hello, i just wanted to say i started taking systema classes, it was great, had alot of fun, and quite a few bruises to add. i heard that systema was the main hand combat system of the russian special forces (spetsnaz) is this true?
Printable View
hello, i just wanted to say i started taking systema classes, it was great, had alot of fun, and quite a few bruises to add. i heard that systema was the main hand combat system of the russian special forces (spetsnaz) is this true?
it's true. Russian troops of special mission units study special system of fight. This system was founded since 1923 and always in improving. The main task of this system is to kill. Minimum of movements and maximum of damage.
But I doubt that you are studing real hand combat system of russian special forces because it's very cruel type of fighting.
I'd doubt that too. However, that wouldn't really make much difference as you can get bruised (or killed) by applying even the smoothest of all martial arts. And you can also get no bruise at all in a combat with a systema practitioner. Ultimately, a style is not important. As well as a weapon. You can really judge a system when the practitioner is limited to its rules. And that you can't afford in a real combat unless what you're looking for is a [doubtful] "beauty" of the process.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscovite
So, to sum it up, there wouldn't be much practical difference in a hand combat between a typically trained Russian or American or African (for that matter) special forces. What would be much more important is, for example, who would discover the other first. Who would wait until the other one is tired and attack then. And so on. The so-called "open hand combat" is so rare between the special forces in real life, that you could probably only see that in a movie. :no:
Sorry for being an ignoramus, but does the System have any relation to Kalashnikov's system of hand combat? If not what do you think of it (Kalashnikov's one)?
Do you mean the Perm style of hand combat (Пермская школа)?Quote:
Originally Posted by gRomoZeka
I think so.. The one where they train almost in slow motion until they get the move right. I've heard a lot of excited praises on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
I see now that this is not the "system", but I'd like to hear your opinion anyway.
I'm not sure I can really give an authoritative opinion since I've never had a train combat with either of their practitioners. I'd say that if their main idea is really training in slow motion, than that isn't new as you can see that method in many styles across the world. For example, partially in Tai-Chi and in some schools of Aikido. I don't think that's ultimately has any importance. A style is just a style. Just something to begin with. :unknown:Quote:
Originally Posted by gRomoZeka
I know, but there is a twist to it, which I can't really explain since I'm not an expert either, and I don't know all the details. I just saw a documentary about it once.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
As far as I know many martial arts use slow motion training, but it's usually "single-handed" exercise in the sense that you're doing it alone (some kind of katas), while in Kalashnikov's system they actually fight in slow motion (painful holds and such, even some resemblance of slow throws), and work with many different weapons (it's a military combat system as well). It reminds me a bit of aikido, but with a touch of cruelty to it (a la Steven Seagull - in cruelty sense))) plus dirty tricks.
I'm sure there are plenty of videos on Youtube, I'll try to find something.
Блин, я ТОРМОЗ.
Только что заметила, что везде писала Калашников вместо Кадочникова. :lol:
It's Kadochnikov, not Kalashnikov. Sorry.
:) I do not want to say that Russian combat is better than American. I said that this sort of fighting is very special and has a lot of difference from "civil" types of combats (karate, aikido, sambo etc). The main purpose of any military combat is to kill or to hurt to an enemy in short time (only one or two movements) because you do not have a time for cinema's dances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
The kalashnikov system is better than anyone else, you were right :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by gRomoZeka
haha- so true!Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscovite
People, please wake up. Systema is a fake. It doesn't work. Show this video to any of your friends who has ever gone boxing (kick-boxing, etc.)
All good martial arts are the same in different countries, althought they have different names, terms, the uniform.
Special forces don't use anything secret in their technique. All elements are simple, well-known, tested many times.
A lot of instructors like to tell that their martial art is used for special forces training. But it is only an advertisement statement.
Well, I'm not a specialist, but a friend of mine is. And he said that the only combat system that is worth the time spent is Sambo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambo_(martial_art)
IMHO, it doesn't matter which style (combat system) you choose. Also, you need to clearly realize the difference between what the special forces do and the sports. I'll try to explain it again with a simple example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Imagine a weak little girl standing on the top of the staircase. There's also a huge dude standing beside her looking somewhere and minding his business. All of a sudden, the girl would give a gentle push to the dude and he would fell off the stairs, break his neck and die. That what the special forces are trained to do. No matter if they use hand combat, firearms, or spades. That, of course, is not a sport since clearly the girl violated all the rules imaginable. In any sport the girl would lose to the dude.
To sum it up, sambo as a sport is just a sport - the stronger would prevail.
There's so called 'Special Sambo'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
But I agree. Any sport is good for tatami but nearly useless in a street fight. I saw many 'masters' of various martial arts beaten by some street brawler.
Also there's a proverb 'There's no trick against an iron bar'. On a tatami you have to win, in a fight you have to survive. That's the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorVK
systema is not useless- i have done at least 5 different martial arts, and of all the martial arts i have done in my life (and i have been doing them for a while) i have found systema to be the most complete, and devastating martial art of all. and quite liberating too as most martial arts teach you to do a certain stance, and do a certain move, a certain way- in systema, nothing is off limits. that is the beauty of it- it teaches you to be fearless whereas other martial arts teach you to have fear- that is all that an aggresive pose demonstrates- is fear on the part of the demonstrater. most martial arts teaches you to be afraid. and systema teaches you about the human soul and about yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ieQaQgF ... annel_page
AFAIK what soldiers are usually taught is neither art nor philosophy. There are several standard situations in close-handed fight (like attack from behind, release from the neck-lock etc.) so for each one such situation a soldier is taught only one trick. In training he repeats and repeats and repeats this trick until it becomes completely automatic. That is all. No dancing, no improvisation, no meditation. But each soldier should have his own series of tricks so enemy does not know what exactly to expect from the randomly selected soldier.
The usual fight in the battlefield consists of one trick from each of the adversaries. And those whose trick is more successfull survives. :)
what does AFAIK mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by it-ogo
anways systema is not designed so that if A happens do B and if B happens do C- because nothing ever happens like that. systema teaches you to use your environment to your best advantage, to be fearless, to die, to kill, how to take control of the situation in the most economic and efficient way possible. systema in its purest form is designed for professional soldiers, because in reality- all martial arts developed from warrior societys- in times of war and conflict, martial arts were designed for the warrior- not the monk, today people do it for meditation, relaxtion, excersize- true martial arts are designed for the warrior, true martial arts are intended to be used, martial arts were birthed from war, true martial arts thrive in war. do things without emotional attachement. systema imo actually embodies asian philosophy more than asian martial arts do- at least in my experience. but hey- what the hell do i know.
As Far As I KnowQuote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane
Alright, so what do YOU need that for? People who had been in the real fight usually prefer to forget everything associated with that. Just to stay sane. Do you feel like your life is too comfortable and boring?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
i am U.S. military- thats why.
They should have taught you some American combat system then. :-DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane
Let's have another talk when you retire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane
if i am lucky :) wow my humor is so dark....Quote:
Let's have another talk when you retire.
I wish you luck... and a lot of it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane
thanks lampada, I appreciate that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
I wonder what Fedor Emilianenko thinks of systema.