WHY: I started out with nothing against SCARS. I was curious about it, ended up on a forum and was insulted and attacked because I didn’t fall in line with SCARS thinking. This led me to more closely examine SCARS. I normally don’t like to point out flaws in other systems because when you are looking you can find flaws in any system. No system is perfect. However, due to the close-mindedness of members of the SCARS forum I ended up putting together the list of questions. Also, Peterson’s ads and claims deserve a response.
MY OPINION OF SCARS: My personal feeling of SCARS is that it’s a paradox. In some ways it’s a decent transition system from traditional arts to self defense training and in other ways it’s a system that will give you false confidence and lead to your death in real combat. On the positive side it does touch on the offensive mindset, it does an excellent job at teaching students to dominate an encounter, it is one of the better systems at teaching commonality of techniques (using a single technique for multiple situations), it covers most areas of combat, it focuses purely on self defense (no art) and it has some nice combinations. The downsides of SCARS are its lack of awareness and de-escalation techniques (i.e. the mental side of combat), it’s a reactionary system and it’s initial move will usually cost you the encounter (and maybe your life), its too focused on taking the enemy to the ground, its reliance on the enemy moving in pre-set patterns to your strikes, the slow use of wind-up strikes, and its over use of locks and throws. A typical SCARS technique has 4-6 movements. The first movement is usually a circular block (er, strike). By the time you can raise your arm from your side, bring it around and down you will hit by any type of direct strike. Against practiced knife fighter you will end up dead. The circular block is always reactionary. In all of the techniques the SCARS fighter waits for the attacker to go first. I’ll repeat this again and again. Action is faster then reaction. If someone is in motion it is doubtful that you will be able to deflect the strike, especially when you are using a circular movement (a straight line is faster then a circle). The only times this will work is against a very telegraphic and/or slow strike. Rarely will the SCARS fighter get to his other movements to dominate the encounter. If the SCARS fighter gets past the first movement the next 3-4 techniques are usually very powerful and flow well together. The SCARS fighter is dangerous during this point of the fight. However, SCARS likes to finish up with a lock, throw or some other takedown. I believe its better just to strike, strike, and strike till the enemy drops.
MY BACKGROUND: Like many people, I started in a martial arts school. After years of training I decided to focus strictly on self-defense so I left the school and started to study military combatives and street fighting based styles. I have done this be training with instructors in person, attending seminars, watching videos, reading books, email, forums and personal training.
Ok, now the questions. I’ll start with some general questions about Peterson’s background, training methods, and principles. Then I will go into specific questions from SCARS advertising, website, manuals, and videos. If anyone has any additional questions feel free to number them and add them to the list. Again, I ask that we keep this clean and open.
1) Let’s start with the name. SCARS stands for "Special Combat Aggressive Reactionary System". I want to question the word "Reactionary" that is built into the systems name. Why the emphasis on Reaction for a supposedly Offensive minded system? The reason can easily be devised from seeing SCARS techniques ... they are reactionary. The SCARS fighter reacts to the enemy's attack with a circular blocking (er, striking) motion and then tries to go on the offensive. Of course, by then it may be too late.
2) Why does it take Peterson 28 tapes to present SCARS? If SCARS were so flexible and unstructured I would think that Peterson could present the required information in 5-10 tapes at the most.
3) It has been stated that SCARS is the most complete system available. Does this mean that there will not be any new SCARS material? If SCARS is complete as of today then there should be no reason for any new material (tapes, manuals, etc) to be created correct? Or is 28 tapes not enough to cover all of the current SCARS material (see the point on tapes above)?
4) Why are SCARS training and tapes so expensive especially since each tape only shows a few techniques since Peterson repeats each on 6-10 times? Is SCARS only for the rich? Does Peterson understand technology and that VCRs have a rewind button?
5) Peterson did not use SCARS in Vietnam. He had not even learned San Soo at that point. If Peterson learned so much about combat in Vietnam then why did he spend years studying San Soo?
6) Why does Peterson make no mention of his San Soo background or his previous instructor Jimmy Woo in is his books, videos or website? Even if Peterson is teaching something completely different he should have respect for his own background.
7) Since Peterson background originated from San Soo what was the revelation he had to form SCARS? What was the spark?
8) Why doesn’t Peterson maintain any relations with other instructors? Is there no one that he respects in the military or personal combat field?
9) When SCARS folks are asked about Peterson's real world experience the only scenario they all seem to site is his encounter in tunnel in Vietnam. Ok, let's assume that his Vietnam experiences taught Peterson the holy grail of reality combat. What did he do after the war? He joined a San Soo school and spent years obtaining a black belt. To invest that much time he must have believed in San Soo. So according to Peterson San Soo must be the ultimate system, correct?
10) Peterson states that SCARS is based on proven scientific principles. Where did Peterson study physics and math? If these are common sense principles then why do you think this knowledge is hidden from everyone?
11) Why does SCARS hide behind math? Just because something is scientific doesn't mean that it’s being applied correctly. Here is a basic example; let’s say someone is drowning in the water. I throw him a life vest. He decides to use the push principle to push it away instead of a pull principle and he promptly drowns. In Ed Parker’s Infinite Insight books he lists the principles for each technique. Some techniques have over 50 scientific principles. However, the problem is that some of the principles are not relevant or applied at the correct time. So either Kenpo is better then SCARS because it’s more scientific or science isn’t the measurement of a good system, which is it?
12) One of the most common questions ... why is SCARS so heavy on Autokinetics? It is said that a SCARS student can react to any situation but your primary drill is moving a medium speed back and forth with one person attacking and the other person responding in set patterns. This doesn't seem very spontaneous to me. If you always get the same reaction when you "hit" someone then you will expect it in the street and you won't always get it.
13) One of the major parts of SCARS training is learning the Autokinetics, how to react to a strike. Their primary drill is for training partners to take turns at medium speed. One person striking and the other reacting. There is even an entire tape on this. It sounds like they get equal time training to strike as they do training to react to the strikes. Every time someone is training to fight someone is training how to exactly react. Isn't there a chance that all of this strike-reaction training would result in a person reacting like that in a real fight when they are hit because of all their training? If they always train to react a certain way when hit in the ribs won't they be conditioned to do this on the streets? This gets back to the point that both striking and reactions are generally unique and perhaps random on the street.
