Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below bossdawg. SAVE YOUR MONEY!! ("Underwood's Combato has been sealed and locked up, available to no one.") Does that sound like it's for sale to you? Never mind, the question is rhetorical. So, you must be talking about Defendo. Actually what you are talking about has very little to do with English so I will translate your post for you. ..."a long time ago there was (peeps) pushing all that military fighting stuff and was in one of the very first ufc. (THe) art of safta..." OK! That's all I need. SAFTA is a repackaged SCARS. Jerry Peterson's SCARS. Special Combative,Aggressive, Reactionary, System. It was taught to Navy Seals, until they clued in and realized that SCARS is just a revved up pep talk mixed with yellow belt level san soo. Lew Hicks who "reinvented" SCARS to SAFTA is a liar. He created nothing. It's still san soo. John Hess trained under Lew Hicks. John Hess fought in UFC#5 on April 7, 1995 at Independence Arena, Charlotte NC against Andy Anderson. According to you (..."He lost quick and badly.") Nice Try! You don't get to rewrite history. You get to read it and weep. Hess won the UFC fight. In Superbrawl 2, Hess lost to Vitor Belfort by knockout punches. Hess' record: 1 win, 1 loss. I'm not the least bit surprised that Hess lost to Belfort. He thought that he was learning a military fighting system from Hicks when in fact it was nothing more than yellow belt level san soo, a traditional martial art. You did not know that. Now,you do. The Seals dropped SAFTA/SCARS like a hot potato when they realized they'd been duped by a fraud like Peterson. You're basing your response on what you think you know about military fighting systems. Well, Defendo is in no way shape or form, even remotely associated with traditional martial arts. To try and down-talk Defendo or any military fighting system using the exposed sham of SCARS/SAFTA is monumentally stupid. Hess won his UFC fight because he was six foot seven inches tall and 300 pounds. Hess lost his Superbrawl match using traditional martial arts. Either of which has absolutely what to do with military combatives? Nothing.BOSSDAWG said:
CQB and military fighting
- Thread starter Philips
- Start date
ACTUAlly it's the same marketing bs they all use. Locked up and unavaible is just clever marketing and is bs. Simply put he was representing and hyping up all this elite miltary fighting arts that are a dime a dozen adds everywhere. He still lost no matter how u try to make an excuse. u said got dropped by the seals , well still was a miltary fighting program even if it was short lived. It has everything to do cqb marketing bs. Truth be told i was a Nato fighting arts member and have lived on military bases so i know bs when i see it.
(ACTUA)lly it's the same marketing bs "they" all use.) "They"! Who are "they"? I'd like to know who "they" are. "They" would probably like to know too. ( Locked up and unavailable is just clever marketing and bs) Combato was put away in 1945. Sixty-one years ago. It has never been and never will be available to the public or regular force members. That sure is clever marketing hype isn't it? That sure is high pressure sales, isn't it? TELEGRAM!! It's not for sale. How's that for marketing? ...("he was representing and hyping up all this elite military fighting arts that are a dime a dozen"... Wrong! I don't care if you're talking about Hess or Hicks (and you brought them into this) Hess/Hicks represented only what they were connected to, SAFTA. Nothing else. ( "He still lost no matter how ( u ) try to make an excuse".) YOU are the one who tried to use him in the first place to support your monosyllabic post and you couldn't even get your facts straight. You said " He lost quick and badly ". No! He didn't. He won the UFC fight that you mentioned. You tried to "cleverly" smudge history to make yourself look "smart". Clever? Smart? You? Uh,sure.BOSSDAWG said:
Listen here ,u missed alot of what has been said and u happened to miss the point. IT is funny to me how u get real pissed and so u dont care. your the one who still said he lost un superbrawl. Read the word lost !!! so listen up proffesor dumbass if u want to start something with me u got it.
Saintinistic
New member
If a capable CQB fighter lost in an event with rules limiting his CQB techniques, wouldnt that show why he lost? I wouldnt want to fight a MMA or boxer etc on his terms, fuck that, I would get beaten cause I personally am not trained that way. but without those rules (that protect our safety) its a different story.
Just a thought on why an expert can be beaten, if one fights in something that is not your forte. I personally dont know the fight you speak of.
My mate has beaten (among many victims) several high profile fighters of both BJJ and Muay Thai factions, not through fighting fire with fire, but by dropping nukes through his own style of "quick kills". works fine, but even he admits he cant fight in a ring to save himself.... "its those damn stupid unrealistc rules that say I cant do what I do"..
food for thought.
