# Krav Maga training effectiveness



## Nadav917 (Jun 7, 2017)

So I just started training Krav Maga once a week on top of going to the gym three times a week (thats all I can manage with school/work), and so far I'm liking it a lot. However, I feel like there's not much actual sparring during the lessons, as it's mostly technique and (even with a cup) I can't bring myself to actually hit my partner with force when practicing. I did an introductory lesson in kickboxing, where there was a lot more actual punching and contact involved, but I felt that Krav Maga was better for self defense, due to the efficiency of the strikes. My question here is is there is any way to improve my striking power and accuracy while sticking with Krav Maga? I'm not sure all this theory will help me if I'm ever in a bad situation and throw a well timed punch at the right spot but with hardly any power due to never actually practicing swinging at full strength. By the way, I don't have immediate access to a punching bag or gloves (the place I do Krav Maga uses handheld mats mostly) so I'd prefer to not have to spend loads of cash on training equipment.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 7, 2017)

You do the kick boxing on the side.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You do the kick boxing on the side.


I don't have so much time. Plus I'm not sure how willing my parents would be to pay for gym membership as well as two different martial arts.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I don't have so much time. Plus I'm not sure how willing my parents would be to pay for gym membership as well as two different martial arts.


Well why don't you pay for it yourself


----------



## drop bear (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I don't have so much time. Plus I'm not sure how willing my parents would be to pay for gym membership as well as two different martial arts.



Once a week is kind of tough then. You would have to choose. And then that depends what you want out of your martial art.

Which I try to ask as where do you see yourself in 10 years


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Well why don't you pay for it yourself


I'm 16, I have school work and a very low paying job. I can't work so many hours in a week so I can't afford a monthly membership for something like this.


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> So I just started training Krav Maga once a week on top of going to the gym three times a week (thats all I can manage with school/work), and so far I'm liking it a lot. However, I feel like there's not much actual sparring during the lessons, as it's mostly technique and (even with a cup) I can't bring myself to actually hit my partner with force when practicing. I did an introductory lesson in kickboxing, where there was a lot more actual punching and contact involved, but I felt that Krav Maga was better for self defense, due to the efficiency of the strikes. My question here is is there is any way to improve my striking power and accuracy while sticking with Krav Maga? I'm not sure all this theory will help me if I'm ever in a bad situation and throw a well timed punch at the right spot but with hardly any power due to never actually practicing swinging at full strength. By the way, I don't have immediate access to a punching bag or gloves (the place I do Krav Maga uses handheld mats mostly) so I'd prefer to not have to spend loads of cash on training equipment.


I'm lost in your logic, you use focus pads in your KM, but don't punch hard? But if you do MT you do punch hard ?

as an aside, I dont see KM as being better at self defence than kickboxing, kick boxing demands great fitness and there not many better self defence skills than being able to jump in the air and hit your attacker in the face with a flying knee


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

Just choose one and stick with it. Both are good both will teach decent self defence skills. There's no magic wand you're not going to be unbeatable just train whatever you enjoy


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I don't have so much time. Plus I'm not sure how willing my parents would be to pay for gym membership as well as two different martial arts.


drop the gym membership then, people were getting fit and strong long before there was a gym on every corner

if you need a punch bag make one,get rucksack or similar fill it full of sand, hang it off a tree and punch it, if its to light fill it full of wet sand


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Just choose one and stick with it. Both are good both will teach decent self defence skills. There's no magic wand you're not going to be unbeatable just train whatever you enjoy


that's good advice to a middle aged man. At 16 however he should be doing the one that is most physically demanding, as its a fact that the one that requires the greater fitness will be the most effective if it comes to fighting back. If only by virtue that he will have greater fitness to fight back with


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> that's good advice to a middle aged man. At 16 however he should be doing the one that is most physically demanding, as its a fact that the one that requires the greater fitness will be the most effective if it comes to fighting back. If only by virtue that he will have greater fitness to fight back with


It's about what he wants maybe he doesn't want fitness


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> It's about what he wants maybe he doesn't want fitness


he has a gym membership , I think its safe to presume he wants fitness?
but that aside he is doing MA for self defence and is concerned that it may not be effective at self defence. The answer to that issue is to increase your fitness. The fitter you are the more effective any self defence is likely to be. Therefore the MA that requires the greater level of fitness is going to be the most effective.

at middle age getting the required fitness for kickboxing is extremely difficult, at 16 its a walk in the park


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> I'm lost in your logic, you use focus pads in your KM, but don't punch hard? But if you do MT you do punch hard ?
> 
> as an aside, I dont see KM as being better at self defence than kickboxing, kick boxing demands great fitness and there not many better self defence skills than being able to jump in the air and hit your attacker in the face with a flying knee



What I meant was that in KM we sometimes use pads (maybe 15-20 minutes per lesson) to do warmups or cooldowns, but the majority of the lesson is done with no protective gear at all except for a cup. I'm obviously not going to punch my partner in the chest as hard as I can, even the instructor just shows us the technique without ever actually touching the guy. One of my friends does kickboxing, and he says they spar every class with protective pads. This obviously helps improve his actual striking ability and punching speed, instead of stopping a few inches short on every strike in order to not hurt your partner. In KM I'm hesitant to use much force if any, because the majority of the techniques I learn involve going for the eyes, throat, knees, etc... So I can't actually hit.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> he has a gym membership , I think its safe to presume he wants fitness?
> but that aside he is doing MA for self defence and is concerned that it may not be effective at self defence. The answer to that issue is to increase your fitness. The fitter you are the more effective any self defence is likely to be. Therefore the MA that requires the greater level of fitness is going to be the most effective.
> 
> at middle age getting the required fitness for kickboxing is extremely difficult, at 16 its a walk in the park


I agree that the fitter you are the easier it is to defend yourself, I just personally like KM more (as a form of self defense) due to the efficiency of the strikes. Also I'm Israeli so I guess there's some national pride in there too... I think I might cut back on the gym, maybe go once or twice a week instead of three times, and add a kickboxing lesson plus punching-bag training/conditioning for 2 days a week. The Dojo in my town offers a great package for that type of combination.


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> What I meant was that in KM we sometimes use pads (maybe 15-20 minutes per lesson) to do warmups or cooldowns, but the majority of the lesson is done with no protective gear at all except for a cup. I'm obviously not going to punch my partner in the chest as hard as I can, even the instructor just shows us the technique without ever actually touching the guy. One of my friends does kickboxing, and he says they spar every class with protective pads. This obviously helps improve his actual striking ability and punching speed, instead of stopping a few inches short on every strike in order to not hurt your partner. In KM I'm hesitant to use much force if any, because the majority of the techniques I learn involve going for the eyes, throat, knees, etc... So I can't actually hit.


so what's the argument for doing KM and not kickboxing. ?


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> he has a gym membership , I think its safe to presume he wants fitness?
> but that aside he is doing MA for self defence and is concerned that it may not be effective at self defence. The answer to that issue is to increase your fitness. The fitter you are the more effective any self defence is likely to be. Therefore the MA that requires the greater level of fitness is going to be the most effective.
> 
> at middle age getting the required fitness for kickboxing is extremely difficult, at 16 its a walk in the park


Well then he has a gym membership so he's already doing his fitness work why pay more money for more fitness work. That'd be a bit of a waste since he's already paid for a gym.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I agree that the fitter you are the easier it is to defend yourself, I just personally like KM more (as a form of self defense) due to the efficiency of the strikes. Also I'm Israeli so I guess there's some national pride in there too... I think I might cut back on the gym, maybe go once or twice a week instead of three times, and add a kickboxing lesson plus punching-bag training/conditioning for 2 days a week. The Dojo in my town offers a great package for that type of combination.


You want to do Krav Maga then do it. Simple as that really but national pride shouldn't be a factor if your looking for self defence. National pride won't save you when you're attacked


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> You want to do Krav Maga then do it. Simple as that really but national pride shouldn't be a factor if your looking for self defence. National pride won't save you when you're attacked


That's not what I meant. If ever in a street fight, I'd rather know how to neutralize someone as quickly as possible, which is what KM offers. However, due to the fact that practicing at full strength would very likely injure my partner, I feel as though I'm not conditioning my body for a fighting situation as much as I would be doing kickboxing, where there's consistent sparring every lesson. Thanks everyone for your answers, I've thought about it and I think I'll go with KM for the technique and kickboxing for the strength/conditioning. I should be able to fit it into my schedule if I move some things around.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> That's not what I meant. If ever in a street fight, I'd rather know how to neutralize someone as quickly as possible, which is what KM offers. However, due to the fact that practicing at full strength would very likely injure my partner, I feel as though I'm not conditioning my body for a fighting situation as much as I would be doing kickboxing, where there's consistent sparring every lesson. Thanks everyone for your answers, I've thought about it and I think I'll go with KM for the technique and kickboxing for the strength/conditioning. I should be able to fit it into my schedule if I move some things around.


Thing is you're training once a week and while it's better than nothing but you won't improve as much as someone who trains 3 or 4 times that's just a fact you won't. For the beginning you should just pick one and get a good solid base then look into cross training. Again do what you want but that's what I'd recommend


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> That's not what I meant. If ever in a street fight, I'd rather know how to neutralize someone as quickly as possible, which is what KM offers. However, due to the fact that practicing at full strength would very likely injure my partner, I feel as though I'm not conditioning my body for a fighting situation as much as I would be doing kickboxing, where there's consistent sparring every lesson. Thanks everyone for your answers, I've thought about it and I think I'll go with KM for the technique and kickboxing for the strength/conditioning. I should be able to fit it into my schedule if I move some things around.


I'm not convinced that KM is any more effective than most other MA to be honest. Certainly kickboxing is very effective a neutralising people, if by neutralizing you mean causing them so much pain they stop trying to hit you


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> I'm not convinced that KM is any more effective than most other MA to be honest. Certainly kickboxing is very effective a neutralising people, if by neutralizing you mean causing them so much pain they stop trying to hit you


Yeah everyone seems to think KM is this ultimate martial art now but from I've seen of it there's really nothing in it that I haven't seen anywhere else. That's not saying it's bad but i don't think it's this super best ever martial art a lot of people make it out to be


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Well then he has a gym membership so he's already doing his fitness work why pay more money for more fitness work. That'd be a bit of a waste since he's already paid for a gym.


well there is the issue that as a society with have been sold the idea that you cant have significant fitness with out a gym membership and the issue that if fighting is the aim then your fitness needs to be geared towards fighting rather than at a general level of fitness and that is best achieved by training for fighting , were that training is extremely challenging


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

jobo said:


> well there is the issue that as a society with have been sold the idea that you cant have significant fitness with out a gym membership and the issue that if fighting is the aim then your fitness needs to be geared towards fighting rather than at a general level of fitness and that is best achieved by training for fighting , were that training is extremely challenging


Oh I don't believe that I haven't used a traditional as in fitness gym since I was 16. Any fitness I do is on my own or in class and yeah sure martial arts should help your fitness but it shouldn't be the main focus unless it's something like aerobic boxing sessions etc. fitness is very important but the technique should be more of a priority since you can do your own fitness but you can't teach yourself the technical aspect


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Oh I don't believe that I haven't used a traditional as in fitness gym since I was 16. Any fitness I do is on my own or in class and yeah sure martial arts should help your fitness but it shouldn't be the main focus unless it's something like aerobic boxing sessions etc. fitness is very important but the technique should be more of a priority since you can do your own fitness but you can't teach yourself the technical aspect


isn't kick boxing aerobic ? That really my point, I find my class to easy from a physical aspect, that's because I work out on fighting enhancing exercises in between. But then I'm to old to go into to kickboxing as the level of fitness required to be good at that  is well above what's obtainable at my advanced age and il spend all my time being knocked out by 22 yo

techneque with out associated fitness is border line useless. Against a much fitter attacker


----------



## Buka (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> So I just started training Krav Maga once a week



You're young, you just started. You'll be fine. Just keep at it. 
Fighting has a way of explaining itself to you.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Yeah everyone seems to think KM is this ultimate martial art now but from I've seen of it there's really nothing in it that I haven't seen anywhere else. That's not saying it's bad but i don't think it's this super best ever martial art a lot of people make it out to be


The reason I like it as a form of self defense is that it teaches you how to go for the weak points of the body, which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art. Obviously if I were a skilled kickboxer or MMA'er I could apply those skills and throw in some eye gouges and the like, but in KM lessons you actually go through the motions of attacking those areas and so it helps develop that response to be instinctual. Also KM is taught in most military/police forces around the world, so I don't see how you can argue that it isn't (at the very least) ONE of the best forms of self defense.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art.







I think you mean "which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art that I am aware of."


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> I think you mean "which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art that I am aware of."


Pardon me if I don't know every single martial art, but I have KM lessons are nearby, and lets face it, I'm not gonna learn to gouge eyes and knee crotches in kickboxing. You're right though of course, I'm sure many self defense systems teach dirty play.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Pardon me if I don't know every single martial art, but I have KM lessons are nearby, and lets face it, I'm not gonna learn to gouge eyes and knee crotches in kickboxing. You're right though of course, I'm sure many self defense systems teach dirty play.


And TMAs

On a more serious note, you can be forgiven for not knowing every art of course, blanket statements however can be tricky.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> The reason I like it as a form of self defense is that it teaches you how to go for the weak points of the body, which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art. Obviously if I were a skilled kickboxer or MMA'er I could apply those skills and throw in some eye gouges and the like, but in KM lessons you actually go through the motions of attacking those areas and so it helps develop that response to be instinctual. Also KM is taught in most military/police forces around the world, so I don't see how you can argue that it isn't (at the very least) ONE of the best forms of self defense.



The police military thing is a red herring. There is no indication they fight any better than anybody else.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 8, 2017)

drop bear said:


> The police military thing is a red herring. There is no indication they fight any better than anybody else.


If it wasn't a good form of self-defense, they wouldn't teach it to those who are frequently in dangerous hand-to-hand combat situations.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If it wasn't a good form of self-defense, they wouldn't teach it to those who are frequently in dangerous hand-to-hand combat situations.



Yeah they would. Have you been in the army? They do all sorts of silly stuff.