14) I have in my hands an article by Bob Kasper in March 2002 edition of Tactical Knives that states … “They hit him with an axe handle, and he got back up to fight. They stabbed they victim once in the chest and twice in the stomach, slashed his forehead and then his throat twice, once nearly ear-to-ear. They tried to shoot him 3 times but missed.” Does this some like someone who would react in a predetermined manner? This is what happens on the street. What is SCARS view on this example? Why does SCARS teach strikes that are totally dependant on a person’s central nervous system shutting down so that they can’t respond?
15) When SCARS students tried to defend (yes, defend) Peterson's poor techniques displayed on Morpheus that used the excuse of that SCARS has infinite techniques and that he is just showing one possibility not necessarily the best. This is major cop-out. If a technique is impractical or poor then why show it at all? He must have some belief in it to record it on video. From now on we can use that excuse for every issue you have with any other style.
16) Did SCARS start out being marketed by TRS? This might explain the hyped marketing material.
17) Can’t the SCARS system stand on its own? Why does it need all of the hyped marketing to get attention?
18) Is there any documentation of Peterson's struggle against 5 enemies in a tunnel in Vietnam? I know others that I fought valiantly in wars but this in of itself doesn’t make one a combat expert. People do what they need to do to survive. Many times they can even remember what they did.
19) No disrespect to SEALS but isn't their primary tools their superior weapons and training not their hands (i.e. unarmed combat)? Haven’t a number of JKD and Kung Fu instructors also trained SEALS?
20) Assuming that SCARS is head-and-shoulders above any other system then I'm surprised that there hasn't been any trained SEAL's selling training. The only SEAL I know that has come to national recognition is Frank Cucci and he is a JKD/Filipino Arts guy. Shouldn't he know about SCARS since he was a SEAL?
21) Has SCARS been taught to SEALS beyond the BUD training?
22) Is SCARS the exclusive system taught to Navy SEALS? If so, why not? Haven't the SEALS also used JKD and other systems?
23) I was looking through a Paladin Press catalogue and there was a book titled US Navy SEALS Combat Manual. I was curious as to whether we could find SCARS techniques in this book? If not, then why not is SCARS is the exclusive SEAL training method? If so, they why since SCARS is top secret?
24) Why is certain SCARS information classified? Who is classifying it and why do parts of it become unclassified?
25) When asked why SCARS was not incorporated by all of the US Military SCARS supporters typically reply something like “the US government is stupid, doesn’t understand HTH training, is stuck in their ways and too slow to change.” However, the biggest selling point of SCARS is that is used to promote SCARS is that it was once used by SEALS (albeit only in BUDS training). Doesn’t this seem like a contradiction?
26) What is the SCARS view on the Peterson vs Hicks court case? For those unfamiliar with this, Hicks is a former Navy Seal that helped Peterson introduce his training to SEALS. Hicks later started his own system called SAFTA. Peterson sued for copyright infringement on the techniques. Hicks won the case and apparently, Hicks still has the right to produce his SAFTA tapes. Does this mean that it was proved that Peterson's information was common knowledge (to San Soo-ists) and not considered proprietary?
27) If SCARS is the best system out there why is it not taking over the world? Why isn't every military branch and police agency required to learn this?
28) If SCARS is perfect and complete then why do some many (dare I say, most) of the students that have attended the SCARS camps also include other systems in their training? They merely list SCARS as one of the "styles" that they have studied. This can be verified by simply searching the internet.
29) What proof is there that SCARS is superior to other martial arts? If you use the argument that its worked in the street I could counter that I know Tae Kwon Do and Grappling stylists that have survived street and knife encounters. If you use the argument that its based on science then I could argue that Kenpo is also perfect then because Ed Parker also claimed that his system was based on science (see earlier question).
30) Why do many SCARS students believe that you have to agree with a system 100%? Only a mindless robot would agree with 100% of what someone has developed. That is why we are unique individuals not brainwashed robots. The whole reason why I posted those quotes is to show that others can easily pick apart SCARS (or just about any system) if you just focus on the negative. Does this invalidate SCARS? No. Every style has a way of presenting its info but there is no style that everyone is going to agree with everything on.
31) Why did Tim Larkin leave the SCARS fold to start his own system? Why did Peterson try to down play Larkin’s training?
32) What happened to the SCARS headquarters in Phoenix? I heard it closed. If so, why?
33) Why does SCARS employ primarily circular and elongated movements instead of more direct linear strikes? The answer I usually get is “to generate power”. However there are types of linear attacks that can generate power like hammer fists and palm down chops (axe hand). I’m not talking about jabs or straight blasts.
34) SCARS preaches that the over reliance on speed can lead to weak strikes (see the Speedman videos). I can agree with that. However, on the opposite end of the spectrum an over reliance on power can lead to slow strikes. Would you agree that the best strikes have the proper balance of speed and power? Peterson relies heavily on chamber or cocking his strikes and blocks. What do you see as the proper balance and how does SCARS achieve that?
35) Let’s deal with the circular, windmill movements of SCARS directly. SCARS folks are very offended by having those movements called blocks. They prefer to call them strikes. Ok, what is the primary purpose of the movement? The answer is to block or redirect the attack. If that isn’t the case then why doesn’t SCARS fighters strike the enemy’s arm when its not being used to attack? The answer is that he wouldn’t. He does so when he wants to block it. Yes, the SCARS fighter is striking it but lets not get hung up in syntax. Many, many systems attack the striking limb. I agree that some systems use a soft strike or strike too high (like the bicep). Why not attack with an axe hand instead of the forearm? Using the forearm gives the enemy another 6 inches of penetration before you impact. Why use a large circular motion when you can just initiate the strike from where ever you hand is currently?
36) SCARS is big on the "no fear" motto. Isn’t fear a natural safety mechanism that all people have? What principles/training methods SCARS uses to take joe-businessman off the street and remove his fear and anxiety of a fight or a knife attack? Also, how do you respond to people like noted author Gavin DeBecker who wrote the Gift of Fear, that feel that fear is a natural protective instinct that can be funneled into a positive tool?
