# Krav-Maga??



## Andr (Oct 4, 2018)

Search out in Youtube a video about Russian Krav Maga. It looks beyond belief.






And I have a question, of course.
Does it work and exist in reality or Krav Maga is applicable only for videos?

Wanted to start Krav Maga but I'm not sure if it is not just a waste of time. Especially, for girls.
Help me out, please!


----------



## wab25 (Oct 4, 2018)

Krav Maga is Israeli not Russian. Its also much like any other art out there. Some schools and instructors are good, some not so much. I can't tell you anything about the Krav school near you, based on a video of someone else on youtube. The best thing you can do is go try it out and try out some of the other available schools.

This video reminded me of the old Gracie ad of the guy on the beach getting beat up and losing the girl, then he trains BJJ and beats the guy to get his girl back...


----------



## oftheherd1 (Oct 4, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Krav Maga is Israeli not Russian. Its also much like any other art out there. Some schools and instructors are good, some not so much. I can't tell you anything about the Krav school near you, based on a video of someone else on youtube. The best thing you can do is go try it out and try out some of the other available schools.
> 
> This video reminded me of the old Gracie ad of *the guy on the beach getting beat up and losing the girl, then he trains BJJ and beats the guy to get his girl back...*



IIRC when I first saw that it was on something, maybe matchbooks, and the weak guy got sand kicked in his face and lost his girl until he trained bodybuilding with equipment from the advertiser, then got his girl back.  It was terrific equipment I guess because it only took a couple or three frames for him to have a Mr. Universe body..   

Ah, the memories


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 4, 2018)

Did the Gracie’s actually make such a commercial??


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Andr said:


> Search out in Youtube a video about Russian Krav Maga. It looks beyond belief.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Best way to find out. Go and try it


----------



## Kababayan (Oct 4, 2018)

This isn't Russian Krav Maga, It's Krav Maga Global in Russia. It's like me saying that I learn American Taekwondo because I study Taekwondo in the U.S.   The video is Eyal Yanilov's Krav organization.  It's good stuff.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Kababayan said:


> This isn't Russian Krav Maga, It's Krav Maga Global in Russia. It's like me saying that I learn American Taekwondo because I study Taekwondo in the U.S.   The video is Eyal Yanilov's Krav organization.  It's good stuff.


Yep the system is good but the video does it no favours. It's poorly put together with bad editing and cuts during the moves


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Thing you'll find with Krav Maga as well is it doesn't look good on video. That's because it's not about looking good. A Krav Maga person isn't going to look pretty hitting pads but that's not what they're trying to do. They're looking to just do enough to escape. Another one of the main things is the mindset, it teaches you to have that aggressive mindset in a fight it gets you to a stage where your exhausted and have to do the techniques to simulate how you'll feel.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 4, 2018)

Gross and beyond stupid.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Gross and beyond stupid.


Thanks for the description of yourself. Now what's your opinion on the video?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 4, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Thanks for the description of yourself. Now what's your opinion on the video?



Read my post again real slowly so you can understand it. Once you do, you'll be able to answer your own question.

Try not to hurt yourself in the process.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Read my post again real slowly so you can understand it. Once you do, you'll be able to answer your own question.
> 
> Try not to hurt yourself in the process.


Relax buddy it's a joke.


----------



## jobo (Oct 4, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Krav Maga is Israeli not Russian. Its also much like any other art out there. Some schools and instructors are good, some not so much. I can't tell you anything about the Krav school near you, based on a video of someone else on youtube. The best thing you can do is go try it out and try out some of the other available schools.
> 
> This video reminded me of the old Gracie ad of the guy on the beach getting beat up and losing the girl, then he trains BJJ and beats the guy to get his girl back...


No its not its british, developed in the east end of london, before israel even existed, .


----------



## Kababayan (Oct 4, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Yep the system is good but the video does it no favours. It's poorly put together with bad editing and cuts during the moves


 
I noticed that when I saw the baseball bat defense.  I'm guessing that KMG didn't make the video, but rather a training group of KMG.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Kababayan said:


> I noticed that when I saw the baseball bat defense.  I'm guessing that KMG didn't make the video, but rather a training group of KMG.