Urban Dictionary: The army way


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> The reason I like it as a form of self defense is that it teaches you how to go for the weak points of the body, which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art. Obviously if I were a skilled kickboxer or MMA'er I could apply those skills and throw in some eye gouges and the like, but in KM lessons you actually go through the motions of attacking those areas and so it helps develop that response to be instinctual. Also KM is taught in most military/police forces around the world, so I don't see how you can argue that it isn't (at the very least) ONE of the best forms of self defense.


Well just because the police learn it doesn't mean it's good. Do you think any police officer is allowed to eye gouge someone or kick them in the groin or rip someone's ear off....no of course not if they did they'd be sued.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 9, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Yeah they would. Have you been in the army? They do all sorts of silly stuff.
> 
> Urban Dictionary: The army way


Thats a very poor argument


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 9, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Well just because the police learn it doesn't mean it's good. Do you think any police officer is allowed to eye gouge someone or kick them in the groin or rip someone's ear off....no of course not if they did they'd be sued.


If someone were attacking the police officer then yes, I imagine the officer is allowed to defend themselves. Kicking someone in the groin to neutralize them is a hell of a lot less grounds for lawsuit than shooting them in the face wouldn't you agree? Also KM requires less training to be effective; I can't imagine the police force would want to spend years training their officers kung-fu or any other form of martial art (although I'm sure a kung-fu master could beat someone up as thoroughly as a KM practitioner), as with KM the moves are rather basic and usually go: "Block the attack, counter ASAP, go for the weak points and stay aware of your surroundings." It's a lot easier to remember a simple set of instructions such as that rather than attempting to apply a complex MA that (typically) wouldn't condone the most effective takedowns due to dirty play.


----------



## EMT (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> So I just started training Krav Maga once a week on top of going to the gym three times a week (thats all I can manage with school/work), and so far I'm liking it a lot. However, I feel like there's not much actual sparring during the lessons, as it's mostly technique and (even with a cup) I can't bring myself to actually hit my partner with force when practicing. I did an introductory lesson in kickboxing, where there was a lot more actual punching and contact involved, but I felt that Krav Maga was better for self defense, due to the efficiency of the strikes. My question here is is there is any way to improve my striking power and accuracy while sticking with Krav Maga? I'm not sure all this theory will help me if I'm ever in a bad situation and throw a well timed punch at the right spot but with hardly any power due to never actually practicing swinging at full strength. By the way, I don't have immediate access to a punching bag or gloves (the place I do Krav Maga uses handheld mats mostly) so I'd prefer to not have to spend loads of cash on training equipment.



Yes, the problem with krav maga is that you can't really train some of the most extreme techniques with a sparring partner which makes the whole training not very effective.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 9, 2017)

EMT said:


> Yes, the problem with krav maga is that you can't really train some of the most extreme techniques with a sparring partner which makes the whole training not very effective.


That's exactly what I'm saying. I've never done a MA before, so my punches and kicks are not trained nor strong, so I feel that doing a lot of KM theory won't help me in the long run. That's why I want to start doing some kickboxing on the side to get better striking power, so that I can use the KM theory with the KB strength should I ever need it.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If someone were attacking the police officer then yes, I imagine the officer is allowed to defend themselves. Kicking someone in the groin to neutralize them is a hell of a lot less grounds for lawsuit than shooting them in the face wouldn't you agree? Also KM requires less training to be effective; I can't imagine the police force would want to spend years training their officers kung-fu or any other form of martial art (although I'm sure a kung-fu master could beat someone up as thoroughly as a KM practitioner), as with KM the moves are rather basic and usually go: "Block the attack, counter ASAP, go for the weak points and stay aware of your surroundings." It's a lot easier to remember a simple set of instructions such as that rather than attempting to apply a complex MA that (typically) wouldn't condone the most effective takedowns due to dirty play.


You probably shouldn't make assumptions about styles you have no understanding of. And actually there are a large number of styles that target the weak areas and as for the police thing. There are people here who know better than me @Tez3 maybe you could clarify. I could be wrong but I believe if a police officer kicked a guy in the groin or eye gouged them and caused serious damage the officer could easily get sued or even prosecuted. Hell a bouncer In my area was put on trial for sweeping a guy who was attacking him to the ground, not even striking him just a sweep


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 9, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> You probably shouldn't make assumptions about styles you have no understanding of. And actually there are a large number of styles that target the weak areas and as for the police thing. There are people here who know better than me @Tez3 maybe you could clarify. I could be wrong but I believe if a police officer kicked a guy in the groin or eye gouged them and caused serious damage the officer could easily get sued or even prosecuted. Hell a bouncer In my area was put on trial for sweeping a guy who was attacking him to the ground, not even striking him just a sweep


Police officers and soldiers can find themselves in tricky situations where they have no choice but to fight back and fight dirty. If a cop had a gun to his head (not saying it happens often but I'm sure it happens), I don't think he would get any criticism for using KM to disarm the attacker and neutralize him, however the means. Just like cops could get sued for using their firearm when not necessary, there are some cases where they must use it to protect their own lives, in which case they do not get sued because it genuinely is in self-defense. Krav Maga is just another weapon in the cop's arsenal, and should s/he ever need it, it's a good skill to have.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Police officers and soldiers can find themselves in tricky situations where they have no choice but to fight back and fight dirty. If a cop had a gun to his head (not saying it happens often but I'm sure it happens), I don't think he would get any criticism for using KM to disarm the attacker and neutralize him, however the means. Just like cops could get sued for using their firearm when not necessary, there are some cases where they must use it to protect their own lives, in which case they do not get sued because it genuinely is in self-defense. Krav Maga is just another weapon in the cop's arsenal, and should s/he ever need it, it's a good skill to have.


Okay


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> By the way, I don't have immediate access to a punching bag or gloves (the place I do Krav Maga uses handheld mats mostly) so I'd prefer to not have to spend loads of cash on training equipment.


These are cheap, and take up little space as you just hang them from the cieling or on the wall.  Obvioulsy this is a UK site, but you'll be able to find something similar whereever you are I am sure.

TurnerMAX Punch Bag Wing Chun Wall Bag Black


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If someone were attacking the police officer then yes, I imagine the officer is allowed to defend themselves. Kicking someone in the groin to neutralize them is a hell of a lot less grounds for lawsuit than shooting them in the face wouldn't you agree? Also KM requires less training to be effective; I can't imagine the police force would want to spend years training their officers kung-fu or any other form of martial art (although I'm sure a kung-fu master could beat someone up as thoroughly as a KM practitioner), as with KM the moves are rather basic and usually go: "Block the attack, counter ASAP, go for the weak points and stay aware of your surroundings." It's a lot easier to remember a simple set of instructions such as that rather than attempting to apply a complex MA that (typically) wouldn't condone the most effective takedowns due to dirty play.



Firstly kicking someone in the groin may well not neutralise them, it's not a fight ender at all. Police forces don't learn any specific martial arts as forces, they may as individuals. Police officers have different priorities, they often want to take someone down to the ground to restrain them, something not recommended for the public. Police officers are variously equipped, many with firearms, most with batons of some sort, usually extendable ( a British police officer fought off one of the terrorists recently with his) sprays of some sort and tasers. Police officers are very well trained in doing what they do, disarming someone with a gun to the head is harder than you imagine, perhaps you have watched too many films and television to make an accurate assessment of how real life police officers work.
The rule in the UK is that one has to use reasonable force, this goes for the police too, one can use pre-emptive moves, one can use a weapon and you can use deadly force if it's reasonable as we've seen last week when three terrorists were shot on sight.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> The reason I like it as a form of self defense is that it teaches you how to go for the weak points of the body, which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art. Obviously if I were a skilled kickboxer or MMA'er I could apply those skills and throw in some eye gouges and the like, but in KM lessons you actually go through the motions of attacking those areas and so it helps develop that response to be instinctual. Also KM is taught in most military/police forces around the world, so I don't see how you can argue that it isn't (at the very least) ONE of the best forms of self defense.


Yeah we are taught to aim for the shins, and the top of the forehead. I always wondered if there was a better way.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 9, 2017)

KM isn't taught in many military forces, (in fact very few probably actually only the IDF, funnily enough) either as much as certain instructors/organisations would like you to believe it is.
As for it being the only martial art that teaches you to go for weak part of the body, you are kidding right? You may want to look up the history of KM, it didn't magically appear and was instantly different from all other styles, it came from other styles. Like all styles it depends who teaches you and how you train as to whether it's any good or not. Don't get caught up in the hype.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If it wasn't a good form of self-defense, they wouldn't teach it to those who are frequently in dangerous hand-to-hand combat situations.



Who is 'they'? And who are these people who are so frequently in dangerous hand to hand combat?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If it wasn't a good form of self-defense, they wouldn't teach it to those who are frequently in dangerous hand-to-hand combat situations.



please remember many of us here have been training in martial arts a really really long time.  try to accept that many of the things that you think are true, are not.   i dont know where your from but keep in mind that KM is kinda new and there are a great number of instructors out there that have no business teaching.  the school down the road from me advertises KM and the school is promoted as such but it was only a few years ago they were teaching kempo karate there.  as i did some research on them i found the head instructor took an 8 hr course, possibly on line and then changed his school to a KM school in order to make more money.   so keep in mind that many schools teach a watered down version of KM and you would find it very difficult to know the difference since you are still new at it.
im not saying your school is not legit, but you should have the opportunity to work power and more at your school.
dont be afraid to look around for something you really like and meets all your needs at this time.  you can always come back to KM later.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Pardon me if I don't know every single martial art, but I have KM lessons are nearby, and lets face it, I'm not gonna learn to gouge eyes and knee crotches in kickboxing. You're right though of course, I'm sure many self defense systems teach dirty play.



You keep mentioning dirty play, can you define what dirty play is in martial arts?  While you are at it, define what your goal is in learning martial arts?

The reason I ask is that although I am happy not to have to use martial arts to resolve a situation, if a person attacks me despite my attempts not to engage in fighting, I don't have a lot of sympathy for what happens to them.  From the little I have seen of Krav Maga, the practitioners don't have a lot of sympathy either.  Am I wrong?

Some of your other comments, I will just put them down to inexperience and lack of knowledge.  But ...  

Most all military and police taking Krav Maga?  That has already been commented on, but I will clarify that military combat and police work are each difference from what most people engage in, and so what the responses should be.  The last thing that most military units want is for their soldiers to have to engage in hand to hand combat.  So knowing a few specialized things for when that happens will probably suffice.  Some specialized units may need training for that, but it will likely be a conglomeration of effective techniques.  Police have the added constraint of trying not to maim or kill while having to fight with someone.  Therefor they may not be able to use some tactics the military may use.

Going for weak points?  What martial art would prefer to go after strong points?  That doesn't make any sense.

Not being able to use full strength?  Yeah, if you constantly attack weak points of the body while connecting with great strength, you will eventually run out of practice partners.  I would suggest what used to be taught in the TKD I studied years ago.  Learn control.  Learn to put full strength at a point you want.  That takes time by the way.  You want to be able to put full strength about 3/8 inch from what you want to strike or kick.  You have to start out and work you way in.  Consider that if you have that kind of control, in a real situation, you can put your point of contact 1/2 to 1 inch inside the attackers body.  If you can't do that, give up martial arts.  

My personal recommendation at your point in martial arts would be to take one martial art, and get really good at it.  After that, you can look around again and see if there is another art you would like to pursue for whatever reason.  By the way, getting good doesn't really occur until around whatever equivalent your art designates as around 2nd or 3rd dan.  You don't have to learn 10 martial arts to 10th dan before you become proficient in defending yourself.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Jun 9, 2017)

oftheherd1 said:


> getting good doesn't really occur until around whatever equivalent your art designates as around 2nd or 3rd dan.



i would put aside ranking and say that proficiency usually comes at about 10 years, regardless what endeavor you are talking about.  martial arts, music, dance, carpentry, metal working  they all take about the ten year mark.  it has something to do with the way the brain works.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 9, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If it wasn't a good form of self-defense, they wouldn't teach it to those who are frequently in dangerous hand-to-hand combat situations.


Martial arts is very unimportant in the army and police. It's taught but it's very basic stuff. That's because they have more important things to be training. And also Krav Maga isn't taught to every army mainly just the Israile army and from what I know it's a different version to what you'll be learning. (Could be wrong there) but anyway don't always get in the assumption an eye gouge or groin kick will end a fight straight away. Can it? Yes of course it can but it could also do not much damage there's no guarantees in fighting. I've never been in a street fight but if I ever was I know my strategy would be to strike hard and fast and hit anything I can and not give them a chance to hit me


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> KM isn't taught in many military forces, (in fact very few probably actually only the IDF, funnily enough) either as much as certain instructors/organisations would like you to believe it is.
> As for it being the only martial art that teaches you to go for weak part of the body, you are kidding right? You may want to look up the history of KM, it didn't magically appear and was instantly different from all other styles, it came from other styles. Like all styles it depends who teaches you and how you train as to whether it's any good or not. Don't get caught up in the hype.


You're right, I was wrong to say it was the only martial art to do so. Keep in mind that I don't have access to lessons in every martial art, so my options are rather limited in terms of my choices. What I meant by that though was that as far as I know about martial arts (which admittedly isn't as much as most people on this forum) is that KM encourages striking the vulnerable parts of your opponent. Of course you can use Muay Thai strikes to hit someone in the groin, or gouge someone's eye out while using MMA techniques, but from what I understand, while training those martial art forms you are not told to specifically target those areas. There are rules in most martial arts, as they are usually also competition sports, while KM was developed solely for self defense. You can tell me I'm wrong; I don't really care, but personally, as I'm trying to learn self defense, I would rather go with the system that is built entirely around that.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

oftheherd1 said:


> You keep mentioning dirty play, can you define what dirty play is in martial arts?  While you are at it, define what your goal is in learning martial arts?
> 
> The reason I ask is that although I am happy not to have to use martial arts to resolve a situation, if a person attacks me despite my attempts not to engage in fighting, I don't have a lot of sympathy for what happens to them.  From the little I have seen of Krav Maga, the practitioners don't have a lot of sympathy either.  Am I wrong?
> 
> ...