37) How does SCARS consider itself having an offensive mindset when its initial movement against strikes is to parry? SCARS should be considered defensive by SCARS own standards according to the Non-Lethal Combat SCARS tapes.
38) Why doesn’t an “offensive” system like SCARS teach any type of attack sequences or preemptive strikes? Why is this so? Note that I don’t consider the windmill block (er, I mean strike) an actual strike. It’s a reaction to what someone else is doing. This theme will come up often in the questioning.
39) Let's say a SCARS fighter and a Combatives fighter are facing each other about 3 feet apart. The SCARS fighter assumes his non-stance with his hands down at his side. The Combatives fighter assumes one of any of the common passive stances ... hands open and out in front in a "calming" motion or hands resting lightly at solar plex level with fingers on each hand touching forming a triangle or one hand on chin the other resting on the first's elbow (jack benny stance) or arms crossed with hands open lightly resting on the other arm. [question A] Ok, which fighter is in a most defensive posture? The answer is the SCARS fighter. The Combatives fighter has moved his hands into an offensive position without seeming aggressive. He can now launch a surprise attack. The "stance" also offers defensive benefits but they are secondary. The SCARS fighter living up to the "R" in his style's name is waiting to react. The Combatives fighter strikes first. [question B] Which fighter is using the offensive mindset? Answer is the Combative's fighter. The Combatives fighter steps forward, drops body mass, pushes off his now rear right foot and from the current location of his hand strikes forward with an left edge-of-hand blow to the throat (for bridge of nose or neck for less lethal). The SCARS fighter begins his windmill block (er, strike). [question C] Which fighter is going to land the better attack? The answer is the Combatives fighter. [question D] Which is faster a circular motion or a direct line (that still has power)? Answer - direct. The Combatives fighter continues to press the assault. He moves his left hand to jam the SCARS fighter's right upper arm, which is now totally outside of him. He can wrap the arm, jam the shoulder, strike down on the bicep or grab the bicep. However, the motion of the left hand is not as important as the right hand strike that is coming at the same time. The left hand motion helps rotate the body to the left to generate torque for the right hand strike. The right hand strike can be an upward palm strike to the chin, a yoke strike to the throat or a face smash. The SCARS fighter is now in a world of pain. The Combatives fighter continues with a right knee to the groin. The strike is not retracted but instead he continues to move forward. The Combatives fighter can follow up with repeated face strikes and knees. [question - E] Who wins? Answer - not the reactionary, circular, defensive movements of the SCARS fighter. This must be what the San Soo folks call the watered down aspect of SCARS.
40) What techniques or principles are in SCARS that you can't find in any other system? Note that using different terminology doesn't make the principle different.
41) Probably the most important self-protection technique is awareness. I haven’t heard anything from SCARS on awareness. What type of drills, tools or techniques does SCARS employ to improve awareness?
42) Does SCARS training incorporate de-escalation techniques for aiding in avoiding conflict? If so, please describe.
43) Please describe in moderate detail the SCARS training drills that are taught at SCARS. Specifically, I would like to know if SCARS uses situational and environment training methods?
44) Why don’t the training partners in SCARS techniques ever offer any type of resistance? They react like pre-programmed robots.
45) Does Peterson believe, like many SCARS students, that traditional martial artists have wasted their time? They should realize that people take up martial arts for more reasons then just self defense. They do it for exercise, balance, flexibility, competition, discipline, sportsmanship, respect, friendship, family activity, challenge, stress relief, etc. There are many, many positive aspects of martial arts training, correct?
46) Would it be fair to say that for a given combat situation there could be more then 1 correct response? If so, isn't then possible that SCARS could have a valid technique as well as another style?
47) In many of the techniques (against punches and grabs) the tapes so the reaction being the windmill, two-hand circular block (er, I mean strike). This seems to draw the attacker forward in hopes of the SCARS fighter to then set up his follow-up strike. I believe this would work fine against a poor attacker. If the attacker is trying a single telegraphed, knockout blow then that could work. But if the attacker is immediately following up with a second strike from the other arm isn't the SCARS practitioner going to be defenseless? His arms are going to be outside his centerline and he is going to have to move against his own momentum to react whereas the attacker has forward momentum thanks to the windmill block and has a wide open angle to strike through.
48) SCARS uses a simple stance of having your arms down at your side. I understand the idea of not giving away your training or escalating the situation with a “fighting stance” but doesn't the SCARS stance slow reaction time? Wouldn't it be better to have some type of stance that gives the appearance of being passive but keeps your weapons (hands) in striking range. Examples would be a passive stance with your arms up in between you and the attacker, relaxed with the hands open. Or a Jack Benny stance with one hand resting on your chin and your other hand resting on your elbow. Both of these stances protect the centerline while offering easy access to surprise strikes but without appearing aggressive. Does SCARS have any stances?
49) What is your response to the statement that SCARS is water-down San Soo or the same as San Soo? What makes SCARS different? Note that I have no opinion here since I haven't had exposure to San Soo but I have heard this statement made.
50) When asked about a principle a SCARS student stated … "Yes, I am afraid it's that complex, otherwise I wouldn't have referred you to all those posts. The SCARS is a gestalt system, meaning that it is very difficult to break the system to the base components of its individual parts." So now one of the easiest to learn systems is "complex"? Are SCARS’ principles too complicated to be expressed easily? This sounds very dangerous and difficult to apply in the street. Even complex principles can be broken down to its base components and be explained.
51) Photos of SCARS have been presented and they all have been torn apart. Please describe some of the more "perfect" SCARS techniques and provide photos since SCARS supporters seem to think this is adequate to judge other systems. I would recommend the following situations: 1) Frontal Gun Threat to Chest, 2) Knife Attack, 3) On your back against a standing enemy.
52) I've heard that SCARS teaches different breathing sounds per type of strike. I would agree that using certain sounds might contract the muscles in a certain way as to improve power in a strike. However, I would believe that the resultant benefit would be very, very minor and not worth the effort. People have their own natural sounds that they used for 10, 20, 30 years. It would take a lot of training to change that for a small benefit. I can see most people getting confused by their own breathing. I would place the breathing in a category with Kata ... the time would be better spent working on attack combinations.
53) I hope SCARS students realize that Peterson isn’t the only person to find flaws in other systems, right? Every system (including SCARS) has weakness or at least responses to certain situations that other systems may deal with better. I just wanted you to realize that some of the things that Peterson says others have already known for a while. We just don’t just don’t see how it benefits our training to tear down others.
54) In a SCARS ad Peterson states "One 'wanna-be-expert' even says that in a knife fight you will get seriously hurt ... What bullsh*t. It's plain ignorance". Does Peterson teach that you will never get cut in a knife fight?
55) In a SCARS ad Peterson states "An amazing demonstration of why my system works 100% of the time!". 100%? Wow. He is guaranteeing it will work all the time. SCARS fighters believe the system is perfect and only a mistake by the practitioner will cause it to fail. Well, doesn't that mean that it is not 100%. If its 100% then you would not be able to make a mistake. Any system works well if the user doesn't make a mistake.
56) In a SCARS ad Peterson states "I guarantee no one will ever be able to defeat you ... where any type of weapon is involved. If they do, I'll immediately refund your money." A fairly safe bet isn't it. When the technique fails the person stands a high chance of being dead and therefore unable to collect.
57) In a SCARS ad Peterson states "In effect, it [HCS] pre-qualifies you for the advanced weapon techniques." Later in the ad he states when talking about other instructors "by the way, there are no advanced techniques". Humm .. didn't he just contradict himself?
58) In a SCARS ad Peterson states "[SCARS] is quickly and easily learned yet permanently retained, and is totally undefeatable and 100% reproducible by any person, any where and any time". Wow! Again, amazing. Can you elaborate? Define "quickly". Define "any person". Does that include an 80 year old grandma?
59) On the SCARS.COM website there is a clip of Peterson defending against what I believe is a grab attempt. During the sequence he lifts up his knee close to his chest to deliver a kick. Is this is a viable kick for the street? A simple jamming maneuver by the other person puts Peterson on his back.
60) On the SCARS.COM website there is a clip of a SCARS person defending against a tackle. The SCARS fighter just stands there as the person closes from 6-7 feet away. Why doesn’t he move? Why does the SCARS fighter always seem to wait for the attacker to go first?
61) On the SCARS.COM website Peterson began advertising an anti-terrorist course right after the 9/11 tragedy. Is anyone else offended that Peterson is now trying to cash in on the 9/11 tragedies?
62) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS by Herb Borkland on page 141 Blake shows a kick to the chin from the side. Would you agree that if Larkin just turned or moved forward Blake would on his back? Would Peterson recommend this technique to soldiers carrying packs and weapons on their back?
63) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS Borkland says that Peterson is also known as “The Deadliest Man Alive”. Who gave him this title? Does Peterson actually support this kind of nonsense?
64) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS Peterson is quoted as saying “SCARS is literally faster then any other kind of fighting”. Can someone show me the proof of this? I believe in the course of this questioning that I’ve proven that one of the major flaws of SCARS is its slowness due to circular movements and chambered strikes. How is SCARS faster then other styles?
65) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS Borkland states that Peterson has 20 plus years of research on Autokinetics. Where is the research? Did Peterson keep documentation? I’ve kept documentation of all my research.
66) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS Borkland compares a person’s reaction to a punch to reacting to pulling your fingers out of a fire. Does SCARS support this statement? Why? What about the adrenaline rush factor, the fact that someone is aware they are going to be hit and someone is fighting for their lives. This may be the source of the failings of SCARS if they believe an instinctive surprise reaction is the same as how everyone will act in combat.
67) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS on page 146 Mr Borkland states that “Since it is proprietary information it’s difficult to site examples of SCARS”. Then what is the purpose of the article? I can tell you its pure marketing. It certainly isn’t journalism. Most of the article is simple blind praise of SCARS without any facts or examples and it’s loaded with pure opinion.
68) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS on page 146 Borkland states that most SCARS lessons contain a throw. Why? Why not apply the SCARS principle of “dominate” and just strike until the enemy drops? This is faster, easier, safer and more efficient.
69) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS on page 146-147 Borkland says that one student at SCARS camp thought he broke a rib. Peterson then slapped his flanks and told him “if your ribs were broke you’d be on the floor by now.” Geeze. First, if I were the student my autokinetic reaction would be to axe hand Peterson to the throat for that type of foolishness. If my ribs were broken I would sue. What is the point of this? To show that Peterson is a tough guy with injured students? To prove that students are brainwashed to put up with whatever Peterson does?
70) In the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS on page 147 Borkland states that 30 students could not pin Peterson against the wall. How did Peterson accomplish this? How could you simple just not overwhelm him take him to the ground, beat him unconscious and then pin him to the wall? This is pure martial arts magic type of stuff or 30 people that are incompetent even after SCARS training.
71) In regards to the May 1999 Black Belt article on SCARS what is Mr Borklands relationship with Peterson? Was there any previous agreement between the two men? Did Peterson have any input into the article?
72) The following few questions are based on clips that were shown here … http://briefcase.yahoo.com/muaythaiadept until the folks on the SCARS forum complained. It seems like they didn’t want a handful of SCARS techniques shown to the public. The techniques can still be found on the Morpheus website under SCARS. By the time the technique gets to Clip 5 Peterson has his enemy down. He reaches down and strains to lift the person. Why grab a downed enemy?
73) On the Clip “Some More San Soo … SCARS”. The attacker punches and then freezes so that Peterson has time to get entirely behind him with the attacker continuing to face forward. Again I ask, does this seem like a realistic attack and/or a realistic technique?
74) On the Inner Circle Lesson 01.21 the 2nd picture shows Peterson performing a chop to the throat. A few questions … why is the attacker so over extended? I have never seen anyone punch that way. Why is his secondary hand down by his belt? I would think that he would be hitting Peterson with a hook? Also, if you look at the picture you can see that the punch penetrated past Peterson so except for the fact that the punch is off to the side Peterson would have been hit since he waited to react to the attacker.
75) The last text on Inner Circle Lesson 01.21 says “the [SCARS] fighter watches the attacker’s reactions to see if any further action is necessary on his part.” This doesn’t seem very offensive minded does it? Wouldn’t you agree that the fighter needs to control the situation not react to the other person? Based on the events that had transpired the fighter should either be immediately closing in to continue the attack or leave the scene. Are you going to wait for him to pull out a gun?