Just a thought on why an expert can be beaten, if one fights in something that is not your forte. I personally dont know the fight you speak of.
My mate has beaten (among many victims) several high profile fighters of both BJJ and Muay Thai factions, not through fighting fire with fire, but by dropping nukes through his own style of "quick kills". works fine, but even he admits he cant fight in a ring to save himself.... "its those damn stupid unrealistc rules that say I cant do what I do"..
food for thought.
(..."(U) missed a lot of what has been said and (U) happened to miss the point".) Wrong as usual. I got the point that you TRIED to make. Your intention here was to deliberately slight military combatives using (he) as a reference. I had to provide the name here, (he) because you didn't know it. You cited (his) performance in a (ufc) fight as THE example that substantiates and validates your "point" saying that "he lost quick and badly".(He) only fought ONE UFC fight and (he) won it. I mentioned that (he) lost in Superbrawl, his only other fight. That makes no difference at all as that fight did not involve military combatives either as you would suggest otherwise. Your argument is hollow. Recorded history makes your attempt in this case to discredit military combatives a dismal failure. Your reference to SAFTA is your futile effort to present military combatives in the same light. SAFTA was exposed as a traditional martial art packaged as something else. I distinguish between Superbrawl and UFC. So do the record books. The records show in perfectly clear English that you've got nothing except your unsubstantiated remarks. ("Read the word lost"!!!) Yes, let's read it from your first post on this thread. (..."and was in one of the very first (ufc)...(He) "lost" quick and badly".) So, according to you ( (He) "lost" quick and badly in one of the very first (ufc). This information was and still is incorrect. Now, here's the "point" that I made. Either way it makes no difference. Military combatives are no part of this equation and that includes Superbrawl, that's why I brought it up. As soon as you mentioned SAFTA you sabatoged your own argument. You came on this thread to present yourself as some kind of an authority. Using posts that barely mimic human speech you've presented yourself here as a common goof. What really irritates you is that everyone reading this can easily see that. Everyone of course being anyone with comprehensive reading skills higher than grade four public school. They can also see that you spelled ("proffesor") wrong, but you performed a perfect "dumbass" before you even wrote it down.
("Any system of fighting no matter what name you give it is all the same if you can look at it on a logic scale.") Logic, huh? I can assure you that there's nothing wrong with my deductive reasoning. You seem to be a little inconsistant though. Kind of like manic/depressive. You also seem to have a great deal to say. You shot yourself down with this:"U.S. MARINE now that's diversity. Lot's of info. Hone what you need for your task." Australian Armed Forces, not bad, but need work on the H2H". "New Zealand Armed forces "forget it". "They have people like "Tank Tod". "Biggest waste of good breathing space ever allowed to walk the earth". "Dude I trained with "Tank" and I found it no good at all. So did the 25 other guys in our squad. Also a lot of what he claims to teach as CQB you would find in a "Woman's Day" mag as health tips." ("Dude I trained with "Tank" and I found it no good at all.") You found it no good at all AND any system of fighting no matter what name you give it is (all the same...) Hey! You wrote it, not me. You also wrote (...U.S. is (pritty) pretty good.) You, yourself have made it very clear that some of what is being presented as combat technology by certain entities is highly desirable, whilst other supposed technology is highly suspect, perhaps even fraudulent. I tend to agree. By your own admission you claim to have trained in a not even marginally adequate CQB system with 25 other guys. Apparently you speak for the 25 other guys that aren't too impressed with it either, BUT "any system of fighting no matter what name you give it is (all the same) if you look at it on a "logic" scale?? Your "logic" escapes me. Seriously, it's probably the most irrational thing that you could say subsequent to your previous posts here. Honestly, I have better things to do than sift through the chaff here. If you had wanted to discuss anything with me, you should have thought about that before you decided that you were qualified to prescribe medication. I'm straight forward. Smart, I like. Smart-Ass, I don't like. You might want to save the PROZAC for yourself, and I would suggest a follow up of 60ml. of MAGNOLAX with 45ml. SODIUM PHOSPHATES ORAL SOLUTION as you're obviously long overdue for a good cleansing. For extra measure be sure to include a bran muffin. I'm done with this topic.
Your assumption is correct and I agree with you completely. I have never said or written anything to the contrary, here or anywhere else. It's almost refreshing to hear it from someone else besides myself. It's nice to know that somebody actually does get it. I wouldn't have even been here to read your post if I could've gotten the printer to spool earlier today. Well, the printer is fixed, I'm done printing, and I'm done with this topic. Take care. Have a nice day.Inspector said:
