their weapons.
Also inhibits the options on your belt, baton, tazer, spray, knife.
However I think you should have a diverse training background, because a lot of fights do end up on the ground.
But here's the real question, would near as many fights end up on the ground if people gave "takedown-defense" the attention it deserved?

CASE STUDY: BJ Penn- Great stand-up, phenom TDD, and competent in BJJ. = Really hard to beat.

If you disagreed with my theory, then you wouldn't of trained BJJ and MT, the most common combo of training, and a good one.

And I wouldn't say that LE Agencies are looking JUST for ground-fighting.
The top DT instructor in KS recommends avoiding the ground, which contradicts your theory. It would be foolish to say any agency is only looking for one style.

I wouldn't try to "burst" anyone's bubble using subjectivity and personal bias against traditional styles. And I wouldn't state my opinion as an absolute.

Although he was seeking advice, if you are going to crticize his program (without even experiencing it), do it in a PM and not publicly. All that''s done is hurt him marketing-wise.

Just my opinion, no insult intended.

V/R

I appreciate the criticizim and support guys. I didnt really go into the specifics or details of the system though. Yes my "formal" background is in traditional styles. These are the styles I can show on paper. I have, though, been involved in MT, BJJ, Pak Qua, Krav Maga, Boxing, Kali Silat, Jeet Kune Do and fought in some "Old school" MMA bouts in Austin, Tx that was run by a group called "The Friday Night Fights". These were unsanctioned and usually held in some business exec's back yard. But this experience I cannot prove on paper.
As for Gov. entities shunning traditionalists, look at James Williams and the system of strategy on youtube. I know this man professionally and know for a fact that he has the exclusive contract with the U.S. Secret Service and a contract with the Naval Special Warfare to teach on the West Coast. His system is about as traditional as they come. The thing that the Gov guys frown at are the schools that push the cultural traditions such as clothing, phylosophy and language. Any system taught is a traditional system because of the muscular and skelatal limitations of the homosapien animal. A person can only move in so many ways or be manipulated in so many ways.
My system is one that covers the scientific and geometric principles that are the basis of the theory of relativity which relates to human positioning and the ability to stand erect or move while on the ground. The Japanese call this Aiki. The Chinese call it Tai Chi. The modern Westerner can call it Force Blending. It is scientific, albeit with many variables, and can be proven on paper with geomotry.
As for the curriculum. I cover, in depth, ground escapes,(not ground fighting), weapons retention and disarms, power generation for striking, assists,(not take downs, because a "take down" is a liability nightmare for an LEO), arrest principles, fighting as a team,(avoiding the "police party"), situational awareness during duress, breath control during duress, elevating the response to deadly force, tool/weapon placement on a duty rig, clearing weapons while grounded, and maintaining a daily "level orange" as opposed to a comfort level for off duty.
I also cover conditioning that is obtainable by a working patrol officer as opposed to the unrealistic "competition" training that would only apply to elite athletes. I even have a program for PSDs that operate in and around crowded buildings.
My principles will cary over to bladed weapons, side arm, and rifle deployment as well. Its not just for empty hand combat. That is why I call it "conflict resolution tactics" and not Defensive Tactics or Combatives. The principles I use have streamlined my shooting abilities by giving me a much more stable shooting platform by altering how I lock my body into a stance, or isolate muscle movements. And, Ive discovered a way to teach these principles using large muscle groups as opposed to intricate isolations that are generally used to teach traditional Asian systems. Its not nearly as floral or smooth as the traditional styles, but real combat never is. I hope this clears up any fears of a "peace, love and happiness- Focus on the lint in your bellybutton" type of school. All training is done in whatever uniform or gear you normally wear while working, including polyester pants or full TAC gear.
Any thoughts guys....BTW the local depts like the idea of a free class, but wont pay the OT for the officers to go. Ive had a couple of officers attend on their own time, and loved it...and used it with sucess. But you know how LEOs are. If they dont have to...they wont and if they do it better pay OT. Id love to be able to focus on MIL and PSD/EP mission specific tactics though.

The simple answer is to attend instructor certification on your own dime. Most state agencies offer a tuition fee based option for the basic instructor certification.

Secondly, partner up with a recognized instructor at the state and local level and get your lesson plans certified. That will, unfortunately, make your lesson plans and evaluation criteria available to LE agencies throughout the state.

The third option is a public marketing test. If you're in this to make money you'll have to spend some to do it. Find a gym in a larger city and do a free series of classes, put on a seminar at the Street Survival conference, address the IACP or the NTOA. If your product is a substantial improvement over currently available training, you'll get bites.