76) On the Inner Circle Lesson 01.22 (Clip 2) the attacker again delivers an over extended strike and is in no position to follow up. Does SCARS only practice reactions to these types of strikes? They hardly seem realistic.
77) On the Inner Circle Lesson 01.22 (Clip 2) it looks like the attacker is attempting to throw a straight punch and Peterson is windmilling from the outside over his arm to perform an outward deflection (er, strike) to the arm and sweep it to the outside. Do you really think this movement is going to be faster then the punch?
78) On the Inner Circle Lesson 01.22 (Clip 2) after punching the attacker freezes with his punching arm by Peterson’s hip and his other arm down by his side. Peterson then proceeds to reach around his back and hook his other arm. Is Peterson’s initial deflection (er, strike) supposed to give the attacker a brain cramp? Why doesn’t he through a hook punch with his other arm or another typical reaction may just be to close and grapple.
79) On the Inner Circle Lesson 01.22 (Clip 2) Peterson finished by lifting the attackers leg and moving him across his body to drop him. It looks like Peterson is really straining and he puts himself off balance. What is the purpose of this maneuver? Why not choke out the enemy from behind, continue striking him, crush his trachea or drop him down and stomp his head?
80) In the HCS Manual (p 1) Peterson provides a list of safety gear required to train … eye protection, full head gear, knee braces, mouth piece, groin cup, chest protection, forearm and shin pads. Wow, this is a lot of padding for such a reality-based system. Is it standard to wear all that? It almost sounds like sparring gear.
81) In the HCS Manual (p 7) Peterson states “This system will use secondary aggressive offensive movements …”. Is this another way of saying you will attack 2nd?
82) In the HCS Manual (p 12) Peterson states “These autonomic reactions will occur in each and every human being. It is consistent and reproducible 100% of the time”. Humm … have you ever heard of situations where people survived multiple stabs or gun shots, or people continuing to play sports with serious injuries. Even if this only happens 1% of the time it still proves Peterson wrong. Of course, under adrenaline this happens much more often, right?
83) In the HCS Manual (p 12) Peterson states “Notice when you perform the same test of lightly poking someone in the ribs, that in addition to turning, they will wince, or bend and curl into the pain”. Really, lightly poking, eh? I tried this against a 3 year old, a 20 year old, a 30 year old woman and a 50 year old man. None of them seemed to wince. Most just slapped my hand away. In the fight that would be the equivalent of them punching me in the face while I waited for an autokinetic reaction from them.
84) In the HCS Manual (p 24) Peterson states “The HCS has analyzed EVERY known organized system of fighting from boxing to the more complex styles of martial arts”. Here is another example of where definitive terms come back to bite. “Every” system? Somehow I doubt that. What is the purpose of even making such a ridiculous claim? I thought SCARS had nothing in common with martial arts.
85) In the HCS Manual (p 35) Peterson states “Never kick higher then your own chin”. Geeze, your own chin? How is that a combat kick? Sounds more like a martial art kick.
86) In the HCS Manual (p 41) Peterson states “… the attacker will not try to counter the [SCARS] fighter at any time”. Can you explain to me how this is at all realistic? It almost sounds like you are doing a kata/form.
87) The following questions refer to the original 4 HCS Tapes by Peterson. I believe (but not positive) that these tapes became the 2 Non-Lethal Combat tapes so the technique numbers can be off. On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat Technique 2 Peterson steps back, bends over and performs a palm strike to the groin. Wouldn’t this maneuver lose power and potential put the attacker on top of you?
88) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat Technique 3 when performing an upper cut to the chin Peterson winds up so far his arm is horizontal behind up. Wouldn’t this technique take precious seconds to execute and be countered before it could be completed?
89) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat Technique 6 in a counter against a one hand grab Peterson lowers both of his hands to engage the enemy’s hand. Doesn’t this leave Peterson wide open for a strike with the other hand?
90) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat Technique 11 when the partner is performing a side headlock his grip is very loose and his hands are down by his groin. Not very realistic and that lack of realism lets this technique work. Peterson pulls his head out by simply twisting his chin inward. This may work against a loose grip or a weakened enemy but do you think it would work against a strong hold? At a minimum you should “T” your body to the attacker.
91) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat Technique 13 Peterson counters a rear choke with a chop to the groin. The attacker jumps of the ground and completely releases his grip. Is this an overly dramatic reaction? Peterson then takes the attacker down and again steps over and straddles a downed enemy. Isn’t this a potentially dangerous position? I guess you could say that the attacker has been injured but that would be making an assumption.
92) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat Technique 16 against a side hand grab Peterson executes a wrist lock throw. If someone has their hands embedded into your hair are you going to be able to execute a wrist lock? Peterson shows a better technique earlier in the tape when he goes with the pull and attacks the enemy. Why not just stick with that technique?
93) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat during the demo of Strike Control Peterson is moving at a decent speed but his training partner is moving quite slow. Does these techniques require a slow moving and very telegraphic enemy? I think so and this sequence demonstrates that fact very clearly. The attacker has to move slowly for Peterson to be able to counter with his circular movement.
94) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat tapes I was surprised at the use of wrist and arm locks. Wouldn’t it be more offensive to just strike the attacker? I believe direct attacks are a better answer then locks.
95) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat tapes against grabs involved dealing with the grabbing hand. The grabbing hand is not the threat. This seems more of a fear reaction (“get this hand off me”) rather then an offensive one. Why not just strike the attacker? The grabbing hand is not the threat.
96) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat tapes Peterson shows 2 students in some type of partial stop-action mode doing "advanced" techniques. First, I thought Peterson said that there are no advanced techniques. Which is true? Secondly, what is the point of this section except pure marketing?
97) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat tapes I noticed in the "advanced" section the students were employing take down maneuvers that also put them on the ground. Why? Isn't it better (in most cases) to perform Stand-up striking instead of engaging in ground combat?
98) On the original HCS Non-Lethal Combat tapes almost every technique displayed ended with some type of take down. Why? Isn't it better (in most cases) to perform Stand-up striking instead of grappling someone to the ground.
99) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 1 Peterson shows a technique (1A-E) where he is utilizing a weapon, however in a 5-6 step technique he only uses the knife (or stick) 1 or 2 times to strike. I understand that he is trying to demonstrate the commonality of techniques (using one sequence for multiple situations) but only using a knife 1 or 2 times when you have it in hand is very inefficient.
100) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 1 Peterson shows a technique against a knife wielding enemy he goes to a ground and flips the enemy. This seems very dangerous and unnecessary.
101) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 1 Peterson shows a technique where he steps over a downed enemy. Why? Why run the risk of him tripping or grabbing you? Isn’t it more effective to leave or stomp him.
102) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 1 Peterson states that he has performed one of the knife techniques in real life. When? Was it during Vietnam? If so, why did he never mention it during his years of San Soo training. If it was on the streets then please tell us the date and city so we can see a copy of the police report.
103) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 1 Peterson uses opposite site circular blocks (er, strikes) to deflect the weapon. Wouldn’t someone stabbing be faster then a circular block (action vs reaction).
104) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2, Technique 2 Peterson defends against a knife stab by standing stationary and performing a right upward circular block (er, strike). I believe there is a reason why Peterson requires all training to be done in medium speed … because if it were done at full speed his techniques would fall apart.
105) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2 during the demonstration of Body Rotation from a hands-up position Blake actually stabs at an angle multiple times that intentionally misses Peterson. In other words, Blake is being a generous and unrealistic training partner. Blake’s stab also penetrates past Peterson before he can deflect the strike with his circular block (er, strike).
106) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2, Technique 4 Peterson shows a technique where he hooks the arm then sits back and rolls on his back to throw the enemy. Why, oh, why do this on the street? What is the scientific reason for putting yourself on your back during a lethal encounter?
107) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2, Technique 5 Peterson shows a punch to the face on a downed enemy. I thought SCARS only punched to soft body targets. Is the face a soft target?
108) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2, Technique 6A Peterson shows a counter where he ducks under a punch an then hooks the back of his neck and (again) sits down and rolls on his back to throw enemy. Full ducking will rarely work except against the most telegraphed strikes. Is SCARS designed to deal with only the most untrained fighters? Again, why go to your back? He must think this is a solid technique since he does this more then once.
109) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2, Technique 7 Peterson moves directly into the power zone of the stick. Peterson does use his stick to hit Blake in the forearm but that didn’t stop Peterson from getting hit. You can see Blake having to pull his strike to avoid hurting Peterson. Would you rather get hit in the bicep or the side of the head? Advantage – street fighter.
110) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 2, Technique 9 the attacker does a full swing of a stick to Peterson’s head. Peterson’s initial counter is a “flick” (his words) of his stick to the enemy’s bicep. Wouldn’t the initial attack have enough power to muscle through a flick?
111) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Peterson starts with a demo of a downward strike to the radial. He employs bad form in this technique. Is it the preferred method of SCARS to have all of the fingers spread? I can understand separating the thumb.
112) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Technique 1 Peterson shows a counter to a downward stab. He performs a circular block (er, strike) with his body squared to the enemy. He then hooks the arm and grabs the wrist. He finishes by going to the ground with his enemy. First, if action is faster then reaction, wouldn’t Peterson be dead from the initial stab? How is he going to complete his first movement? Secondly, does he really think in the heat of battle he will be able to grab the wrist of someone who is not static? Lastly, again, why go to the ground?
113) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Technique 2 Peterson starts the technique of with a gouge to the eyes and then gets control of the arm. So far so good, however, then he drops to the ground right in front of his enemy to throw him. Why, when you have you enemy blinded and have control of him would you jump to the ground?
114) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Technique 3 when Blake is stabbing with the knife he holds it so it points to the side at about 45 degrees. When he stabs he misses Peterson because of the angle of his knife. If he held the knife straight you can tell he would of beat Peterson’s block (er, strike). Blake is one of the senior instructors. Is this how he is taught to fight with a knife? Oh, and again Peterson goes to the ground to throw his enemy.
115) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Technique 4 after slicing the enemy’s Achilles tendon to and taking him down Peterson still steps over his enemy and straddles him. Isn’t the benefit of cutting the tendon the fact that the enemy’s cannot use it to run. Why not leave the area at that time?
116) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Technique 5 Peterson deflects the knife attack, grabs the enemy’s wrist and then drops to the ground to throw the enemy. Again, it is doubtful that you will be able to grab a non-static knife hand. Peterson finally gives a reason for constantly going to the ground … “you might slip on a rock”. So, if you are slipping you will be able fall in such a way as to execute one of these throws? This seems like an unlikely reason. There is no reason to be “afraid” of the ground but standing is preferable to being on the ground especially against a weapon using enemy. Wouldn’t you agree? On the ground its harder to flee, your movement is more restricted, you are in danger from other enemy’s and the power in many strikes is restricted.
117) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Technique 8 Peterson defines against a rear knife threat that his hooked around his neck by grabbing the wrist and upper arm, bending over and throwing the enemy over him. What if the attacker was crouching into a solid base or pulling Peterson back? When the enemy is falling over the top wouldn’t it be possible that his weight and momentum might slide your grip and he could slice your neck? Isn’t there a decent chance that you could get forced into a grappling situation if the throw doesn’t go perfectly?
118) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3, Peterson described SCARS as a "perfect system". I quote “Thank God the system is perfect.” What makes SCARS perfect and what makes other systems not perfect? What are the criteria for a perfect combat system?
119) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3 during the demo on the Personal Attack Training Peterson performs some stick attack strikes. During his swings he brings the weapon back behind him … very telegraphic. Isn’t this type of movement that allows for the SCARS defense against the stick in the first place?
120) On the Edged and Impact Weapons Tape 3 Peterson says “If a person has a favorite technique they have a weak system.” What does he mean by this? SCARS does an admirable job at teaching a single technique against multiple different kinds of attacks? Isn’t this in a sense a “favorite” technique? I understand not relying on 1 technique but according to SCARS principles of people reacting in standard ways couldn’t you have a technique that works well for you? This seems like another example of Peterson saying one thing and then doing another.
121) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson shows the proper alignment for a punch. He shows the knuckles raises about the bones in the forearm at a 45 degree angle. He mentions the strength of a triangle but this doesn’t apply. A triangle has 3 sides not 2 (forearm and back of hand). Wouldn’t the bones of the forearm be more supportive if they were directly lined up with the knuckles?
122) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson displays about 10 different kinds of closed-fist punches and 5 different poke variations. Why the need for all of these different structures to remember? Seems kind of complicated and convoluted. By the way I do very much like the Personal Attack Trainer (PAT) that Peterson developed.
123) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Larkin demonstrates a windmill block (down circle strike). The movement starts with the hand down by the groin, circles to the outside of his body, then all the way up and over his head before coming down. Do you believe this can be delivered faster then the enemy’s first strike and how is it useful after the first punch when the range closes?
124) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson demonstrates an inverted knee to the outside. He raises his right knee and strike to a target to his right. This doesn’t seem very efficient or powerful. Why not turn right and use your left knee to strike with body torque?
125) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson shows a back fist strike to the temple to a target behind him? Wouldn’t it be better to use an axe hand (palm down) strike?
126) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson shows a front kick and says that he never teaches the use of the tip of the toes to strike. In general I can agree with that but since Peterson teaches military units why wouldn’t they use the tip of their boots?
127) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Larkin shows a straight leg kick to the throat. Larkin is standing a few feet away from his target, which is on his right. He raises his right leg straight up in front of the target and hooks it into the neck. First off, the target would almost have to be unconscious to not see that coming and block or grab the leg sending Larkin on his rear. Second, why kick that high? Third, why not step forward and axe hand to the throat?
128) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson shows a crescent/wheeling kick to the chest. Couldn’t you generate more power by turning into the enemy and using a more direct kick or hand strike? Doesn’t Peterson run a high risk of slipping if he was in an unstable environment like on mud or snow, or what about if he was in combat gear? Why include this type of kick?
129) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Blake is demonstrated a striking sequence. He starts the windup for a right punch from the back of his left hip. Isn’t this extremely telegraphic and slow? Even if the SCARS fighter could land this first punch he better get the Autokinetic reaction that he wants or he will not be able to connect with the next punch which is just was telegraphic.
130) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape they demo strikes using a combat stick. He seems to be disregarding his own principle in dominating the encounter. He continuously uses the stick with one hand and draws it all the way behind him to begin his strike. Couldn’t you dominate more with a two handed grip? Why spend so much time winding up strikes when you have a dangerous weapon that will increase your impact?
131) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape they demo strikes using a knife. Again, they wind up the knife slashes from behind their back. Does SCARS use more slashes then thrust? Why wind up the strikes?
132) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson states that “it’s complicated to learn how to walk around a [downed] human being and hit targets”. Complicated? Then why do it? Would you agree that stomping is simply? Why not just stomp on some vitals and leave?
133) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson states that you can train Autokinetic reactions on the PAT dummy. How? Does the PAT move?
134) On the Body Weapons and PAT Tape Peterson shows a maneuver where he starts by standing in front of the enemy and then jumps in the air, spins with his back to the enemy and then lands with an elbow strike. Does SCARS teach leaving your feet in a fight? Does SCARS teach turning your back to an enemy to land and strike?
135) On the Firearm Disarmament tape, Technique 5A Peterson demonstrates an arm bar takedown. As he slowly rolls on top of his opponent why doesn’t the enemy just shoot him instead of just lying there? Can you make the assumption that he will be completely disabled at that point?
136) On the Firearm Disarmament tape Peterson mentions that he’s done “this type of disarm in Latin America”. Is he referring to a training or live context? Please elaborate on this.
137) On the Firearm Disarmament tape Peterson states that he had a law officer try to shoot him as Peterson was performing the disarm and the LO shot himself in the “gut”. Was this with live ammo? Was any charges filed against Peterson for unsafe training methods?
138) On the Firearm Disarmament tape, Technique 7 Peterson says “don’t ever hit the gun away”. Why? Is it better to keep the gun pointing within a few centimeters of your body so that the room for error is very marginal? To me, trying to keep everything that “tight” employs the use of fine motor skills. Certainly more precision then a strong axe hand or hard slap. One small mistake or bend of the attacker’s wrist and Peterson would be shot. He states that one of his concerns is getting someone else shot. But he shows disarms that fire in 6 of his 8 ranges. Wouldn’t the same principle apply? If you know if certain directions are safe then you could use a more gross motor movement.
139) On the Firearm Disarmament tape, Technique 8 demonstrates a rear threat with the enemy’s left hand holding Peterson’s left arm from behind. Peterson turns left and Larkin just lets his left arm go. In a real life scenario wouldn’t Larkin have an adrenalized strong grip and therefore hinder Peterson’s movement so that Peterson would be shot?
140) On the Training Principles and Methodologies tape Peterson demonstrates what he considers is wrong with blocking. Does he think this is something new? Most systems call their blocks “strikes” as well and focus on the radial nerve or bicep.
141) On the Training Principles and Methodologies tape Peterson shows the “eye jerk” on a windmill block (er, strike). He says that follow-up strikes from the enemy will have no accuracy or power. I agree that the accuracy will be off but will all the power be lost? When you are pulling the enemy forward into you couldn’t that add power?
142) On the Training Principles and Methodologies tape Peterson shows stepping thru and punching. I believe his point on stepping into the enemy but the chambered punch he throws would be too slow when delivered to a prepared enemy. Peterson would get hit first. He later shows a step and strike to the throat, which was much less telegraphed with no windup. It was a direct strike, which is much better.
143) On the Training Principles and Methodologies tape towards the end of the tape Peterson says don’t workout with “speed”. I agree with the fact that it is good to include low speed training to focus on movements and targets but to never train at a more then 50% speed doesn’t seem realistic. I don’t believe that I have ever heard of a physical skill that trainers say shouldn’t be trained at full speed at some point. If you combine the chaos of combat and the speed of action and you haven’t trained either won’t you be in for a shock?
144) On the Training Principles and Methodologies tape toward the end of the tape Peterson says you should train with a partner that has similar reactions to you. Doesn’t this seem restrictive and short-sited? Why even say this? Shouldn’t you train with a wide range of partners who give a range of different reactions?
145) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 1, Technique 2 Instead of just standing there after strikes 3 and 4 wouldn’t it be more likely that the attacker (even if injured) would try to tie-up Peterson?
146) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 1, Technique 3, two questions. First, are you really going to be able to pull off a kick to the heart in combat, isn’t there safer techniques? Second, while doing 2 spins under the attacker’s arms wouldn’t the attacker do something besides just stand there (the only damage he received so far is a block)?
147) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 1, Technique 4 is a kick to the chin realistic? The risks of failure of this maneuver and the low chance of success makes this a ridiculous strike. Can you describe a situation where you would use this over a more direct attack?
148) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 1, Technique 9 you better hope your enemy is oblivious as Peterson’s son when performing this sequence. Because you are off balance when perform double strikes (kick and punch) these types of strikes lose power and puts you off balance. Peterson’s bad personal execution of this technique has him waving his hand in front of his enemy as he winds up. Wouldn’t an attacker be alerted? Isn’t there a more direct strike that would be better? Why waste time learning this technique?
149) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 1, Technique 12 isn’t Peterson wide open for a left strike after his double windmill strikes?
150) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 1 is this supposed to be an example of a preemptive strike? Is someone just going to left you would directly up to them until you are almost chest to chest and just stand there? It doesn’t seem very realistic.
151) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 2 why do two weaker double strikes instead of one direct strike? Lift your knee higher then your belt will probably land you on your butt if he moves forward at all.
152) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 3 isn’t intentionally dropping to one knee with your back to your enemy directly in front of him after only previously doing a block dangerous?
153) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 4 after punching is the attacker going to just stand there with his arm straight long enough for Peterson to step past him to the side and reach back to throw him?
154) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 9 Peterson states that a person falling forward (unawares) only has a 40% chance to stop his fall with his hands (that he would hit his face). Wouldn’t a person’s instinctive reaction to put their hands up to break the fall increase those chances? Can you site the study Peterson performed to come up with these percentages?
155) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 11 is a good example of wear the slow speed of the SCARS drills presents a real problem. A person doing a realistic strike grab would be moving in with aggression. By the time Peterson completes his outward circular deflections the person would be much closer then shown in the video. Also, in real life a person wouldn’t start a grab from so far away making it possible to do this technique. Comments?
156) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 2, Technique 12 shows the attacker grabbing Peterson with one hand then Peterson hooks his arm and neck and knees him as he drops to the ground in front of him. Is this realistic and/or safe? Aren’t there hundreds of better options? Why teach this? Its pure martial arts.
157) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3, Technique 3 shows the attacker punching. Peterson then grabs the punch with his opposite hand (right punch / right grab) then drops to the ground on his left side, chambers his left leg and kicks to the attackers left knee. Again, why so many techniques that voluntarily has you going to the ground in front of an attacker? Would this work for military units?
158) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3, Technique 4 shows a counter to a punch that has Peterson grapping the punching wrist and in a big circular movement pulling the attackers arm down to his ankle and then scooping his leg. This is one of the least realistic so far? Is the person who is punching just going to stand there? Are you really going to be able to grab a punch?
159) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3, Technique 8 I almost couldn’t believe what I was seeing. Peterson blocks a right straight punch with a right inward crescent kick. Do you believe that this has any real possibility of succeeding? The attacker’s punch, at full extension, was still about 3 feet from Peterson. This was embarrassing to watch.
160) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3, Technique 9 was yet another technique that involves taking yourself to the ground. Where these techniques really taught to the military? Would you recommend throwing yourself on the ground in a hot combat zone?
161) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3, Technique 11 shows Peterson hopping up and forward and kicking. Would this be safe on uneven terrain, loose dirt, ice or in combat gear?
162) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3, Technique 14 demonstrates Peterson stopping a straight punch with a toe kick to the shoulder. Then after doing a hook kick to the kidney Peterson does a 180 degree leap in the air to land with stomp kick to the knee. Could this in anyway be performed against a resisting enemy that doesn’t give consent?
163) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 3 Peterson talks about showing “higher coordination skills”. In other words gross motor skills which any good combat instructor knows will fail completely in the heat of combat. Why show these?
164) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 4, Technique 14 Peterson states that he has done this technique for real during war. We have to assume he meant Vietnam. The technique shows Peterson performing a takedown against a guard while he is handcuffed. Is there any documentation that Peterson was captured during Vietnam? How did he escape all of the other armed guards, locked doors, etc, etc after taking down a single guard and fleeing with his hands still cuffed?
165) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5, Technique 4 shows the Attacker throwing a right punch and just keeping it extended while Peterson steps forward, ducks underneath, does a circular right crescent shin kick to the back, plants his leg (now the attacker’s arm finally comes down). Is that a realistic response from an attacker? As Peterson does this movement Larkin actually catches Peterson’s leg by accident and has to drop it.
166) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5, Technique 6 shows a counter to a double grab. Peterson does a front snap kick to the diaphragm. If done at real speed, wouldn’t Peterson’s leg be jammed and he would be pushed backwards on one leg so he would go down?
167) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5, Technique 7 shows a counter to a running tackle. Blake performs this counter by putting his arms under the attacker’s neck and jumps up and throws his legs back into a sprawl. At this speed he lands with his elbow on the mat with his weight and the attacker’s weight . Wouldn’t he be injured?
168) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5, leading up to the multi-fight scenarios Peterson says that every single one of his techniques can be used in a multi-fight. He also says don’t go to the ground. However, over ½ of his techniques involve taking yourself to the ground.
169) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5 Peterson says that you must keep moving in a multi-fight scenario then in his first situation he deals with the first attacker while staying stationary.
170) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5 Peterson says that a true multi-fight scenario involves people attacking at once (not one after another). However, he shows Blake striking. Peterson steps to the right and Larkin just stands there until Peterson is done with Blake, then Larkin strikes while Blake waits, then he strikes.
171) On the Hand To Hand Combat Tape 5 Peterson shows a scenario dealing with multiple attackers where he turns his back on the 2nd attacker to do a hair grab on the first one.
172) Investigation into Peterson's Vietnam background couldn't find evidence of any of his combat claims. Is there proof?
173) Tim Larkin who was Peterson's right hand man before he split off was proven to not be a Navy Seal but a dropout from buds training.