I've already said this a few times on this thread, but what I meant is that other martial arts aren't as focused on attacking vulnerable body parts as KM. By vulnerable I mean areas that could cause permanent damage if attacked: the eyes, throat, small joints like fingers, etc. Learning how to throw a punch while training MMA is learning how to swing a closed fist at someone, which is considered legal in the competition sport, whereas in KM you learn to shove your open hand in the opponents face and dig in with your fingers. There's a lot of things you learn in KM that you don't learn in other martial arts, hence the 'dirty play' aspect of it. 

As for what you said about the last thing military units wanting is for their soldiers to be in hand-to-hand combat, I don't see how that would mean they don't get into those situations anyway. Just because they don't want to be in those situations doesn't mean they won't. Also I never meant that KM was the only martial art taught in many military and police forces. Of course they use various techniques and training. However, through one quick google search I found that at the very least the Israeli, British and American armies all train KM at least to a certain extent, so again I bring up the point that if it weren't effective, the military wouldn't decide to use it. 

As you said about it taking a long time to gain the control to use full strength and not hit your partner, I obviously have not trained for long enough to do that. I don't want to train KM for 10 years just so that I can use force without hurting my partner, I want to improve my power alongside my KM training. Since I can't hit my partner directly in KM, I want to do kickboxing on the side to allow me to do some actual sparring. That was the entire point of this thread, I honestly don't know how it escalated into a full-out argument over the legitimacy of KM.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Firstly kicking someone in the groin may well not neutralise them, it's not a fight ender at all. Police forces don't learn any specific martial arts as forces, they may as individuals. Police officers have different priorities, they often want to take someone down to the ground to restrain them, something not recommended for the public. Police officers are variously equipped, many with firearms, most with batons of some sort, usually extendable ( a British police officer fought off one of the terrorists recently with his) sprays of some sort and tasers. Police officers are very well trained in doing what they do, disarming someone with a gun to the head is harder than you imagine, perhaps you have watched too many films and television to make an accurate assessment of how real life police officers work.
> The rule in the UK is that one has to use reasonable force, this goes for the police too, one can use pre-emptive moves, one can use a weapon and you can use deadly force if it's reasonable as we've seen last week when three terrorists were shot on sight.



Obviously I'm not a police officer, so I wouldn't know, but people keep saying on here that cops have to use reasonable force. Does that mean that police officers are only trained to take down someone safely and 'legally'? Because that doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't they be trained to handle something worse than that and then dial it down when actually working in the field? Are you telling me that if a police officer has a gun pointed at them, that they must still consider the ethical implications of kicking the guy in the groin or gouging out his eyes? Of course they have limitations and such and if there were any other way to take the guy down I'm positive they would take that course of action, what I'm trying to say is that KM would help in a more serious situation where they can't manage with just pepper spray or their taser doesn't work for some reason. I also don't appreciate your condescension where you assume I'm brainwashed by Hollywood movies to think that a gun-to-the-head situation can be solved with simply twisting it out of the guy's hand, but surely it's better to train KM techniques in disarming someone than just sit back and say 'Oh well it's not as easy to disarm someone as they show in the movies' and just take the bullet, right? Also, you sort of proved yourself wrong in your last point. If it's sometimes considered 'reasonable' to use lethal force, such as in the case of a terrorist attack, then what happened to your argument that KM is not suitable for police work?


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I've already said this a few times on this thread, but what I meant is that other martial arts aren't as focused on attacking vulnerable body parts as KM. By vulnerable I mean areas that could cause permanent damage if attacked: the eyes, throat, small joints like fingers, etc. Learning how to throw a punch while training MMA is learning how to swing a closed fist at someone, which is considered legal in the competition sport, whereas in KM you learn to shove your open hand in the opponents face and dig in with your fingers. There's a lot of things you learn in KM that you don't learn in other martial arts, hence the 'dirty play' aspect of it.
> 
> As for what you said about the last thing military units wanting is for their soldiers to be in hand-to-hand combat, I don't see how that would mean they don't get into those situations anyway. Just because they don't want to be in those situations doesn't mean they won't. Also I never meant that KM was the only martial art taught in many military and police forces. Of course they use various techniques and training. However, through one quick google search I found that at the very least the Israeli, British and American armies all train KM at least to a certain extent, so again I bring up the point that if it weren't effective, the military wouldn't decide to use it.
> 
> As you said about it taking a long time to gain the control to use full strength and not hit your partner, I obviously have not trained for long enough to do that. I don't want to train KM for 10 years just so that I can use force without hurting my partner, I want to improve my power alongside my KM training. Since I can't hit my partner directly in KM, I want to do kickboxing on the side to allow me to do some actual sparring. That was the entire point of this thread, I honestly don't know how it escalated into a full-out argument over the legitimacy of KM.


I think the point being made to you, is KM is not alone in hitting vulnerable body parts, nor is it more effective at self defence than many other arts, and whilst the ten year quoted is a bit long, it does take more than a few lessons with slow complient partner who you are not allowed to hit, to be able to actually use it. It does take a fair time and a good deal of application and fitness to make it effective, just as with any other art


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Obviously I'm not a police officer, so I wouldn't know, but people keep saying on here that cops have to use reasonable force. Does that mean that police officers are only trained to take down someone safely and 'legally'? Because that doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't they be trained to handle something worse than that and then dial it down when actually working in the field? Are you telling me that if a police officer has a gun pointed at them, that they must still consider the ethical implications of kicking the guy in the groin or gouging out his eyes? Of course they have limitations and such and if there were any other way to take the guy down I'm positive they would take that course of action, what I'm trying to say is that KM would help in a more serious situation where they can't manage with just pepper spray or their taser doesn't work for some reason. I also don't appreciate your condescension where you assume I'm brainwashed by Hollywood movies to think that a gun-to-the-head situation can be solved with simply twisting it out of the guy's hand, but surely it's better to train KM techniques in disarming someone than just sit back and say 'Oh well it's not as easy to disarm someone as they show in the movies' and just take the bullet, right? Also, you sort of proved yourself wrong in your last point. If it's sometimes considered 'reasonable' to use lethal force, such as in the case of a terrorist attack, then what happened to your argument that KM is not suitable for police work?


generaly speaking cops can only use the force that is reasonable in th circumstances , also generaly that would rule out blinding the suspect and renderings them incapable of having children


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Obviously I'm not a police officer, so I wouldn't know, but people keep saying on here that cops have to use reasonable force. Does that mean that police officers are only trained to take down someone safely and 'legally'? Because that doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't they be trained to handle something worse than that and then dial it down when actually working in the field? Are you telling me that if a police officer has a gun pointed at them, that they must still consider the ethical implications of kicking the guy in the groin or gouging out his eyes? Of course they have limitations and such and if there were any other way to take the guy down I'm positive they would take that course of action, what I'm trying to say is that KM would help in a more serious situation where they can't manage with just pepper spray or their taser doesn't work for some reason. I also don't appreciate your condescension where you assume I'm brainwashed by Hollywood movies to think that a gun-to-the-head situation can be solved with simply twisting it out of the guy's hand, but surely it's better to train KM techniques in disarming someone than just sit back and say 'Oh well it's not as easy to disarm someone as they show in the movies' and just take the bullet, right? Also, you sort of proved yourself wrong in your last point. If it's sometimes considered 'reasonable' to use lethal force, such as in the case of a terrorist attack, then what happened to your argument that KM is not suitable for police work?


If someone is holding a gun at your head and wants to kill you your dead. No amount of Krav Maga or anything will save you. They won't walk over with heavy footsteps and say a big monologue before killing you. They'll walk up behind and shoot you before you even know they're there.

Also yes if someone does have a gun at your head and doesn't shoot you straight away then more likely they don't want to kill you just rob you. So if someone puts a gun at my head and asks for my wallet you know what I'm gonna do? I'm giving that guy my wallet and going home alive. 

Thing is there's no argument here the police do not train Krav Maga simple as that


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I've already said this a few times on this thread, but what I meant is that other martial arts aren't as focused on attacking vulnerable body parts as KM. By vulnerable I mean areas that could cause permanent damage if attacked: the eyes, throat, small joints like fingers, etc. Learning how to throw a punch while training MMA is learning how to swing a closed fist at someone, which is considered legal in the competition sport, whereas in KM you learn to shove your open hand in the opponents face and dig in with your fingers. There's a lot of things you learn in KM that you don't learn in other martial arts, hence the 'dirty play' aspect of it.
> 
> As for what you said about the last thing military units wanting is for their soldiers to be in hand-to-hand combat, I don't see how that would mean they don't get into those situations anyway. Just because they don't want to be in those situations doesn't mean they won't. Also I never meant that KM was the only martial art taught in many military and police forces. Of course they use various techniques and training. However, through one quick google search I found that at the very least the Israeli, British and American armies all train KM at least to a certain extent, so again I bring up the point that if it weren't effective, the military wouldn't decide to use it.
> 
> As you said about it taking a long time to gain the control to use full strength and not hit your partner, I obviously have not trained for long enough to do that. I don't want to train KM for 10 years just so that I can use force without hurting my partner, I want to improve my power alongside my KM training. Since I can't hit my partner directly in KM, I want to do kickboxing on the side to allow me to do some actual sparring. That was the entire point of this thread, I honestly don't know how it escalated into a full-out argument over the legitimacy of KM.


Thing is you already seem to know what you want and are getting upset with the answers people are giving you


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> If someone is holding a gun at your head and wants to kill you your dead. No amount of Krav Maga or anything will save you. They won't walk over with heavy footsteps and say a big monologue before killing you. They'll walk up behind and shoot you before you even know they're there.
> 
> Also yes if someone does have a gun at your head and doesn't shoot you straight away then more likely they don't want to kill you just rob you. So if someone puts a gun at my head and asks for my wallet you know what I'm gonna do? I'm giving that guy my wallet and going home alive.
> 
> Thing is there's no argument here the police do not train Krav Maga simple as that


By that logic no one should ever train disarming someone ever, because it simply doesn't work. I'm not saying it works 100% of the time, but if even one person has ever prevented a bullet to the face using KM or a similar technique, it's worth learning.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Obviously I'm not a police officer, so I wouldn't know, but people keep saying on here that cops have to use reasonable force. Does that mean that police officers are only trained to take down someone safely and 'legally'? Because that doesn't make any sense.


People keep saying it because it's true.
They do have to use reasonable force, they do have to take people down legally, and it makes perfect sense.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Thing is you already seem to know what you want and are getting upset with the answers people are giving you


I already said I knew what I wanted a while ago, now I'm just hearing a lot about how I'm not experienced enough to know anything. I never pretended to be an expert on MA, and I'm not hearing any actual replies to my posts as to what alternative MA's there are, rather just a lot of 'KM isn't as effective as you think, I know more because I've done MA for longer'. Apologies if I sound salty now, but this thread turned from asking for advice into a 'why KM isn't actually that great' thread.


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> By that logic no one should ever train disarming someone ever, because it simply doesn't work. I'm not saying it works 100% of the time, but if even one person has ever prevented a bullet to the face using KM or a similar technique, it's worth learning.


I'm not sure it would ever work outside of a km demonstration film or a movie. You would need to be lightning fast and the gunman as slow as a slug


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> People keep saying it because it's true.
> They do have to use reasonable force, they do have to take people down legally, and it makes perfect sense.


Of course they have to use reasonable force. I never said that if a guy was standing unarmed a cop has the right to kick him in the groin to get him to the ground. I'm saying in a situation where the guy was armed (be it a knife, gun or whatever), and is actively attacking the cop, 'reasonable force' then includes using harsher methods of neutralization (such as KM), and cops at least should be able to handle a situation like that.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> I'm not sure it would ever work outside of a km demonstration film or a movie. You would need to be lightning fast and the gunman as slow as a slug


So what you're actually saying is that 100% of the time if a gun is pointed at you, you're dead, and you shouldn't even bother trying to disarm the attacker?


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I already said I knew what I wanted a while ago, now I'm just hearing a lot about how I'm not experienced enough to know anything. I never pretended to be an expert on MA, and I'm not hearing any actual replies to my posts as to what alternative MA's there are, rather just a lot of 'KM isn't as effective as you think, I know more because I've done MA for longer'. Apologies if I sound salty now, but this thread turned from asking for advice into a 'why KM isn't actually that great' thread.


km is no better or worse than a lot of arts, it shares the problem with a number of arts that you cant try it full speed/ power until you actually need t, by which time its to late.

a lot of the promo stuff is fantasy


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> So what you're actually saying is that 100% of the time if a gun is pointed at you, you're dead, and you shouldn't even bother trying to disarm the attacker?


no, but it fair to say that if the gun is pointing at you, you have a better chance of living if you do what you are told and don't try nd grab the gun


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> km is no better or worse than a lot of arts, it shares the problem with a number of arts that you cant try it full speed/ power until you actually need t, by which time its to late.
> 
> a lot of the promo stuff is fantasy


I can accept that answer, and I appreciate you not just bashing on the art. Of course there are flaws with every MA, this entire time I've just been saying that KM appeals more to me. Simply a matter of a opinion, everyone thinks differently.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> By that logic no one should ever train disarming someone ever, because it simply doesn't work. I'm not saying it works 100% of the time, but if even one person has ever prevented a bullet to the face using KM or a similar technique, it's worth learning.


It depends on the person because if you make one tiny mistake you're dead. Personally I find it to risky it's not worth dying over for a small bit of cash or a watch or whatever. Also people don't just train to fight either people just want to learn for example I'm learning bjj I know I'm probably never going to use it in a fight as even if I do get in a fight I wouldn't want to take it to the ground but I do it because it's fun plain and simple


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> no, but it fair to say that if the gun is pointing at you, you have a better chance of living if you do what you are told and don't try nd grab the gun


I (or anyone for that matter) would have to be pretty stupid to not listen to a mugger if they had a gun in their face. I don't expect I'll be in a situation like that many times in my life, but when I brought that point up I was actually talking about the police and military forces, which I'm sure encounter more guns to the face than your average citizen.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Of course they have usual force. I never said that if a guy was standing unarmed a cop has the right to kick him in the groin to get him to the ground. I'm saying in a situation where the guy was armed (be it a knife, gun or whatever), and is actively attacking the cop, 'reasonable force' then includes using harsher methods of neutralization (such as KM), and cops at least should be able to handle a situation like that.