If your product is not a miracle cure, be prepared for the stark truth that regardless of money spent in training, most agencies fail to conduct concurrent training to maintain those skills. The real money? Train the trainer.

Thanks Jody. I tried the intruct cert option. The problem is you have to have an agency approve the course via Dept. letter head. I offered to pay for my cert and go on my vacation. The Capt., the one that gives the blessing on training, refused to approve it. You see, its a small dept and he is the "instructor" for the dept. He got a little antsy about another, younger, officer taking the title of "Instructor". His ego and complete lack of understanding of the subject squashed it before it ever started.

I did find a gym to let me teach, even pay me a little, but itll be months before they are ready with the space, and they want me to teach the traditional aspect of it. Im going to try to talk the owner into giving me a shot with the Tactical system. He is retired DEA and former EP so he may go for it. Id rather teach the young bucks going directly into harms way though, while they are fired up and like sponges.

The train the trainer aspect is what im shooting for in LE. I teach principles not techniques. That is why I think this will stick with officers. Its kinda like giving an officer a catchy quote like " Tap, Rack, Fire" instead of going into detail about seating the mag, attempting to charge the weapon, and attempting to fire a round.

My little quote is "Gather, Turn, and Drop" I had a Dept Sheriff chant that about 10 times and I gave him a fairly realistic attack. He immediately protected himself in his own way, and found a body part to gather up, turned his body and dropped me like a bad habbit. Thats when I knew this worked. This was his first day and was trowing me like Steven Segal, and able to recover to subdue, cuff, or terminate. It was ugly but it worked for him immediately.

Thanks, I hope I didnt ramble. I tend to leave novels on here sometimes. Sorry.

ksleo wrote:

blackknife, Just so you know, Krav Maga incorporates traditional MA elements. For LEOs, ground-control is implied, yes. Groundfighting from an LE stand point is a HORRIBLE idea, generally, unless you have a "cover" officer. Number one scenario for gun grabs and officers losing their weapons. Also inhibits the options on your belt, baton, tazer, spray, knife. However I think you should have a diverse training background, because a lot of fights do end up on the ground. But here's the real question, would near as many fights end up on the ground if people gave "takedown-defense" the attention it deserved? CASE STUDY: BJ Penn- Great stand-up, phenom TDD, and competent in BJJ. = Really hard to beat. If you disagreed with my theory, then you wouldn't of trained BJJ and MT, the most common combo of training, and a good one. And I wouldn't say that LE Agencies are looking JUST for ground-fighting. The top DT instructor in KS recommends avoiding the ground, which contradicts your theory. It would be foolish to say any agency is only looking for one style. I wouldn't try to "burst" anyone's bubble using subjectivity and personal bias against traditional styles. And I wouldn't state my opinion as an absolute. Although he was seeking advice, if you are going to crticize his program (without even experiencing it), do it in a PM and not publicly. All that''s done is hurt him marketing-wise. Just my opinion, no insult intended. V/R

When I meant by groundfighting is to learn to fight from the ground if a person is taken there. It is easy to say just avoid being taken to the ground but this in not so simple unless a person has a wrestling or other grappling background. Most Cops that work the streets have no fighting skills and most rather spend time playing golf or softball instead of training in something that would save their ass on the streets.

I have found out that lot of DT instructors in LEO agencies have no grappling background so they have bad things to say about ground control. We had a Sgt in our DT staff that hated anything to do with ground control techniques. The reason was his MA background was in Karate so he was closed minded. I told him that I could take his ass down and there would be nothing he could do about it. I told him that I would prove it....he did not take the offer. I don't know who this top DT instructor in Kansas is but what is his background?

The truth is there is no one super style that makes it safe for LEO's. If there was we all would have learned it.

The problem is not having a style that works. There are hundreds. Its the ability to teach officers an effective system in a few days and have them remember it. Cause like you said, theyd rather play golf or softball. I believe I have found a way to transpose some of the knowlege I have in a very short time. Like the SPEAR system I use the officers natrual reactions and give them some tools to make those reactions more efficient.

The system is based on off balancing and control, not striking or chokes or locks. In order to lock an opponents body, you have to lock your own. That is dangerous in a violent encounter. PLEASE dont think I am challenging or downing your instruction. I have no idea how you have augmented your system to meet the dept. needs. You may very well be doing exactly what I am attempting to do. I am just trying to give a clear picture of what I am trying to do for professionals in harms way.

Again thanks for the input. I welcome all input from the professionals on this fourm...the good, the bad and the ugly, as long as its based on facts and experience, which you seem to have both.