Yes, that's right.  The more severe the threat the more severe their "reasonable force" can be.  That's why armed police recently shot knife wielding terrorises in London.  The severity of the threat meant that deadly force became a reasonable response.  However what you said was the the police having to use reasonable force "doesn't make any sense".


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I already said I knew what I wanted a while ago, now I'm just hearing a lot about how I'm not experienced enough to know anything. I never pretended to be an expert on MA, and I'm not hearing any actual replies to my posts as to what alternative MA's there are, rather just a lot of 'KM isn't as effective as you think, I know more because I've done MA for longer'. Apologies if I sound salty now, but this thread turned from asking for advice into a 'why KM isn't actually that great' thread.


No ones said its not great people have been saying about the police and army thing which is just fact.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Yes, that's right.  The more severe the threat the more severe their "reasonable force" can be.  That's why armed police recently shot knife wielding terrorises in London.  The severity of the threat meant that deadly force became a response response.  However what you said was the the police having to use reasonable force "doesn't make any sense".


I can see how what I said came across that way, but what I meant was that it made no sense for officers to ONLY be trained to take down someone with minimal force. If a cop found themselves in a situation where they needed a higher level of reasonable force, and were never given the training to do so, they would be in a pretty bad situation.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> km is no better or worse than a lot of arts, it shares the problem with a number of arts that you cant try it full speed/ power until you actually need t, by which time its to late.
> 
> a lot of the promo stuff is fantasy


Agreed it looks cool and probably draws in good business but really no ones going to get in close range with a gun they'll be at a distance so really you have no chance to get to them


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Agreed it looks cool and probably draws in good business but really no ones going to get in close range with a gun they'll be at a distance so really you have no chance to get to them


Fine. Replace that gun with a knife, or stick, or any other close-range weapon that would require a disarming technique similar to that of a gun. Saying 'chances are if someone has a weapon you're screwed anyway' effectively delegitimizes any hand-to-hand disarming technique, which eliminates a pretty big part of self-defense. Better to know how to disarm a guy with a knife or gun and never have to than need to and not know how.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I can see how what I said came across that way, but what I meant was that it made no sense for officers to ONLY be trained to take down someone with minimal force. If a cop found themselves in a situation where they needed a higher level of reasonable force, and were never given the training to do so, they would be in a pretty bad situation.


Ok, I get what you meant now.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Does that mean that police officers are only trained to take down someone safely and 'legally'



Police officers are trained to take people down effectively.



Nadav917 said:


> Are you telling me that if a police officer has a gun pointed at them, that they must still consider the ethical implications of kicking the guy in the groin or gouging out his eyes?



Faced with a gun pointing at you I doubt many people consider eye gouges and groin kicks anyway, neither are as effective as you seem to think they are.



Nadav917 said:


> I also don't appreciate your condescension where you assume I'm brainwashed by Hollywood movies to think that a gun-to-the-head situation can be solved with simply twisting it out of the guy's hand, but surely it's better to train KM techniques in disarming someone than just sit back and say 'Oh well it's not as easy to disarm someone as they show in the movies' and just take the bullet, right?



KM is an amalgam of different styles, it is not the only one, as you seem to thin, that has disarms.



Nadav917 said:


> Also, you sort of proved yourself wrong in your last point. If it's sometimes considered 'reasonable' to use lethal force, such as in the case of a terrorist attack, then what happened to your argument that KM is not suitable for police work?



You said it in your first sentence.. "Obviously I'm not a police officer,"  you have serving and retired police officers telling you something but you aren't accepting they know what they are talking about. KM is no more and no less effective than most styles, it isn't special, it's isn't better than everything. It's also only as good as it's trained and taught.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> to kick him in the groin to get him to the ground



don't bank on it getting him to the ground, you may just make him angry.



Nadav917 said:


> ONLY be trained to take down someone with minimal force.



_*Reasonable force doesn't mean minimal force*_*.* Shooting a terrorist dead is reasonable force if they are on a murderous rampage and may have a suicide vest on. One can use force *proportional to the threat*, that's reasonable force. You can KO them if necessary that's reasonable, kicking them in the head while they are out isn't reasonable.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Police officers are trained to take people down effectively.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Never said it was the only one to teach disarms, and never said it was the best out of everything. From the very beginning this thread has been primarily about KM, which is why I keep talking about it. I just brought up the fact that KM has been used in different military and police forces across the world, which is something that can be found out with no policing experience, but rather a quick search on google. I respect the answers given by retired police officers, but you haven't trained as a cop all over the world, so I'm not sure how you can be so certain about the use of it across the entire world, as opposed to just the UK.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> don't bank on it getting him to the ground, you may just make him angry.
> 
> 
> 
> _*Reasonable force doesn't mean minimal force*_*.* Shooting a terrorist dead is reasonable force if they are on a murderous rampage and may have a suicide vest on. One can use force *proportional to the threat*, that's reasonable force. You can KO them if necessary that's reasonable, kicking them in the head while they are out isn't reasonable.


That is precisely what I have been saying all along. If the guy is standing there with his hands up, a cop should not be able to stick his fingers in his eyes to neutralize him. If he was swinging at him with a knife, a cop who is trained in KM would be better off than one who isn't. (Again I only say KM in this case because it is relevant to this threat, I'm not saying another MA wouldn't be effective.)


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Never said it was the only one to teach disarms, and never said it was the best out of everything. From the very beginning this thread has been primarily about KM, which is why I keep talking about it. I just brought up the fact that KM has been used in different military and police forces across the world, which is something that can be found out with no policing experience, but rather a quick search on google. I respect the answers given by retired police officers, but you haven't trained as a cop all over the world, so I'm not sure how you can be so certain about the use of it across the entire world, as opposed to just the UK.


Don't believe everything google tells you


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Never said it was the only one to teach disarms, and never said it was the best out of everything. From the very beginning this thread has been primarily about KM, which is why I keep talking about it. I just brought up the fact that KM has been used in different military and police forces across the world, which is something that can be found out with no policing experience, but rather a quick search on google. I respect the answers given by retired police officers, but you haven't trained as a cop all over the world, so I'm not sure how you can be so certain about the use of it across the entire world, as opposed to just the UK.



Ok I googled, no police forces came up and only the IDF came up ( as Israeli police officers are ex military they don't count as being taught KM as police) I've worked with many people from many different countries so have a good idea of what they train. However many KM schools claim that it's taught in far more places than it is, it's a 'selling point'. It's USP isn't, and other styles gyms and schools also use 'special forces/police' as their selling point.
Yes, this thread is about KM but you don't seem to understand that there's many variations of it, thought up by various people, as I keep saying it's only as good as the instructor teaching and only as good as the training, just like any other style.



Nadav917 said:


> That is precisely what I have been saying all along. If the guy is standing there with his hands up, a cop should not be able to stick his fingers in his eyes to neutralize him. If he was swinging at him with a knife, a cop who is trained in KM would be better off than one who isn't. (Again I only say KM in this case because it is relevant to this threat, I'm not saying another MA wouldn't be effective.)



Just no, there is not a style in the world that can disarm a knifeman purely using martial arts techniques without the defender being injured sometimes severely. Anyone who teaches you that you can disarm a knife swinging toward you and you not be hurt is lying. Police officers just about everywhere know this ( and one I can think of is an extremely good martial artist, an MMA fighter, as well as a police unarmed combat trainer).
On the recent terrorist knife attack in London various people took on the attackers, one Spanish man went for them with his skateboard, he was killed. Another, a sports journalist who is also a martial artist also went for them and was stabbed in the throat. A police officer used his baton against one and received bad cuts to both arms, others threw chairs and tables at them. The police shot them dead.

I though many of you would like this though.
http://www.independent.co.uk/News/u...ner-football-fan-lion-of-london-a7775246.html


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> That is precisely what I have been saying all along. If the guy is standing there with his hands up, a cop should not be able to stick his fingers in his eyes to neutralize him. If he was swinging at him with a knife, a cop who is trained in KM would be better off than one who isn't. (Again I only say KM in this case because it is relevant to this threat, I'm not saying another MA wouldn't be effective.)


Well I'm not police but I've worked on plenty of doors and if I ever eye gouged a guy even if he had a rocket launcher I'd be out of a job and may as well give the guy my house keys with how much he'd sue me for


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Well I'm not police but I've worked on plenty of doors and if I ever eye gouged a guy even if he had a rocket launcher I'd be out of a job and may as well give the guy my house keys with how much he'd sue me for



I saw a fight in a club once where a guy was poked in the eye ( not 'gouged' as such, as the eyeball didn't hang down his cheek) it just made him as mad as hell, he  used his good eye to take down everyone he could see. We were fine we just got on his blindside.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Ok I googled, no police forces came up and only the IDF came up ( as Israeli police officers are ex military they don't count as being taught KM as police) I've worked with many people from many different countries so have a good idea of what they train. However many KM schools claim that it's taught in far more places than it is, it's a 'selling point'. It's USP isn't, and other styles gyms and schools also use 'special forces/police' as their selling point.
> Yes, this thread is about KM but you don't seem to understand that there's many variations of it, thought up by various people, as I keep saying it's only as good as the instructor teaching and only as good as the training, just like any other style.
> 
> 
> ...


You're putting words into my mouth now. Did I ever once claim that using KM against a knife-wielding attacker would not result in you being injured? The first thing my KM teacher told me was that the majority of the time you're in a fight with someone who genuinely wants to cause you harm, you're going to get hurt. The most you can hope for most of the time is having that knife hitting your arm instead of plunging into your heart, as it is nearly impossible to completely stop someone with intent to hurt you. The fact is that if someone were swinging a knife at me, I'd have a better chance of getting out of the confrontation alive if I were trained in KM than if I weren't trained in anything. You can bring up different martial arts that would have the same effect all day long, but I'm not talking about other martial arts. If you're going to deny that knowing KM against someone trying to slash you would be better than not knowing any self-defense, I'm afraid I can't say anything to you anymore, because that is simply ridiculous.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> You're putting words into my mouth now. Did I ever once claim that using KM against a knife-wielding attacker would not result in you being injured? The first thing my KM teacher told me was that the majority of the time you're in a fight with someone who genuinely wants to cause you harm, you're going to get hurt. The most you can hope for most of the time is having that knife hitting your arm instead of plunging into your heart, as it is nearly impossible to completely stop someone with intent to hurt you. The fact is that if someone were swinging a knife at me, I'd have a better chance of getting out of the confrontation alive if I were trained in KM than if I weren't trained in anything. You can bring up different martial arts that would have the same effect all day long, but I'm not talking about other martial arts. If you're going to deny that knowing KM against someone trying to slash you would be better than not knowing any self-defense, I'm afraid I can't say anything to you anymore, because that is simply ridiculous.


Not necessarily if a knife catches you on the inside of your arm and catches a vein then you'll die just the same as if you get stabbed in the heart


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Not necessarily if a knife catches you on the inside of your arm and catches a vein then you'll die just the same as if you get stabbed in the heart


You're getting into the 'what if's' now, which is hardly conducive to a solid debate. I'd rather take my chances with getting cut in the arm, which isn't lethal 100% of the time, than getting stabbed in the heart, which as far as I know is much more likely to kill you.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> You're putting words into my mouth now. Did I ever once claim that using KM against a knife-wielding attacker would not result in you being injured? The first thing my KM teacher told me was that the majority of the time you're in a fight with someone who genuinely wants to cause you harm, you're going to get hurt. The most you can hope for most of the time is having that knife hitting your arm instead of plunging into your heart, as it is nearly impossible to completely stop someone with intent to hurt you. The fact is that if someone were swinging a knife at me, I'd have a better chance of getting out of the confrontation alive if I were trained in KM than if I weren't trained in anything. You can bring up different martial arts that would have the same effect all day long, but I'm not talking about other martial arts. If you're going to deny that knowing KM against someone trying to slash you would be better than not knowing any self-defense, I'm afraid I can't say anything to you anymore, because that is simply ridiculous.


You really need to realise martial arts won't turn you into jackie chan. Martial artists aren't superhuman and non martial artists aren't just slow clumsy idiots. Someone could train everyday for 20 years and they could get into a fight with a drunk at a bar and get knocked out in 5 seconds. It's not about how much training you have it's about what happens in that fight. There's a lot of luck involved in fights.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> You're getting into the 'what if's' now, which is hardly conducive to a solid debate. I'd rather take my chances with getting cut in the arm, which isn't lethal 100% of the time, than getting stabbed in the heart, which as far as I know is much more likely to kill you.


The what it's are the most important part of martial arts. What you're stuck on is the ideal phase where it happens in the perfect way....nope wrong you'll never use the perfect technique in a fight it'll never go to plan you need to consider these ideal things and honestly what I've said isn't that uncommon you go to block a knife it'll be with your lower arm right where the veins are....one wrong twist you get very dead very quick


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> You really need to realise martial arts won't turn you into jackie chan. Martial artists aren't superhuman and non martial artists aren't just slow clumsy idiots. Someone could train everyday for 20 years and they could get into a fight with a drunk at a bar and get knocked out in 5 seconds. It's not about how much training you have it's about what happens in that fight. There's a lot of luck involved in fights.


Then why train in any martial arts ever? You can read every single one of my replies, I never claimed that training in KM or anything else will turn me into a killing machine. If I train KM for 5 years, I will be better suited to defend myself than I was before I started training. That is just the truth. Of course every fight involves a certain level of luck, but I couldn't win a fight vs. Conor Mcgregor. Why? Because he's trained in MA's more than I have, and therefore is better at defending and attacking.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> The what it's are the most important part of martial arts. What you're stuck on is the ideal phase where it happens in the perfect way....nope wrong you'll never use the perfect technique in a fight it'll never go to plan you need to consider these ideal things and honestly what I've said isn't that uncommon you go to block a knife it'll be with your lower arm right where the veins are....one wrong twist you get very dead very quick


No, I meant the what if's aren't good for a debate, which is what is happening right now. I can say, 'You might be a kung fu master, but what if the guy you're fighting pulls out a grenade and throws it at your feet? Kung fu won't help you then will it?' No, of course it won't. But that's not relevant. An infinite number of things can happen during a fight. Fights are dangerous, whether you are trained in MA or not. They are less dangerous, however, if you have some idea of what to do against an attack. I honestly cannot see how you are trying to argue against that statement, considering this is an entire website dedicated to people who recognize the benefit of MA on your reflexes, defensive skills and overall safety.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Then why train in any martial arts ever? You can read every single one of my replies, I never claimed that training in KM or anything else will turn me into a killing machine. If I train KM for 5 years, I will be better suited to defend myself than I was before I started training. That is just the truth. Of course every fight involves a certain level of luck, but I couldn't win a fight vs. Conor Mcgregor. Why? Because he's trained in MA's more than I have, and therefore is better at defending and attacking.


If I went up to Conor mcgregor in a bar when he's talking to his friends and punch him in the face then I could knock him out. Better suited sure but no where near certain and honestly not always.  A guy I know was a very good street fighter and got into fights a lot and won most. He was an idiot but he was tough but then he started training and he couldn't fight as well because he got so focused on his techical fighting he lost the killer instinct, it's like Bruce lee says about people getting held down by traditional mess. Now I know that's not the general rule but it happens


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> No, I meant the what if's aren't good for a debate, which is what is happening right now. I can say, 'You might be a kung fu master, but what if the guy you're fighting pulls out a grenade and throws it at your feet? Kung fu won't help you then will it?' No, of course it won't. But that's not relevant. An infinite number of things can happen during a fight. Fights are dangerous, whether you are trained in MA or not. They are less dangerous, however, if you have some idea of what to do against an attack. I honestly cannot see how you are trying to argue against that statement, considering this is an entire website dedicated to people who recognize the benefit of MA on your reflexes, defensive skills and overall safety.


We recognise it but aren't blinded by it either. And saying what if someone throws a grenade that's stupid...but saying what if you block a knife the wrong way and get your veins cut that's not stupid because that could very easily happen.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> If I went up to Conor mcgregor in a bar when he's talking to his friends and punch him in the face then I could knock him out. Better suited sure but no where near certain and honestly not always.  A guy I know was a very good street fighter and got into fights a lot and won most. He was an idiot but he was tough but then he started training and he couldn't fight as well because he got so focused on his techical fighting he lost the killer instinct, it's like Bruce lee says about people getting held down by traditional mess. Now I know that's not the general rule but it happens


I thought we were talking about fighting, not surprise punches to the face. Choose your scenario and then maybe we can try and see how MA's would benefit. Having a gun on you won't help if someone sneaks up on you and knocks you out with a baton to the head, does that mean guns are never a good way to defend yourself?


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> We recognise it but aren't blinded by it either. And saying what if someone throws a grenade that's stupid...but saying what if you block a knife the wrong way and get your veins cut that's not stupid because that could very easily happen.


What makes you think I'm blinded by it? Again, I never claimed KM or any MA would make me into an impervious lethal weapon than can take out anyone who comes at me, but it would at least give me a fighting chance.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I thought we were talking about fighting, not surprise punches to the face. Choose your scenario and then maybe we can try and see how MA's would benefit. Having a gun on you won't help if someone sneaks up on you and knocks you out with a baton to the head, does that mean guns are never a good way to defend yourself?


How do you a think fight works? Do you think they clear a massive space declare they're going to fight then both drop into fighting stances?

Surprise attacks are how most fights start unless you're one of those idiots who goes round looking for trouble.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> What makes you think I'm blinded by it? Again, I never claimed KM or any MA would make me into an impervious lethal weapon than can take out anyone who comes at me, but it would at least give me a fighting chance.


Everyone's got a fighting chance someone sees a knife and starts swinging haymakers with no skill that could just as easily save them as any Krav Maga techique


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> How do you a think fight works? Do you think they clear a massive space declare they're going to fight then both drop into fighting stances?
> 
> Surprise attacks are how most fights start unless you're one of those idiots who goes round looking for trouble.


Obviously you cannot defend against an attack that comes out of nowhere. Doesn't matter if you're a blackbelt in whatever, someone smashes your face against the bar, you're going to take the hit. But on the off-chance you're not immediately rendered unconscious, the attack then turns into a fight, where both sides are aware of the conflict. This is where the MA's come in. This is what I'm talking about. You keep trying to make me seem like some sort of naïve teen who loves ninja movies too much and thinks that any fight can be solved with some fancy moves, but I'm not. I get that fighting is messy. I get that knowing MA's will not protect me 100%. But I also know that it is better than where I am right now, which is untrained in any MA.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Everyone's got a fighting chance someone sees a knife and starts swinging haymakers with no skill that could just as easily save them as any Krav Maga techique


You really believe that if I square up like a boxer I would have just as good a chance of blocking a knife than if I knew KM, a form of self-defense that specifically trains for situations involving knives at close range?


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Obviously you cannot defend against an attack that comes out of nowhere. Doesn't matter if you're a blackbelt in whatever, someone smashes your face against the bar, you're going to take the hit. But on the off-chance you're not immediately rendered unconscious, the attack then turns into a fight, where both sides are aware of the conflict. This is where the MA's come in. This is what I'm talking about. You keep trying to make me seem like some sort of naïve teen who loves ninja movies too much and thinks that any fight can be solved with some fancy moves, but I'm not. I get that fighting is messy. I get that knowing MA's will not protect me 100%. But I also know that it is better than where I am right now, which is untrained in any MA.


I don't need to make you seem like anything you're doing all the work for me.

You are naive and you are a teenager. Nothing wrong with that we all start somewhere but you've come no here saying things that are wrong so don't be upset when people point out those things to you.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> You really believe that if I square up like a boxer I would have just as good a chance of blocking a knife than if I knew KM, a form of self-defense that specifically trains for situations involving knives at close range?


Yep because I have this great thing called life experience where I've seen this exact thing happened.

Also why wait until the knifes thrown as soon as you see the hint of a knife coming out smack the guy as hard as you can


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> You are naive and you are a teenager. Nothing wrong with that we all start somewhere but you've come no here saying things that are wrong so don't be upset when people point out those things to you.



*QFT.*


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> I don't need to make you seem like anything you're doing all the work for me.
> 
> You are naive and you are a teenager. Nothing wrong with that we all start somewhere but you've come no here saying things that are wrong so don't be upset when people point out those things to you.


Can you please outline for me what I've said that was so incorrect? Maybe I was wrong about the extent to which KM is used around the world in police and military forces, but I'm interested in how I'm incorrect that KM would do a better job of defending me than being untrained in MA at all.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Yep because I have this great thing called life experience where I've seen this exact thing happened.
> 
> Also why wait until the knifes thrown as soon as you see the hint of a knife coming out smack the guy as hard as you can


Again, you're putting words into my mouth. It's not like I would stand there waiting for a knife to come out to counter it. I'm saying that using a block like you would in boxing (putting your hands in front of your face) would not defend against a knife as well as some of the techniques I've already learned in KM in the few lessons I've had.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Can you please outline for me what I've said that was so incorrect? Maybe I was wrong about the extent to which KM is used around the world in police and military forces, but I'm interested in how I'm incorrect that KM would do a better job of defending me than being untrained in MA at all.


Because as has been said many times the martial art really means nothing in a fight it's about the person who uses it. You could train for 10 years but just not be very good or skilled or co-ordinated or just not tough enough to fight. I know loads of very good martial artists way better than me who look amazing doing there kata and techniques in the dojo but just aren't tough enough to defend themselves if they get a hit and taste their own blood they'd freeze and stop and get pounded on.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Again, you're putting words into my mouth. It's not like I would stand there waiting for a knife to come out to counter it. I'm saying that using a block like you would in boxing (putting your hands in front of your face) would not defend against a knife as well as some of the techniques I've already learned in KM in the few lessons I've had.


Actually a boxing block would work very well against a knife. It'd stop the knife hitting it's intended target it may cut your forearm but who cares that's what happens in a fight. Okay you talk me through this scenario 

I draw a knife and try to stick it In your stomach. Tell me what you do


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Because as has been said many times the martial art really means nothing in a fight it's about the person who uses it. You could train for 10 years but just not be very good or skilled or co-ordinated or just not tough enough to fight. I know loads of very good martial artists way better than me who look amazing doing there kata and techniques in the dojo but just aren't tough enough to defend themselves if they get a hit and taste their own blood they'd freeze and stop and get pounded on.


Okay I'll lay out to you what I've meant this entire time. Take your average guy. Not trained in any martial arts. If he were ever confronted with someone trying to start a fight with him, he would probably try to swing a few punches, most likely miss, and receive a beating. Now take that same guy, and put him through even just a year or two of KM, or any other MA. After that period of time, he will be more suited to reading the situation, knowing when to counter and when to attack, being able to block a punch from the attacker, and overall will be better off in the fight. I never once stated that if you take a weak-willed pacifist who couldn't hit a man if he tried and tell him how to punch a guy in the throat in the right way, he'd suddenly become Bruce Lee. You're putting these words into my mouth and then calling me out on them, when I never once stated any such thing.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Actually a boxing block would work very well against a knife. It'd stop the knife hitting it's intended target it may cut your forearm but who cares that's what happens in a fight. Okay you talk me through this scenario
> 
> I draw a knife and try to stick it In your stomach. Tell me what you do


Oh I'm sorry I thought that by your logic if a knife nicks your arm you can bleed out just as easily as if you were stabbed in the heart right? 

As for your scenario, I'm not denying it would be hard to defend. If someone did that to me right now, with me and my lack of training, I would most certainly be fucked. You, on the other hand, who I am assuming has done MA's for a while now based off of your profile on here, would most likely be able to handle the situation better than I could.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Okay I'll lay out to you what I've meant this entire time. Take your average guy. Not trained in any martial arts. If he were ever confronted with someone trying to start a fight with him, he would probably try to swing a few punches, most likely miss, and receive a beating. Now take that same guy, and put him through even just a year or two of KM, or any other MA. After that period of time, he will be more suited to reading the situation, knowing when to counter and when to attack, being able to block a punch from the attacker, and overall will be better off in the fight. I never once stated that if you take a weak-willed pacifist who couldn't hit a man if he tried and tell him how to punch a guy in the throat in the right way, he'd suddenly become Bruce Lee. You're putting these words into my mouth and then calling me out on them, when I never once stated any such thing.


As I've said.....and I'll have to say again it seems. It depends on the person. They may suck, there teacher may be a fraud, maybe they're drunk at the time. A good street fighter could easily take out a good martial artist and vice versa


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> As I've said.....and I'll have to say again it seems. It depends on the person. They may suck, there teacher may be a fraud, maybe they're drunk at the time. A good street fighter could easily take out a good martial artist and vice versa


It seems like we're both repeating ourselves now. That average guy after 2 years of training would be better than he was before. Period. He might not be able to win a fight against a skilled street fighter, but he would simply be more skilled than he was before he started his training. What you're saying is like if someone who never played basketball before trained every day for years, but when it came down to it he never actually got any better because he's 'just not that kind of guy'.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Oh I'm sorry I thought that by your logic if a knife nicks your arm you can bleed out just as easily as if you were stabbed in the heart right?
> 
> As for your scenario, I'm not denying it would be hard to defend. If someone did that to me right now, with me and my lack of training, I would most certainly be fucked. You, on the other hand, who I am assuming has done MA's for a while now based off of your profile on here, would most likely be able to handle the situation better than I could.


Look at the magic word I said....forearms....you don't have veins on the forearms as far as I know.

Sooo you haven't even been taught a knife defence yet but are so certain that a Krav Maga person could defend against a knife better than an average guy...you don't know how good the Krav Maga defences are...trust me there are knife techniques taught out there that are seriously dangerous....to the person doing the technique


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> It seems like we're both repeating ourselves now. That average guy after 2 years of training would be better than he was before. Period. He might not be able to win a fight against a skilled street fighter, but he would simply be more skilled than he was before he started his training. What you're saying is like if someone who never played basketball before trained every day for years, but when it came down to it he never actually got any better because he's 'just not that kind of guy'.


Yep difference is you're repeating yourself saying things wrong. Again no maybe not it all depends there is nothing certain about anything. Maybe train for at least a year before thinking you know these things for certain. I guarantee if your still training in a year you'll see exactly what I'm saying


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Look at the magic word I said....forearms....you don't have veins on the forearms as far as I know.
> 
> Sooo you haven't even been taught a knife defence yet but are so certain that a Krav Maga person could defend against a knife better than an average guy...you don't know how good the Krav Maga defences are...trust me there are knife techniques taught out there that are seriously dangerous....to the person doing the technique


If you keep your arms up like a boxer, the person wielding the knife could very simple turn it at an angle, and hit you in your upper arm. 

And I have been taught knife defences in class, admittedly at a much slower speed and with fake knives, so no, I wouldn't claim myself to be an expert on blocking knives, which is what I meant by my lack of training. And how could you seriously say that an average guy could defend against a knife as well as a KM practitioner? Even with my limited experience in the class, I would feel more confident against a knife than I would before I had ever done those exercises in class. Why? Because I learned a new technique, went through it several times with a partner, and have therefore added that knowledge into my 'fighting portfolio'. I know that personally, if someone slashed at me with a knife before I started KM, I would likely flinch like a little ***** and take the blade to the chest, because I would have no idea how to stop it. Now having done what I did during those lessons, I would at least try to do what I learned in class.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Yep difference is you're repeating yourself saying things wrong. Again no maybe not it all depends there is nothing certain about anything. Maybe train for at least a year before thinking you know these things for certain. I guarantee if your still training in a year you'll see exactly what I'm saying


So you're saying that it happens that someone starts a martial art and after training for a while, are less suited for a fight than they were before? I really hope you realize how ridiculous that sounds.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> If you keep your arms up like a boxer, the person wielding the knife could very simple turn it at an angle, and hit you in your upper arm.
> 
> And I have been taught knife defences in class, admittedly at a much slower speed and with fake knives, so no, I wouldn't claim myself to be an expert on blocking knives, which is what I meant by my lack of training. And how could you seriously say that an average guy could defend against a knife as well as a KM practitioner? Even with my limited experience in the class, I would feel more confident against a knife than I would before I had ever done those exercises in class. Why? Because I learned a new technique, went through it several times with a partner, and have therefore added that knowledge into my 'fighting portfolio'. I know that personally, if someone slashed at me with a knife before I started KM, I would likely flinch like a little ***** and take the blade to the chest, because I would have no idea how to stop it. Now having done what I did during those lessons, I would at least try to do what I learned in class.


With your limited experience you'd die you know rhe techique very very basically and if you try it against a full speed knife you'd die very quick trust me on that


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> With your limited experience you'd die you know rhe techique very very basically and if you try it against a full speed knife you'd die very quick trust me on that


Not any quicker than I'd die throwing my hands up and closing my eyes would I?


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> So you're saying that it happens that someone starts a martial art and after training for a while, are less suited for a fight than they were before? I really hope you realize how ridiculous that sounds.


Yes it does I've seen it happen a number of times but hey you know best right. Anyway I'm bored bye bye


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Not any quicker than I'd die throwing my hands up and closing my eyes would I?


Best advice for anyone to deal with a knife. Run like hell


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Best advice for anyone to deal with a knife. Run like hell


What if you can't? **** happens man, if my back was against the wall and a knife was in my face, I'll take KM over nothing any day. But you can keep believing that I would somehow be better off being unskilled at any self-defense, I just hope you don't ever decide to become a martial arts teacher, because then I'd have to worry for the safety of your students.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> What if you can't? **** happens man, if my back was against the wall and a knife was in my face, I'll take KM over nothing any day. But you can keep believing that I would somehow be better off being unskilled at any self-defense, I just hope you don't ever decide to become a martial arts teacher, because then I'd have to worry for the safety of your students.


Lol I already do teach thanks and my students are fine thank you. But thanks for your concern kiddo


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Lol I already do teach thanks and my students are fine thank you. But thanks for your concern kiddo


Why teach them though? Doesn't that make them worse off in a fight? You'd better just leave them be untrained, because they have the same fighting chance as you do, right?


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Why teach them though? Doesn't that make them worse off in a fight? You'd better just leave them be untrained, because they have the same fighting chance as you do, right?


Yeaahhhh that's right because everyone wants to fight who trains martial arts don't they


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Yeaahhhh that's right because everyone wants to fight who trains martial arts don't they


Fair point. I see you've dropped your argument though, presumably because you realized how little sense it made.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Fair point. I see you've dropped your argument though, presumably because you realized how little sense it made.


No I just can't be bothered arguing with children who think they're right all the time


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> No I just can't be bothered arguing with children who think they're right all the time


Nice, going for the ad hominem. Maturity isn't contingent on age, and sometimes kids are right too


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Nice, going for the ad hominem. Maturity isn't contingent on age, and sometimes kids are right too


Bye I'm very bored now I'm sure you'll see this as a sign that you win but hey whatever gets you through the day


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> The first thing my KM teacher told me was that the majority of the time you're in a fight with someone who genuinely wants to cause you harm, you're going to get hurt. The most you can hope for most of the time is having that knife hitting your arm instead of plunging into your heart, as it is nearly impossible to completely stop someone with intent to hurt you.


I think your instructor has been watching too many Bourne films.  If someone has a knife and wants to hurt you they are hardly likely to do you the courtesy of waving it infront of you so you have a chance to defend yourself.  They'll shank you, prison style, and the first you will know about it is when the knife is in your back.

On the other hand if someone shows you the knife, chances are they just want to scare you into giving them what they want (money, phone, body (for the purposes of sexual assault),

Hence the saying; A stabber rarely shows and a shower rarely stabs.

Have you or your instructor looked at the crime statistics in your area to determine number of recorded knife crimes?  How many stories of people fighting with knives in the street are there in your local paper in the last 12 months? Is is something you realistically need to learn where you live?  Your KM teacher is going to feed you the Jason Bourne fantasy of knife fighting because he wants to sell you KM lessons, but what it the reality where you live?


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> I think your instructor has been watching too many Bourne films.  If someone has a knife and wants to hurt you they are hardly likely to do you the courtesy of waving it infront of you so you have a chance to defend yourself.  They'll shank you, prison style, and the first you will know about it is when the knife is in your back.
> 
> On the other hand if someone shows you the knife, chances are they just want to scare you into giving them what they want (money, phone, body (for the purposes of sexual assault),
> 
> ...


No one's fed me any fantasy, I've never been in a fight and doubt I will be for a very long time. I live in a rich country with extremely low crime rates, and I'm not worried about anyone stabbing me when I walk down the street. If I were being mugged, I would do what the guy said, I wouldn't try to show off any KM. That'd be stupid. But statistics don't help you if you end up in a bad situation. It might not be a knife, but I've seen a guy break a bottle while drunk at a bar and threaten someone else with it. Nothing ended up happening, but if it had escalated, things could have gone very bad. If I'm ever in a situation like that (statistically unlikely but always possible), I'd feel a lot better knowing I've put some work into dealing with something like that. I've just been using a knife as an example, but a broken bottle could do just as much damage if used correctly. As I said earlier in this thread, if someone walks up behind you and shanks you in the back, you're screwed. No way around it. But fights where you are aware the other guy is holding a weapon do happen, and in those cases having done the techniques in class would help, I believe.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I live in a rich country with extremely low crime rates, and I'm not worried about anyone stabbing me when I walk down the street. If I were being mugged, I would do what the guy said, I wouldn't try to show off any KM.


Shouldn't SD training reflect the threats you are most likely to face?  People waving knives or bottles in your face is not going to be top of the list of most likely threats I would imagine if that is where you live.  What do the crime statistics in your area show is the threat someone of you age/sex demographic is most likely to face?

A military SD system developed for for a highly volatile part of the world would not seem to be designed for a civilian living in a well off low crime rate surburban environment.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Shouldn't SD training reflect the threats you are most likely to face?  People waving knives or bottles in your face is not going to be top of the list of most likely threats I would imagine if that is where you live.  What do the crime statistics in your area show is the threat someone of you age/sex demographic is most likely to face?
> 
> A military SD system developed for for a highly volatile part of the world would not seem to be designed for a civilian living in a well off low crime rate surburban environment.


Why focus on statistics though? If there's only one stabbing in my town per year, thats a very low chance of me being stabbed. But what if that one person were me? Knowing the chances of being stabbed are low doesn't help me if someone happens to be trying to stab me. This is all hypothetical, of course. I'm not gearing up for war or anything. I guarantee 95% of KM students don't ever use it in a real life-or-death situation, but it doesn't hurt being trained in it.

Also KM started for the military but can easily be adapted for civilian use. Mainly just take out the part where you learn how to attack and defend with the stock and barrel of a rifle and bang, you're prepared for most things you'll run into in the regular world.


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Why teach them though? Doesn't that make them worse off in a fight? You'd better just leave them be untrained, because they have the same fighting chance as you do, right?


thos discussion has polarizered to ( the ussual ) silly positions. Those being that learning ma makes you supper dooper at defending your self, or its not a bout fighting ,and you will lose anyway in a street encounter.

the simple rule of thumb is,,,,,,,,,, if you have the required skills and the physicality to put them into action the ma should win/ defend himself. If the skills are under developed   or he doesn't have the superior strengh, speed ,co ordination to pull them off then he will probably loose. 

taken ng a knife of someone is very easy, provided you have perfected the techneque AND if you are,considerably faster than the knife man with the strength to get it out of his grip/ deliver a killer blow. If not you will get stabbed some where, it is just the rules of the jungle


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Why focus on statistics though? If there's only one stabbing in my town per year, thats a very low chance of me being stabbed. But what if that one person were me? Knowing the chances of being stabbed are low doesn't help me if someone happens to be trying to stab me. This is all hypothetical, of course. I'm not gearing up for war or anything. I guarantee 95% of KM students don't ever use it in a real life-or-death situation, but it doesn't hurt being trained in it.
> 
> Also KM started for the military but can easily be adapted for civilian use. Mainly just take out the part where you learn how to attack and defend with the stock and barrel of a rifle and bang, you're prepared for most things you'll run into in the regular world.


yes, but with the point I made above, KM was developed for the idf. If you are 22and just completed basic training for the army. Then you may well have the physicality to use them effectively . Though I'm sure the idf don't have a 100% win record with it either. But you need the fitness, be that strengh co ordination speed balance to pull it off. If you have no physical advantages on your attacker, then all you are left with is a technique and the element of surprise, which means you either take them out in 5 secs or you lose


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> yes, but with the point I made above, KM was developed for the idf. If you are 22and just completed basic training for the army. Then you may well have the physicality to use them effectively . Though I'm sure the idf don't have a 100% win record with it either. But you need the fitness, be that strengh co ordination speed balance to pull it off. If you have no physical advantages on your attacker, then all you are left with is a technique and the element of surprise, which means you either take them out in 5 secs or you lose


Thank you for finally bringing this thread back to where it started. That is precisely why I want to start kickboxing on the side, so that I can get that higher level of physical fitness and strength, and be able to use that in my KM training.


----------



## jobo (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Thank you for finally bringing this thread back to where it started. That is precisely why I want to start kickboxing on the side, so that I can get that higher level of physical fitness and strength, and be able to use that in my KM training.


yes and that a very valid logic. . But the point that other are making is that For most of the students it is indeed a Jason Bourne fantasy of killer moves that ( your words) neutralise an a much more physically able attacker in seconds and that's dodgy advertising.

my initial point was the kickboxing techniques' will in most instances be superior to KM, not least because of the simplicity, the live practise and the fitness you need , with the notable exception of knife and gun disarms, which as we have established are dodgy at the best of times


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

jobo said:


> KM was developed for the idf.



It was actually developed before the IDF was formed, it was designed for Jewish people ( not fit or even young people) to be able to defend themselves from the many anti Semitic attacks we are subjected to even to this day. It is taught to the IDF in a stronger more robust form but it's not a substitute for weapons, it's very much a last ditch line of defence. There has been a lot of knife attacks in Israel by terrorists ( the thought is that the London attackers are emulating them) but the first thing is to shoot them not try to defend against them. The KM training is also very good for training confidence and aggression into recruits, one reason that the British army still trains with the bayonet. British soldiers have had to use their bayonets a couple of times in Afghanistan but it was a very much last ditch defence, weapons are the obvious first choice. martial arts training/hand to hand/ unarmed combat whatever you call it has obvious value for training recruits, that they may have to use it at some point is not really the reason they teach it.



Nadav917 said:


> Also KM started for the military but can easily be adapted for civilian use.



Wrong way wrong. My mother learnt KM in the 1930s for it's original purpose.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

Slight detour and I make no apologies for it.

All those who made it to hospital after last weeks terrorist attack have survived their injuries, no mean feat by the medics to keep them alive. Just wanted to pass that on.
Every London Bridge terror victim who made it to hospital has survived


----------



## drop bear (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Obviously I'm not a police officer, so I wouldn't know, but people keep saying on here that cops have to use reasonable force. Does that mean that police officers are only trained to take down someone safely and 'legally'? Because that doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't they be trained to handle something worse than that and then dial it down when actually working in the field? Are you telling me that if a police officer has a gun pointed at them, that they must still consider the ethical implications of kicking the guy in the groin or gouging out his eyes? Of course they have limitations and such and if there were any other way to take the guy down I'm positive they would take that course of action, what I'm trying to say is that KM would help in a more serious situation where they can't manage with just pepper spray or their taser doesn't work for some reason. I also don't appreciate your condescension where you assume I'm brainwashed by Hollywood movies to think that a gun-to-the-head situation can be solved with simply twisting it out of the guy's hand, but surely it's better to train KM techniques in disarming someone than just sit back and say 'Oh well it's not as easy to disarm someone as they show in the movies' and just take the bullet, right? Also, you sort of proved yourself wrong in your last point. If it's sometimes considered 'reasonable' to use lethal force, such as in the case of a terrorist attack, then what happened to your argument that KM is not suitable for police work?



They can use unreasonable force. But they are not generally trained in it. Part of the training is like a lot of industry training which is done for the sake of liability. So if you do go and poke out someone's eye. You can't then turn around and say you were told to do it.

For the rest of it. The kickboxing will help the krav in pretty much the way you think it will.

In that to get any move to work on a guy you need a system that stops you from being hit and let's you hit them.  Which is what kick boxing focuses on.

Then once you can do that you can apply krav tactics and hit people in their vulnerable areas.

I find that I need to do a lot of the very basic elements of fighting well before I can apply any of the krav stuff I have learned.

Even that block punch thing is a complete bugger to pull off in sparring.

Block,punch, arm grab, disarm, follow up? There is a mountain of fundamental fighting skills that are required to make that possible.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 10, 2017)

drop bear said:


> They can use unreasonable force



'Reasonable force' is a legal term rather than a description of techniques. it's what you deem reasonable in regards the threat you face. What might be thought reasonable for me probably wouldn't be thought reasonable if you did the same thing.
I know quite a few Aussie police officers and I've never found their training to be for the sake of liability, I've always been quite impressed by how physical they can be _when policing_ ( thought I'd better add that in case you got the wrong idea...)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> The reason I like it as a form of self defense is that it teaches you how to go for the weak points of the body, which is something that isn't taught in any other martial art. Obviously if I were a skilled kickboxer or MMA'er I could apply those skills and throw in some eye gouges and the like, but in KM lessons you actually go through the motions of attacking those areas and so it helps develop that response to be instinctual. Also KM is taught in most military/police forces around the world, so I don't see how you can argue that it isn't (at the very least) ONE of the best forms of self defense.


Every art I've studied, whether in depth or only in a seminar, has touched on the idea of weak points. It's how things work.


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Why focus on statistics though?


Because they tell you what crimes you are mostly likely to be a victim of?


----------



## drop bear (Jun 10, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> 'Reasonable force' is a legal term rather than a description of techniques. it's what you deem reasonable in regards the threat you face. What might be thought reasonable for me probably wouldn't be thought reasonable if you did the same thing.
> I know quite a few Aussie police officers and I've never found their training to be for the sake of liability, I've always been quite impressed by how physical they can be _when policing_ ( thought I'd better add that in case you got the wrong idea...)



Yeah. I was kind of using unreasonable force for simplicity.

Australians police tend to ignore the training.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Every art I've studied, whether in depth or only in a seminar, has touched on the idea of weak points. It's how things work.


I meant the points of the body that would be illegal to attack in most competition MA's. Just to clarify.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Because they tell you what crimes you are mostly likely to be a victim of?


Again, it's what is 'most likely'. Things outside of that category still do happen, and when training KM it's not like I'm gonna pass on the lesson that teaches how to disarm a guy with a gun because it 'isn't likely' for it to happen to me, I'll take what I can from the lesson on the off-chance I'm ever held at gunpoint for some reason.


----------



## frank raud (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Again, it's what is 'most likely'. Things outside of that category still do happen, and when training KM it's not like I'm gonna pass on the lesson that teaches how to disarm a guy with a gun because it 'isn't likely' for it to happen to me, I'll take what I can from the lesson on the off-chance I'm ever held at gunpoint for some reason.


Eventually you will realize that training for every possible scenario cuts into the time you train for realistic possibilities, making your overall training less effective.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

frank raud said:


> Eventually you will realize that training for every possible scenario cuts into the time you train for realistic possibilities, making your overall training less effective.


Fair enough, but I don't make the lesson plans. I just do what my teacher shows, and so far he hasn't been doing any outrageous stuff involving assault rifles or anything, so I think I'm good.


----------



## frank raud (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> Fair enough, but I don't make the lesson plans. I just do what my teacher shows, and so far he hasn't been doing any outrageous stuff involving assault rifles or anything, so I think I'm good.


  Oh, to be young again, and have someone else pay for my training.


----------



## Nadav917 (Jun 10, 2017)

frank raud said:


> Oh, to be young again, and have someone else pay for my training.


What does the lesson plan of the teacher have to do with who is paying the membership?


----------



## frank raud (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> What does the lesson plan of the teacher have to do with who is paying the membership?


It's the acceptance of throwing everything at a wall. People become a little more discerning when they figure out how many hours they had to work in exchange for what they are paying for their training. Nothing for you to worry about now.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I meant the points of the body that would be illegal to attack in most competition MA's. Just to clarify.


Yes, and every art I've visited with (even the ones that participate in competition) know about those. There are a lot of arts and schools that train for things other than competition, and they all train how to make use of those points. Krav is not unique in that aspect.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 10, 2017)

Nadav917 said:


> I meant the points of the body that would be illegal to attack in most competition MA's. Just to clarify.



Yeah. What nobody here is telling you is you attack them in the same way. And defend them in the same way as competition. Pretty much.

Well you should anyway.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 10, 2017)

frank raud said:


> Eventually you will realize that training for every possible scenario cuts into the time you train for realistic possibilities, making your overall training less effective.



It is a concept. Pulling something out of someone's hand is a meta idea. It can be trained with a gun. But used against a bottle.

Makes no real difference.

You can use the same hand fighting that works on weapons to stop punches in a clinch.

So you are not necessarily loosing out to specifics as much as you think.


----------



## frank raud (Jun 10, 2017)

drop bear said:


> It is a concept. Pulling something out of someone's hand is a meta idea. It can be trained with a gun. But used against a bottle.
> 
> Makes no real difference.
> 
> ...






 



  Doesn't translate well to a bottle or a knife


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2017)

frank raud said:


> Doesn't translate well to a bottle or a knife



OK. I don't have much phone credit so I might be guessing on those videos. But my one gun defense is basically half a wristlock throw and then stripping the gun out of their hand. If I had credit I could show you the aikido guy who pulled that off against a gunman. 

And look it is simple and mostly points the bang end of the gun towards the bad guy.

I have used that same wrist lock and strip against thousands of guys with bottles. Sometimes I don't even spill the contents.

I have also disarmed two guys with knives.(only one serious one) heaps of phones. And a packet of cigarettes.

I also use the same move to separate guys who have grips on each other.

I have gun defended people more than I have hit people. Because it is such a good little low level response.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 11, 2017)

drop bear said:


> OK. I don't have much phone credit so I might be guessing on those videos. But my one gun defense is basically half a wristlock throw and then stripping the gun out of their hand. If I had credit I could show you the aikido guy who pulled that off against a gunman.
> 
> And look it is simple and mostly points the bang end of the gun towards the bad guy.
> 
> ...


Most gun disarms I've seen (and trained in) are specialized to a gun. I prefer an approach like this - use what works elsewhere, if it applies - because it is just an adaptation of something you can use with other weapons, and even if there's no weapon.

Just FYI, the two videos show a fairly standard takeaway for a gun to/near the forehead from the front. One hand to the wrist for control, the other under the gun for an upward takeaway (getting the barrel off-target, too). One included a kick in the process, which seems both unnecessary and a bad idea - too much complication in a situation where failure would probably be disastrous. I've pasted a screen shot from the first one so you can see what they're showing.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> View attachment 20812
> Most gun disarms I've seen (and trained in) are specialized to a gun. I prefer an approach like this - use what works elsewhere, if it applies - because it is just an adaptation of something you can use with other weapons, and even if there's no weapon.
> 
> Just FYI, the two videos show a fairly standard takeaway for a gun to/near the forehead from the front. One hand to the wrist for control, the other under the gun for an upward takeaway (getting the barrel off-target, too). One included a kick in the process, which seems both unnecessary and a bad idea - too much complication in a situation where failure would probably be disastrous. I've pasted a screen shot from the first one so you can see what they're showing.



On my computer had a look. I dont think you need thousands of gun disarms or somehow specialize in them. But a couple are usefull mechanics.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 11, 2017)

drop bear said:


> On my computer had a look. I dont think you need thousands of gun disarms or somehow specialize in them. But a couple are usefull mechanics.


The ones I learned all came down to the same basic mechanics in either vertical or horizontal planes. If I had to put them in "technique" buckets, I'd say there were 3 techniques I learned, and the rest were just variations of those, or were variations of existing techniques (like the wrist throw you mentioned).


----------



## Paul_D (Jun 14, 2017)

The point I am trying to get across is you want to learn SD, but don’t actually seem to know who or what it is you are defending yourself from (An all too common problem).  Rather than learning to deal with the crimes/criminals you are most likely to be a victim of, so that your SD defence training is relevant to you, you seem to be training KM as some sort of swiss army knife MA to deal with any and all possible scenarios. 

If your 80 year old Gran came to you and asked you to teach her SD, because her friend had had her handbag stolen, you wouldn’t tell her to go to the local boxing club in case she ever gets into a bar fight.  Instead you would teach her about how muggers go about selecting their victims, so that she knows what behaviour to avoid doing, and therefore greatly lessen her chances of being selected as a victim.

Of course, if she also wants to go to her local boxing gym for fun, that’s fine  but that doesn’t make it a SD class for 80 year old grans.

If you are worried about bar fights, avoid bars with bad repuations, learn verbal de-escalation and pre-emptive striking.  If you are worried about being mugged learn how muggers select their victims so you can lessen your chances of beign slected as victim.  If you are worried about being a victim of domestic abuse learn to recognise the warning signs of a potentially abusive relaitonship so you can get out early.  If you are worried about being sexually assaulted whilst you go for a run, then avoid joggiong down alleyways were you can be ambushed, don't wear a hooded as it restricts your vision,and don't run with headphones in.

The list goes on, but basically none of the things I have listed you will learn in a KM class.  So if you enjoy KM keep doing it, that's great, but don't think you're learning SD that's relevant to you.  The vast majority of SD skills for people who live in rich countries with low crimes rates, and non physical.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 4, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> View attachment 20812
> Most gun disarms I've seen (and trained in) are specialized to a gun. I prefer an approach like this - use what works elsewhere, if it applies - because it is just an adaptation of something you can use with other weapons, and even if there's no weapon.
> 
> Just FYI, the two videos show a fairly standard takeaway for a gun to/near the forehead from the front. One hand to the wrist for control, the other under the gun for an upward takeaway (getting the barrel off-target, too). One included a kick in the process, which seems both unnecessary and a bad idea - too much complication in a situation where failure would probably be disastrous. I've pasted a screen shot from the first one so you can see what they're showing.


You can use disarms that will work against a knife but they are very much frowned upon and, imo, good reason.  The problem is this, let's say one uses a wrist lock > throw/takedown > strip sequence like you might do for a blunt object or knife.  Even if you control the wrist well enough that you can't get shot, a shot can still go off and who knows who/what will be hit.  The safest bet, for everyone in the area, are variations of what the videos showed.  In this way you get control of the weapon faster and you can then even turn it on the attacker to prone him out until the authorities arrive.

I also agree with the kick being problematic.  You are going to have your hands full (literally and figuratively) getting the gun, adding a kick to the mix is, again just my opinion, over complicating one of the most dangerous, if not the most dangerous, self defense scenario you will face.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 4, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> You can use disarms that will work against a knife but they are very much frowned upon and, imo, good reason.  The problem is this, let's say one uses a wrist lock > throw/takedown > strip sequence like you might do for a blunt object or knife.  Even if you control the wrist well enough that you can't get shot, a shot can still go off and who knows who/what will be hit.  The safest bet, for everyone in the area, are variations of what the videos showed.  In this way you get control of the weapon faster and you can then even turn it on the attacker to prone him out until the authorities arrive.
> 
> I also agree with the kick being problematic.  You are going to have your hands full (literally and figuratively) getting the gun, adding a kick to the mix is, again just my opinion, over complicating one of the most dangerous, if not the most dangerous, self defense scenario you will face.



The gun is mostly pointed towards the bad guy.

Control of the weapon is a more nuanced concept. You don't want to sacrifice loosing complete control for speed.

Thinking slap disarms here.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> The gun is mostly pointed towards the bad guy.
> 
> Control of the weapon is a more nuanced concept. You don't want to sacrifice loosing complete control for speed.
> 
> Thinking slap disarms here.


The gun in that scenario certainly CAN be pointed at the bad guy but I am just not willing to bank on that, and again just my opinion, I think it dangerous for anyone to do that is all.  In the other methods you still have control and due to the manner in which you execute the control you don't simply strip the weapon, you retain it.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 4, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> The gun in that scenario certainly CAN be pointed at the bad guy but I am just not willing to bank on that, and again just my opinion, I think it dangerous for anyone to do that is all.  In the other methods you still have control and due to the manner in which you execute the control you don't simply strip the weapon, you retain it.



You think it is dangerous to do a gun disarm?

I am lost as to which method you prefer.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You think it is dangerous to do a gun disarm?
> 
> I am lost as to which method you prefer.



When you have to disarm you have to disarm.

As for preferred method a variation of this...






depending on the size of the weapon I may have both hands on the weapon but this sums up the general principle I think is safer for all involved.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 4, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> When you have to disarm you have to disarm.
> 
> As for preferred method a variation of this...
> 
> ...



We are basically discussing the same move.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> We are basically discussing the same move.



oh okay then, it was the "throw" before the strip that threw me off (no pun intended).  I prefer to get the gun away before I toss someone around and risk an accidental discharge that could hurt someone else.


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> oh okay then, it was the "throw" before the strip that threw me off (no pun intended).  I prefer to get the gun away before I toss someone around and risk an accidental discharge that could hurt someone else.


has any one,actually tried this with,a real bad guy and a real gun stuck on their forehead ?


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> has any one,actually tried this with,a real bad guy and a real gun stuck on their forehead ?



I have done so under the following.  Training partner and a S&W M&P with a simmunition barrel.  I would actually find that to be "worse" than a real bad guy because the training partner knows the strip is coming where as a real bad guy will expect compliance or an attempt at flight.  Got my "bell rung" the first few times because even with protection, at that range the Sim hits kinda hard but once you get the simultaneous zone while grabbing it works.


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> I have done so under the following.  Training partner and a S&W M&P with a simmunition barrel.  I would actually find that to be "worse" than a real bad guy because the training partner knows the strip is coming where as a real bad guy will expect compliance or an attempt at flight.  Got my "bell rung" the first few times because even with protection, at that range the Sim hits kinda hard but once you get the simultaneous zone while grabbing it works.


so no then, I've seen it in the movies,i don't doubt it could be done, if you are faster than a rattle snake on,speed, just wondering what the survival rate is in real life


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> so no then, I've seen it in the movies,i don't doubt it could be done, if you are faster than a rattle snake on,speed, just wondering what the survival rate is in real life


 So being shot by a real gun in the head when you don't do it right doesn't count?  Lol.  You do know that's all a simmunition barrel is correct?  Same magazine, gunpowder propelled projectiles.  It's just the Sim round is about the size of a .32 and is plastic and filled with paint so you need to swap the barrel out.

Also as I noted in that kind of scenario the training partner KNOWS you are going for a disarm and so is on a hair trigger.  The bad guy doesn't expect someone to try it and is surprised.  Ergo this is actually a rare case where "if it works in training it has a better chance of working on the street" because in training the surprise factor is largely non-existent.

It doesn't even require as much speed as you think it does. The first thing you do to set it up is raise your hands up to your fix this accomplishes two things. First it gets your hands already in the position they need to be to launch the grab as you Zone. 2nd along with little bit of acting which shouldn't be too hard in the circumstances it basically creates the appearance of submission through fear. Creating that sense of submission in the assailant gives you an extra Split Second or so in order to do what you have to do. Then it is not only a matter of doing the grav you have to simultaneously Zone if you don't when you grab that gun you can still get a shot off and get you.  The fact that you're zoning at the same time as you take control the weapon means that even if he does get a shot off you aren't there for him to shoot and the fact that you have control of the weapon means he can't track you. Do either one before the other and you're probably in a world of hurt though and it is getting that simultaneous action that's the difficult part but it's that simultaneous action which means you don't mean to be as fast as a snake to pull it off.


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> So being shot by a real gun in the head when you don't do it right doesn't count?  Lol.  You do know that's all a simmunition barrel is correct?  Same magazine, gunpowder propelled projectiles.  It's just the Sim round is about the size of a .32 and is plastic and filled with paint so you need to swap the barrel out.
> 
> Also as I noted in that kind of scenario the training partner KNOWS you are going for a disarm and so is on a hair trigger.  The bad guy doesn't expect someone to try it and is surprised.  Ergo this is actually a rare case where "if it works in training it has a better chance of working on the street" because in training the surprise factor is largely non-existent.
> 
> It doesn't even require as much speed as you think it does. The first thing you do to set it up is raise your hands up to your fix this accomplishes two things. First it gets your hands already in the position they need to be to launch the grab as you Zone. 2nd along with little bit of acting which shouldn't be too hard in the circumstances it basically creates the appearance of submission through fear. Creating that sense of submission in the assailant gives you an extra Split Second or so in order to do what you have to do. Then it is not only a matter of doing the grav you have to simultaneously Zone if you don't when you grab that gun you can still get a shot off and get you.  The fact that you're zoning at the same time as you take control the weapon means that even if he does get a shot off you aren't there for him to shoot and the fact that you have control of the weapon means he can't track you. Do either one before the other and you're probably in a world of hurt though and it is getting that simultaneous action that's the difficult part but it's that simultaneous action which means you don't mean to be as fast as a snake to pull it off.


im still waiting for someone to say they have done it or even seen it done in real life.

people waving guns around are prone to pull the trigger t, when they didn't mean to, I don't doubt that any sudden movement will have them fire, the only question is in the 3/10s of a,second it takes them to pull the trigger, have you got the gun pointing somewhere else and of course id it now pointed at someone else?


----------



## drop bear (Jul 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> has any one,actually tried this with,a real bad guy and a real gun stuck on their forehead ?



Nope. Mine is just a best guess.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> im still waiting for someone to say they have done it or even seen it done in real life.
> 
> people waving guns around are prone to pull the trigger t, when they didn't mean to, I don't doubt that any sudden movement will have them fire, the only question is in the 3/10s of a,second it takes them to pull the trigger, have you got the gun pointing somewhere else and of course id it now pointed at someone else?



It is kind of like CPR. You try it when the alternative is worse.


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> It is kind of like CPR. You try it when the alternative is worse.


im not sure that coming to the quite reasonable,conclusion that if he intended to shoot you, rather than,requiring you to do something, he would already have,done so, isn't a better option. Fine if you know for a fact the next few moments are your last, then why not, after all it works every time in the movies


----------



## drop bear (Jul 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> im not sure that coming to the quite reasonable,conclusion that if he intended to shoot you, rather than,requiring you to do something, he would already have,done so, isn't a better option. Fine if you know for a fact the next few moments are your last, then why not, after all it works every time in the movies



The theory is you don't go to the secondary crime scene. So if you are going to get shot. Get it in the street where help could come. Not in their basement where they can do what they want.

I use that disarm for a lot of non gun stuff. So it is not completely wasted effort.


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> The theory is you don't go to the secondary crime scene. So if you are going to get shot. Get it in the street where help could come. Not in their basement where they can do what they want.
> 
> I use that disarm for a lot of non gun stuff. So it is not completely wasted effort.


im not sure that after getting 9 mm in the brain help is much good to you. But I suppose I see your point, if they are wandering you to some where quieter to kill you vwhy not


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 5, 2017)

jobo said:


> im still waiting for someone to say they have done it or even seen it done in real life.
> 
> people waving guns around are prone to pull the trigger t, when they didn't mean to, I don't doubt that any sudden movement will have them fire, the only question is in the 3/10s of a,second it takes them to pull the trigger, have you got the gun pointing somewhere else and of course id it now pointed at someone else?


Hmmm really?  I have responded to a lot of shootings in my day and in almost 20 years the only times there was an "oh crap" was when the person shot themselves.

Also you note the time to pull the trigger.  Good, I was actually hoping you would.  The average reaction time of a person, under ideal circumstances (they are ready to react, perfect lighting etc) is ~.25 seconds.  This is to perform a rather linear task as well, say just pulling the trigger.

So here we have a scenario where the following factors typically exist in a street encounter BEFORE you do anything.
1. The bad guy doesn't want to kill you.  They want your money, keys, cellphone, not a murder rap.
2. They are expecting compliance born of fear, after all they have a gun to your head.
3. They are tunnel visioned on the gun and what it is pointing at, in this case your head.

The first two are going to slow his reaction time even further.  The third is something the technique exploits.

I could go into detail on the technique but the thing is you have a person who is likely to have a slower than .25 second reaction time.  Why is this important?  The average untrained person can strike with a fist at a speed of 22 fps.  You are reaching for a gun AND zoning, the gun is approximately 1/10th that 22 ft, if not even closer.  Ergo you will get your hand on that gun and their arm before they START the trigger pull.  So long as your grip is solid AND you zone, even if they do pull the trigger you aren't in front of the barrel anymore and they can't track you to fire another shot. Then you proceed with the rest of the movement.

It takes training but does work


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Hmmm really?  I have responded to a lot of shootings in my day and in almost 20 years the only times there was an "oh crap" was when the person shot themselves.
> 
> Also you note the time to pull the trigger.  Good, I was actually hoping you would.  The average reaction time of a person, under ideal circumstances (they are ready to react, perfect lighting etc) is ~.25 seconds.  This is to perform a rather linear task as well, say just pulling the trigger.
> 
> ...


well if your figures were correct it would be impossible to dodge a punch,a tenth of a second to land it, 3/ 10s to dodge it. Yet every day people dodge punches, strange that


----------



## drop bear (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Hmmm really?  I have responded to a lot of shootings in my day and in almost 20 years the only times there was an "oh crap" was when the person shot themselves.
> 
> Also you note the time to pull the trigger.  Good, I was actually hoping you would.  The average reaction time of a person, under ideal circumstances (they are ready to react, perfect lighting etc) is ~.25 seconds.  This is to perform a rather linear task as well, say just pulling the trigger.
> 
> ...



If you are guessing. Write it up like you are guessing. Everyone understands that pretty much nobody has de gunned a person live. But to try to make it sound like you know is one of the main reasons reality based guys sound like snake oil salesmen.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> If you are guessing. Write it up like you are guessing. Everyone understands that pretty much nobody has de gunned a person live. But to try to make it sound like you know is one of the main reasons reality based guys sound like snake oil salesmen.




Well I am not guessing.  I noted using the technique successfully with functional weapons, against an opponent prepared for the disarm, the weapon was simply equipped with Sims.  Now would I do that anywhere but at work?  No because it is still dangerous as hell and even though I won more than I lost a 75% success rate isn't enough to take the risk over a wallet.  At work however if a guy is doing that they probably intend of killing me anywho so 75% is better than zero.

The point of the last post was simply to support the actual physical dynamics with proven scientific facts (speed, reaction time etc.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Well I am not guessing.  I noted using the technique successfully with functional weapons, against an opponent prepared for the disarm, the weapon was simply equipped with Sims.  Now would I do that anywhere but at work?  No because it is still dangerous as hell and even though I won more than I lost a 75% success rate isn't enough to take the risk over a wallet.  At work however if a guy is doing that they probably intend of killing me anywho so 75% is better than zero.
> 
> The point of the last post was simply to support the actual physical dynamics with proven scientific facts (speed, reaction time etc.



What is your scientific background?

I mean seriously we need to separate what is known from what is guessed at or we will never separate fact from fiction.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> What is your scientific background?
> 
> I mean seriously we need to separate what is known from what is guessed at or we will never separate fact from fiction.



Well in terms of the science I will admit I am parroting scientific studies, including ones specifically related to LE UoF.  A simple Google of reaction time and punching speed will produce the data.

My main point however was only to use that to support how a majority of the time, against a firearm it sim, meaning same weight, trigger pull etc. as one that would kill.  So long as the disarm and zoning happen together it does work.  He made the claim of the .3 sec to pull the trigger and so I noted the reaction time and striking speed studies to broaden the context.


----------



## drop bear (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Well in terms of the science I will admit I am parroting scientific studies, including ones specifically related to LE UoF.  A simple Google of reaction time and punching speed will produce the data.
> 
> My main point however was only to use that to support how a majority of the time, against a firearm it sim, meaning same weight, trigger pull etc. as one that would kill.  So long as the disarm and zoning happen together it does work.  He made the claim of the .3 sec to pull the trigger and so I noted the reaction time and striking speed studies to broaden the context.



Ok. here is the trick. and it is not just you it gets done by people all the time.(Climate change anyone?)

Apart from that we don't know if they are actually facts. We dont know if they are the most applicable facts and we don't know if there are omitted facts that change the conclusion.

What you suggest is pretty convincing.

 But then I am not a scientist and would be guessing.

Eg.


----------



## jobo (Jul 5, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Well in terms of the science I will admit I am parroting scientific studies, including ones specifically related to LE UoF.  A simple Google of reaction time and punching speed will produce the data.
> 
> My main point however was only to use that to support how a majority of the time, against a firearm it sim, meaning same weight, trigger pull etc. as one that would kill.  So long as the disarm and zoning happen together it does work.  He made the claim of the .3 sec to pull the trigger and so I noted the reaction time and striking speed studies to broaden the context.


yes but you've ignored the post about your figures making punch dodging impossible


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 5, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Ok. here is the trick. and it is not just you it gets done by people all the time.(Climate change anyone?)
> 
> Apart from that we don't know if they are actually facts. We dont know if they are the most applicable facts and we don't know if there are omitted facts that change the conclusion.
> 
> ...




Okay then forget the numbers.  Lets just look at this...

1. I am facing a person pointing a gun at my head.
2. This firearm is a fully functional .40 cal semiautomatic pistol.  The only difference is that the barrel was swapped so it would fire bullets that won't kill me, they just break skin or leaves bumps and brusies, if it hits where you have no protective gear, and leaves paint behind.  So same size, similar weight (thicker barrel but lighter ammo), same trigger pull etc. of a real gun because it is real.
3. said person KNOWS I am going to try and disarm them, there is no element of surprise in my favor.

Yet with all of that (the lack of surprise imo is the biggest factor), so long as I get my timing right (which I am now at about a 75% success rate my issue is usually the footwork so I don't zone at the right time) I still end up with the gun in the end, and if they manage to get a shot off, the shot misses me and is striking the floor.

I think that this shows it's more than possible, if you train it right.


----------



## Paul_D (Jul 11, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> You do know that's all a simmunition barrel is correct?  Same magazine, gunpowder propelled projectiles.  It's just the Sim round is about the size of a .32 and is plastic and filled with paint so you need to swap the barrel out.


How would he know that?  Most of us have never even seen a gun, let alone fired one, or indeed have any idea what what you are talking about.  You may as well of written this in Arabic for all the good it does me.

I thought simmunation barrel was a typo, not an actual word, so I wouldn't even a have bothered to google it.

You do know we don't all live in the US, and most of us have never even see a gun, correct?


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 11, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> How would he know that?  Most of us have never even seen a gun, let alone fired one, or indeed have any idea what what you are talking about.  You may as well of written this in Arabic for all the good it does me.
> 
> I thought simmunation barrel was a typo, not an actual word, so I wouldn't even a have bothered to google it.
> 
> You do know we don't all live in the US, and most of us have never even see a gun, correct?



Well first they are a standard Security Forces training tool

Second he certainly acted like a no it all but I gave a brief explanation any who.

Third after I explained it briefly he still acted like a no it all.

So did I get a little condescending?  Yeah, but know it all who actually.know very little bring that out in me.


----------



## jobo (Jul 12, 2017)

Juany118 said:


> Well first they are a standard Security Forces training tool
> 
> Second he certainly acted like a no it all but I gave a brief explanation any who.
> 
> ...


im stil waiting for you to explain how its possible to block a punch, but not possible to pull a trigger, in a 10th of a,second


----------



## drop bear (Jul 12, 2017)

jobo said:


> im stil waiting for you to explain how its possible to block a punch, but not possible to pull a trigger, in a 10th of a,second



You to a certain degree cheat. You start closer and act first. So you get a bit of ambush time.

Same as how a sucker punch works.

It is pretty well accepted you need some favorable conditions before you even get to a high risk defense.


----------



## jobo (Jul 12, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You to a certain degree cheat. You start closer and act first. So you get a bit of ambush time.
> 
> Same as how a sucker punch works.
> 
> It is pretty well accepted you need some favorable conditions before you even get to a high risk defense.


but he gave hard maths, that pulling a trigger in 10th of a,second was impossible, yet its more than possible to block a punch when you have a 10th of a second to see it and move. To his point of view it isn't a high risk move, but a near certainty's, he has math to prove it


----------



## drop bear (Jul 12, 2017)

jobo said:


> but he gave hard maths, that pulling a trigger in 10th of a,second was impossible, yet its more than possible to block a punch when you have a 10th of a second to see it and move. To his point of view it isn't a high risk move, but a near certainty's, he has math to prove it



Yeah and I mentioned why I don't like the maths. And he hit a different method of explaining his process.


----------



## Juany118 (Jul 12, 2017)

drop bear said:


> You to a certain degree cheat. You start closer and act first. So you get a bit of ambush time.
> 
> Same as how a sucker punch works.
> 
> It is pretty well accepted you need some favorable conditions before you even get to a high risk defense.



Exactly but first let me say it would NEVER be my first choice.  Off the job I would always just hand over my wallet.  

The thing is "on the job" in uniform and full kit, if I have a gun that close to my head they likely mean to kill me.  In that case part of the thing is actually not only about the action itself being an "ambush" it's about psychology.  If I lower my hand to my gun they are pulling the trigger faster than I can break leather.  

However they expect me to be afraid (which I would be btw, anyone who says different is lying or psychotic) so raising my hands in surrender to frame my face is expected.  The fact that my hands are now in line with the gun is likely not a thought in my head.  Next you don't want to get the "Johnny bad ***" look on your face, you want the nervousness/fear to show on your face and in your voice when you say "don't do it."  All of this adds to the "ambush effect" because they see the expected reaction and thus feel in control.

Now like I said, right now, against a prepared opponent, using a real gun just shooting dummy rounds, I have a 75% success rate.  That is NOT by any shape of the imagination good enough odds to protect my wallet in a street robbery but it is good enough odds if the other option is 100% death. 

PS regarding the psychological effect I will talk with the instructor who trained me in the technique.  He is also a Forensic Behavioral Analyst and the psychological stuff came from studies of such scenarios.  I will see if he can provide me with on-line sources for those studies and, if he can (vs expensive text books), I will post the links for those interested in that kind of thing.  To me half of self defense is psychological so I am very interested in such things.


----------