Nah kmg have their own channel. that t shirt is just standard uniform anyone can buy. For all we know this could be a guy with a few weeks training or just bought himself a t shirt


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

Kababayan said:


> I noticed that when I saw the baseball bat defense.  I'm guessing that KMG didn't make the video, but rather a training group of KMG.


Also I don't know all those techniques but the ones I did recognise looked poorly done or just not shown. E.g the oriental stab attack where you use a downward inside defence  that was literally completely cut out. Also what's up with those close ups of the guy on the ground while the other guys fighting in the distance


----------



## drop bear (Oct 4, 2018)

It proves dubstep isn't dead.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 4, 2018)

Andr said:


> Search out in Youtube a video about Russian Krav Maga. It looks beyond belief.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do you ever see krav maga applied outside of a demo?


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 4, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Do you ever see krav maga applied outside of a demo?


Yes worked with a guy when I was a bouncer who did Krav Maga and he used it effectively all the time and that was his only training


----------



## drop bear (Oct 4, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Yes worked with a guy when I was a bouncer who did Krav Maga and he used it effectively all the time and that was his only training



Well there you go. A guy who knows a guy uses it effectively.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Oct 4, 2018)

There should just be a automated bot respond to 90% of threads with "it depends". 

as i put above, it depends and it does depend heavily on who teaches it.


As i dont know Russian i dont know the context of this video. 






jobo said:


> No its not its british, developed in the east end of london, before israel even existed



I believe the creator militarized his sports knowledge under defendu via some form of training or service with the U.K/western allies.      Providing all the sources i got is accurate and all that stuff.  I would say its unique enough to be called Israeli and be his system per say. 




Honestly krav maga is one of those milked to death things, im not too sure if there is a world wide organization of "proper" krav maga who maintains standards but its so fragmented and has a plethora of different teaching methods to its name you could have a very distinct training quality difference. 

Also a big point, you aren't getting what the ISDF gets and the police get a different one to them etc.  Plus their standards take into account you being military fit anyway.   Before this turns into a rant, thats all i have to type. 

I dont harbor a specific dislike for it, that's just the problems i see for it. Also some of the above might be known/obvious for some of you.


----------



## jobo (Oct 5, 2018)

Rat said:


> There should just be a automated bot respond to 90% of threads with "it depends".
> 
> as i put above, it depends and it does depend heavily on who teaches it.
> 
> ...


Im not sure what your point is, it was never a sport, it was always a self defence system, and its country of origin is england,  

That makes it british, like karate is japanese, irrespective of where its taught, or how its modified

Your point about fitness however is true, but also true of all ma/ defence systems, they all work much much better if your " military " fit


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2018)

Anyone got a real life example of Krav being used to fight off multiple armed assailants?


----------



## wab25 (Oct 5, 2018)

jobo said:


> its country of origin is england


I had always been told it was developed by Imre Lichtenfeld. From Wiki:


> Imre Lichtenfeld (also known as Imi Sde-Or) was born in 1910 in Pozsony, Austro-Hungary and grew up in Bratislava (Slovakia). Lichtenfeld became active in a wide range of sports, including gymnastics, wrestling, and boxing. In 1928, Lichtenfeld won the Slovak Youth Wrestling Championship, and in 1929 the adult championship (light and middle weight divisions).[30] That same year, he also won the national boxing championship and an international gymnastics championship. During the ensuing decade, Imi's athletic activities focused mainly on wrestling, both as a contestant and a trainer.
> 
> In the mid-1930s, anti-Semitic riots began to threaten the Jews of Bratislava, Czechoslovakia. Lichtenfeld became the leader of a group of Jewish boxers and wrestlers who took to the streets to defend Jewish neighborhoods against the growing numbers of national socialist party and anti-Semitic thugs. Lichtenfeld quickly discovered, however, that actual fighting was very different from competition fighting, and although boxing and wrestling were good sports, they were not always practical for the aggressive and brutal nature of street combat. It was then that he started to re-evaluate his ideas about fighting and started developing the skills and techniques that would eventually become Krav Maga. Having become a thorn in the side of the equally anti-Semitic local authorities, in 1940 Lichtenfeld left his home with his family and friends on the last refugee ship to escape Europe.
> Krav Maga - Wikipedia



I realize that it Wiki... but it is the basic summary I usually find when read the pages of the different Krav groups. Can you elaborate more on Krav actually being from England? I am not doubting you... its just not part of the usual history of Krav, unless I am missing something. Anyway, I would love to hear more about its English origin.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 5, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Anyone got a real life example of Krav being used to fight off multiple armed assailants?



Ironically  I did read one which I am trying to hunt down.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Oct 5, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Anyone got a real life example of Krav being used to fight off multiple armed assailants?


it wouldnt matter because it didnt happen inside an octagon.


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2018)

hoshin1600 said:


> it wouldnt matter because it didnt happen inside an octagon.



I have no problem with non-sport examples:






However, I typically see this type of thing from boxers, not Krav people.


----------



## jobo (Oct 5, 2018)

wab25 said:


> I had always been told it was developed by Imre Lichtenfeld. From Wiki:
> 
> 
> I realize that it Wiki... but it is the basic summary I usually find when read the pages of the different Krav groups. Can you elaborate more on Krav actually being from England? I am not doubting you... its just not part of the usual history of Krav, unless I am missing something. Anyway, I would love to hear more about its English origin.


People involved with it, who write the histories, like to bask in the reflected glory of the idf, but it was conceived in Hungary , then with the jewish exerdus from easten europe in the 1930s tranfered to london where it was developed, so depebdent on what point your saying it began, its either hungarian or British, or a bit if both.! but it  is most certainly is NOT from Israel


----------



## wab25 (Oct 5, 2018)

jobo said:


> People involved with it, who write the histories, like to bask in the reflected glory of the idf, but it was conceived in Hungary , then with the jewish exerdus from easten europe in the 1930s tranfered to london where it was developed, so depebdent on what point your saying it began, its either hungarian or British, or a bit if both.! but it  is most certainly is NOT from Israel


Ok, I get how its not from Israel. But, are you saying that someone other than Lichtenfeld created it? 

Imi Lichtenfeld - Wikipedia

I don't see him going to London or even England. The closest he got was to North Africa serving with the British supervised Free Czechoslovak Legion sometime between 1940 and 1942. Where does London come in? Or who from London created Krav, if it wasn't Lichtenfeld?


----------



## jobo (Oct 5, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Ok, I get how its not from Israel. But, are you saying that someone other than Lichtenfeld created it?
> 
> Imi Lichtenfeld - Wikipedia
> 
> I don't see him going to London or even England. The closest he got was to North Africa serving with the British supervised Free Czechoslovak Legion sometime between 1940 and 1942. Where does London come in? Or who from London created Krav, if it wasn't Lichtenfeld?


????????????????? He conceived it,tought  ut to others, who then moved to london and tought and developed it further, 

Or he was the father, but not the one who raised the child !


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 5, 2018)

wab25 said:


> Ok, I get how its not from Israel. But, are you saying that someone other than Lichtenfeld created it?
> 
> Imi Lichtenfeld - Wikipedia
> 
> I don't see him going to London or even England. The closest he got was to North Africa serving with the British supervised Free Czechoslovak Legion sometime between 1940 and 1942. Where does London come in? Or who from London created Krav, if it wasn't Lichtenfeld?


Imi litchfield created it. But eyal yanillow developed it as a system. He was litchfields right hand man and helped him make the actual syllabus so it was more structured. But the principles all came from litchfield but at the end of the day. Who cares where it came from


----------



## wab25 (Oct 5, 2018)

jobo said:


> Or he was the father, but not the one who raised the child !


I must read history a bit differently. Not only was he the father, but he raised the child as well.



> In the late 1930s, anti-Semitic riots threatened the Jewish population of Bratislava. Together with other Jewish boxers and wrestlers, Lichtenfeld helped to defend his Jewish neighborhood against racist gangs. He quickly decided that sport has little in common with real combat and began developing a system of techniques for practical self-defense in life-threatening situations.[8][9]
> 
> In 1935, Lichtenfeld visited Palestine with a team of Jewish wrestlers to participate in the Maccabi games but could not participate because of a broken rib that resulted from his training while en route. This led to the fundamental Krav Maga precept, 'do not get hurt' while training. Lichtenfeld returned to Czechoslovakia to face increasing anti-Semitic violence. Lichtenfeld organized a group of young Jews to protect his community. On the streets, he acquired hard won experience and the crucial understanding of the differences between sport fighting and street fighting. He developed his fundamental self-defense principle: 'use natural movements and reactions' for defense, combined with an immediate and decisive counterattack. From this evolved the refined theory of 'simultaneous defense and attack' while 'never occupying two hands in the same defensive movement.'[10][11][12]
> 
> ...



A Hungarian, created a fighting system, took it to Israel and named it Krav, taught it at the IDF school for 20 twenty years, then modified it for civilian needs and created two training centers for it. But one of his early students went to London... So we now have the Krav Maga, the British system of self defense...? Ok.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 5, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> I have no problem with non-sport examples:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What made that guy a boxer....I saw the same punches used in Krav Maga, karate and boxing so what specifically made him a boxer?


----------



## wab25 (Oct 5, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Imi litchfield created it. But eyal yanillow developed it as a system.


In 1948 Lichtenfeld was teaching his Krav to the IDF. Eyal started training at Lichtenfeld's training center in Israel in 1974. Still not sure how that makes Krav a British system?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 5, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> What made that guy a boxer....I saw the same punches used in Krav Maga, karate and boxing so what specifically made him a boxer?



The guys name is Nuh Demircan, and he himself said that all he knew was boxing.


----------



## Kababayan (Oct 5, 2018)

Rat said:


> Honestly krav maga is one of those milked to death things, im not too sure if there is a world wide organization of "proper" krav maga who maintains standards but its so fragmented and has a plethora of different teaching methods to its name you could have a very distinct training quality difference.
> .



Respectfully, my friend, because Krav is a fairly new system of self defense (compared to other martial arts) it can easily be traced back to the original organization.  The big four organizations (main students of Imi Lichtenfeld) maintain fairly tight standards of Krav Maga.  Kravists tend to know who the main Krav organizations are.  Even across the big four organizations, Krav tends to look the same.  The issue is when someone takes the concepts or a few techniques of Krav and creates their own version of "Krav-Fu".  I wouldn't say "fragmented" because that would mean that the head instructor of an "off-shoot Krav" was a part of the Big Four organizations originally, although I understand what you mean when you say "fragmented".  I would say that somebody is creating their own personal system and calling it Krav...even when it's not.  Krav has a very distinct signature.  I think the confusion comes when people make judgements of Krav based on observations and not long-term training.  I mean no disrespect when I say that, it would be like me speaking my opinions about Aikido, as truth, without actually studying the art, and studying it from an actual respected Aikido school.  Originally Krav was intended to be taught in a 20 hour course, or 18, I forget.


----------



## pdg (Oct 5, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Do you ever see krav maga applied outside of a demo?



Wasn't it on the Simpsons that time?


----------



## Andr (Oct 5, 2018)

Hanzou said:


> Anyone got a real life example of Krav being used to fight off multiple armed assailants?



I heard about this one  
Dad pictured drenched in blood after using martial arts skills to fight off machete gang raiding his £400k home


----------



## Flying Crane (Oct 5, 2018)

It’s amazing how slow-motion video coupled with dramatic background music can make someone look really awesome.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 5, 2018)

wab25 said:


> In 1948 Lichtenfeld was teaching his Krav to the IDF. Eyal started training at Lichtenfeld's training center in Israel in 1974. Still not sure how that makes Krav a British system?


Never said it did


----------



## Andr (Oct 5, 2018)

Flying Crane said:


> It’s amazing how slow-motion video coupled with dramatic background music can make someone look really awesome.



The best moment is 1:02 when something is flying out from a guy. At first glance it looks like teeth. Video could be more realistic with this action!


----------



## Andr (Oct 5, 2018)

And what about girls? Is Krav Maga useless for them at all? Maybe vice versa, Krav Maga is more applicable for girls because nobody expects any hard struggle from them?


----------



## Hanzou (Oct 6, 2018)

Andr said:


> And what about girls? Is Krav Maga useless for them at all? Maybe vice versa, Krav Maga is more applicable for girls because nobody expects any hard struggle from them?



That would entirely depend on if they're getting quality instruction. While there's some legit Krav out there, there's an increasing amount of Krav being taught that is highly questionable.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 6, 2018)

Andr said:


> And what about girls? Is Krav Maga useless for them at all? Maybe vice versa, Krav Maga is more applicable for girls because nobody expects any hard struggle from them?


Go train and find out


----------



## Saheim (Oct 11, 2018)

Krav Maga is unmatched...... when it comes to pretending to fight people who are pretending to attack you 

Don't freak, I'm kidding BUT stereotypes do not magically appear out of thin air either.


----------



## BigMotor (Oct 11, 2018)

Krav Maga works and so does Combatives, but it is loosey goosey in ways; it is difficult to draw up a playbook of what constitutes the art; at least in my mind.
I have a book on Army Combatives, which can be summarized this way, harm or kill them, with any means at hand. And, Krav Maga seems to be the same way.

That is not a slam against it, but any training in it would have to be sharply defined, and directed by the instructor. Otherwise, it would be easy to get lost, trying to figure out your next move.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 11, 2018)

BigMotor said:


> Krav Maga works and so does Combatives, but it is loosey goosey in ways; it is difficult to draw up a playbook of what constitutes the art; at least in my mind.
> I have a book on Army Combatives, which can be summarized this way, harm or kill them, with any means at hand. And, Krav Maga seems to be the same way.
> 
> That is not a slam against it, but any training in it would have to be sharply defined, and directed by the instructor. Otherwise, it would be easy to get lost, trying to figure out your next move.



Why?

You would think a system like that would be better streamlined in to basic concepts.


----------



## BigMotor (Oct 11, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Why?
> You would think a system like that would be better streamlined in to basic concepts.


I am just thinking on my feet, and it seems like Krav Maga is so loose in concept; that it might tend to fall apart, right when you need it most.
I am certain that their are masters of the art, who never have to wonder about their next move. If I am wrong, OK, it isn't the first time.
Do you train in it?

I looked up a local school, and there are pretty good reviews of it:
But hey, my eight years in the Airborne Infantry and combat experience may have made me crazy. Please, do not take me at my word. Go to a class and find out for your self.

I am not knocking the art, because it must be useful; I wonder how many people take it seriously though. Maybe I am too serious, and it bleeds into my posts: life made me pretty intense.
Tony K.'s review of Pinellas Krav Maga


----------



## drop bear (Oct 11, 2018)

BigMotor said:


> I am just thinking on my feet, and it seems like Krav Maga is so loose in concept; that it might tend to fall apart, right when you need it most.
> I am certain that their are masters of the art, who never have to wonder about their next move. If I am wrong, OK, it isn't the first time.
> Do you train in it?
> 
> ...



I did an rbsd called scientific fighting Congress which attracted some krav guys and looks like it has similar training ideas.
(A lot of which I don't really like)

I now do mma and its accompanying sub styles  which in my opinion is what krav should have been. 

And mma has that same loose concept issue. But I find you can trim the system down to its bare bones and at least have a conservative and comprehensive approach.

From there you can go buck wild. 

And I find if the art is drill or demo heavy then people feel obligated to have techniques for the sake of how clever they look. Where if the style is resisted training heavy. People go the other way and only do what they feel comfortable with.


----------



## Saheim (Oct 12, 2018)

I will say this (positive thing) about KM -

It reminds me of Dept of Corrections "DTAC" (defensive tactics).  I have told friends of mine -  if you have NO training or experience in violence and are looking for a quick way to get kinda caught up; if you wanna learn the basics of hurting people who are trying to hurt you WITHOUT spending hours focusing on your stance, conditioning you body, making sure hand an foot placement is 100% correct; if you're not pursuing excellence, but rather (field) competence.... Let the prison train you!

And, what little I have seen of KM, it really reminds me of D.O.C. training.

With that said, as always - train hard, fight easy.  If you ain't really roughin each other up, you're just dancin (that applies to every art).  So KM could be good or bad, depending on who is teaching and how.  (Imho) Training methods trump lineage.  I don't need to hear how connected a place is to Israel, I need to see some pressure testing.


----------



## FriedRice (Oct 18, 2018)

Andr said:


> Wanted to start Krav Maga but I'm not sure if it is not just a waste of time. Especially, for girls.
> Help me out, please!



YES, there are LOTS and LOTS of girls and women in Krav Maga classes.


----------



## FriedRice (Oct 18, 2018)

Andr said:


> And what about girls? Is Krav Maga useless for them at all? Maybe vice versa, Krav Maga is more applicable for girls because nobody expects any hard struggle from them?



No, it's not useless....it's pretty good for girls, women and men who can't handle full MMA, as MMA is a lot rougher.  The better perks for girls is that you'll have many other girls to train with and not be the 1 or 2 girls training with a bunch of sweaty dudes in MMA/Muay Thai.  It's a great starting point if you're looking for self defense. After 2 years of dedicated training and you think you're pretty good....go to an MMA gym and see how you do vs. Muay Thai or BJJ.  Go spar some Muay Thai girls with 2 years exp. or a small dude with the same, etc.   Some Krav gyms even have a legit MT and BJJ program. 

It won't be cheap though, esp. when Krav gyms are paying monthly $$$ to their federation to use that name.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 18, 2018)

FriedRice said:


> No, it's not useless....it's pretty good for girls, women and men who can't handle full MMA, as MMA is a lot rougher.  The better perks for girls is that you'll have many other girls to train with and not be the 1 or 2 girls training with a bunch of sweaty dudes in MMA/Muay Thai.  It's a great starting point if you're looking for self defense. After 2 years of dedicated training and you think you're pretty good....go to an MMA gym and see how you do vs. Muay Thai or BJJ.  Go spar some Muay Thai girls with 2 years exp. or a small dude with the same, etc.   Some Krav gyms even have a legit MT and BJJ program.
> 
> It won't be cheap though, esp. when Krav gyms are paying monthly $$$ to their federation to use that name.


Lol yet again you show a huge amount of ignorance. I've trained in 2 big clubs with big organisations and each cost 20 a month


----------



## Kababayan (Oct 18, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Lol yet again you show a huge amount of ignorance. I've trained in 2 big clubs with big organisations and each cost 20 a month



Agreed. I train with IKMF for a low fee.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 18, 2018)

Kababayan said:


> Agreed. I train with IKMF for a low fee.


I'm kmg and it's a low price for months and gradings are 50 and even equipment is pretty low


----------



## Kababayan (Oct 18, 2018)

KMG is great.  I always considered the "Big Four" of Krav as being KMWW, IKMF, IKMA, and KMG. Essentially anyone who can connect back to Imi Lichtenfeld within one or two generations. I include Krav Maga Alliance in with KMWW.  I may be forgetting an organization.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 18, 2018)

jobo said:


> No its not its british, developed in the east end of london, before israel even existed, .




No it's not. Complete nonsense.


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 18, 2018)

Kababayan said:


> KMG is great.  I always considered the "Big Four" of Krav as being KMWW, IKMF, IKMA, and KMG. Essentially anyone who can connect back to Imi Lichtenfeld within one or two generations. I include Krav Maga Alliance in with KMWW.  I may be forgetting an organization.


I don't know much about other organisations and tbh I don't really care. Kmg is the one near me and it's well run in my opinion they've got good courses like bar fighting and ground fight courses plus regular instructor updates which is good. But if I went somewhere and saw a different organisation I'd have no problem training there as long as the teachings good


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 18, 2018)

Tez3 said:


> No it's not. Complete nonsense.


Jobo talking nonsense....wow that's new...whatever next lol


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 18, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Jobo talking nonsense....wow that's new...whatever next lol



I've heard what he said a few times before , it's usually part of anti Semitic rants ie because the Jews couldn't possibly be able to fight...… It's usually found on the far right sites.


----------



## Kababayan (Oct 18, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> I don't know much about other organisations and tbh I don't really care. Kmg is the one near me and it's well run in my opinion they've got good courses like bar fighting and ground fight courses plus regular instructor updates which is good. But if I went somewhere and saw a different organisation I'd have no problem training there as long as the teachings good



At least you know that the one near and that you train at you is generally respected by kravists.


----------



## FriedRice (Oct 18, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Lol yet again you show a huge amount of ignorance. I've trained in 2 big clubs with big organisations and each cost 20 a month



aww, the ignore function must be broken again for you?


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 18, 2018)

FriedRice said:


> aww, the ignore function must be broken again for you?


Yeah I decided by ignoring you I'd miss all the hilariously ignorant comments you make


----------



## FriedRice (Oct 18, 2018)

Headhunter said:


> Yeah I decided by ignoring you I'd miss all the hilariously ignorant comments you make



you get so mad though.


----------



## lqkenpo (Oct 19, 2018)

Andr said:


> Search out in Youtube a video about Russian Krav Maga. It looks beyond belief.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Bringing this back to context before the who can wind up who battle continues...

Honestly like anything and everything out there try it and find out. I would say do you research find a respected legit instructor to learn off and have fun learning a new art. different martial arts have different positives and negatives its finding the balance right for you. If your more worried about ground game self defense id lean towards BJJ but Krav (depending on the school) should if its legit give you coverage in that area as well. Have fun


----------



## Headhunter (Oct 19, 2018)

Kababayan said:


> At least you know that the one near and that you train at you is generally respected by kravists.


Well I don't train anymore there due to moving to New York and am running a kids class there but if I get some spare time I may see what I can find


----------



## Gold dust Dan (Jan 13, 2019)

Has anyone actually used this in a self defense situation?


----------



## Headhunter (Jan 13, 2019)

Gold dust Dan said:


> Has anyone actually used this in a self defense situation?


Yep all the time....I use the Krav Maga mindset of avoiding trouble and staying alert....that's the first rule of Krav Maga


----------



## Ivan (Jan 14, 2019)

Andr said:


> Search out in Youtube a video about Russian Krav Maga. It looks beyond belief.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Krav Maga, a system not a martial art, is from the IDF not Russia. You're probably confusing it with Systema, which is controversial. By IDF, I am referring to the Israeli Defence Force. The difference between a system and martial arts, is supposedly that a system continually evolves to suit modern situations, although you could argue that this is applicable to many martial arts nowadays, such as BJJ.

Krav Maga is specifically made for self defence in any environment by any means necessary. It helps you see and cut through the **** and lies that many McDojos and myths indulge you with. It is extremely effective, and if you're serious about it, you can take a 1-month course in Israel with some of its most influential coaches that will turn you into a self defence machine.


----------



## jobo (Jan 14, 2019)

Ivan said:


> Krav Maga, a system not a martial art, is from the IDF not Russia. You're probably confusing it with Systema, which is controversial. By IDF, I am referring to the Israeli Defence Force. The difference between a system and martial arts, is supposedly that a system continually evolves to suit modern situations, although you could argue that this is applicable to many martial arts nowadays, such as BJJ.
> 
> Krav Maga is specifically made for self defence in any environment by any means necessary. It helps you see and cut through the **** and lies that many McDojos and myths indulge you with. It is extremely effective, and if you're serious about it, you can take a 1-month course in Israel with some of its most influential coaches that will turn you into a self defence machine.


maybe maybe not, a self defence machine in a month is a tall order, krav was developed to teach  people basic self defence quickly, not that they would be very good quickly, krav, as with any other skill takes some time , to be good.

.of course it rather depends on your level to start off with, if your 23 and just finished basic training for the army, you may get quicker results than someone very unfit,serious over weight in there late 40s


----------



## Headhunter (Jan 14, 2019)

Ivan said:


> Krav Maga, a system not a martial art, is from the IDF not Russia. You're probably confusing it with Systema, which is controversial. By IDF, I am referring to the Israeli Defence Force. The difference between a system and martial arts, is supposedly that a system continually evolves to suit modern situations, although you could argue that this is applicable to many martial arts nowadays, such as BJJ.
> 
> Krav Maga is specifically made for self defence in any environment by any means necessary. It helps you see and cut through the **** and lies that many McDojos and myths indulge you with. It is extremely effective, and if you're serious about it, you can take a 1-month course in Israel with some of its most influential coaches that will turn you into a self defence machine.


Sorry that last statement is rubbish. A month of Krav training will give you the basics but you most certainly will not be a "self defence machine" (whatever that is)


----------



## Ivan (Jan 14, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> Sorry that last statement is rubbish. A month of Krav training will give you the basics but you most certainly will not be a "self defence machine" (whatever that is)


I don't know man, I mean to me, it looks like the training there is really high quality! When you go there, you live and breathe Krav Maga, along with fitness and it's all you will be doing apar from eating, sleeping and running. Their training is something I only wish I could get here.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jan 14, 2019)

KMG is Krav maga global right?       I am pretty new to krav maga organization names.


----------



## Headhunter (Jan 15, 2019)

Ivan said:


> I don't know man, I mean to me, it looks like the training there is really high quality! When you go there, you live and breathe Krav Maga, along with fitness and it's all you will be doing apar from eating, sleeping and running. Their training is something I only wish I could get here.


Firstly that's not true people there do have lives and not everyone is training 24/7 in fact barely anyone is and it doesn't matter how good the teaching is you still need the months and years to get the muscle memory and the fact there's hundreds of different techniques in Krav Maga means it's impossible to learn all of them and be able to do them properly in a month


----------



## Headhunter (Jan 15, 2019)

Rat said:


> KMG is Krav maga global right?       I am pretty new to krav maga organization names.


Yes


----------



## pdg (Jan 15, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> Firstly that's not true people there do have lives and not everyone is training 24/7 in fact barely anyone is and it doesn't matter how good the teaching is you still need the months and years to get the muscle memory and the fact there's hundreds of different techniques in Krav Maga means it's impossible to learn all of them and be able to do them properly in a month



Not only muscle memory, but muscle to begin with.

You're going to need a serious level of fitness before you even start a month long full time training program...


----------



## Ivan (Jan 15, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> Firstly that's not true people there do have lives and not everyone is training 24/7 in fact barely anyone is and it doesn't matter how good the teaching is you still need the months and years to get the muscle memory and the fact there's hundreds of different techniques in Krav Maga means it's impossible to learn all of them and be able to do them properly in a month


Fair enough, guess I was told wrong.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 15, 2019)

Ivan said:


> Fair enough, guess I was told wrong.



Ummm... it's called advertising. Where grandiose claims and hyperbole are the norm.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

oftheherd1 said:


> IIRC when I first saw that it was on something, maybe matchbooks, and the weak guy got sand kicked in his face and lost his girl until he trained bodybuilding with equipment from the advertiser, then got his girl back.  It was terrific equipment I guess because it only took a couple or three frames for him to have a Mr. Universe body..
> 
> Ah, the memories


I remember that ad in comic books.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I have no problem with non-sport examples:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Most of the ones I've seen used strikes. Hard to tell a well-trained striker using a close guard from another in these situations, IMO.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

Andr said:


> And what about girls? Is Krav Maga useless for them at all? Maybe vice versa, Krav Maga is more applicable for girls because nobody expects any hard struggle from them?


If we talk reality, stronger muscles are an advantage in any style. Women tend to have weaker muscles (though not in all areas), so will (on average) hit less hard, etc. But any style that works when taught well (and KM is one) will work for a woman when taught/learned well.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

BigMotor said:


> Krav Maga works and so does Combatives, but it is loosey goosey in ways; it is difficult to draw up a playbook of what constitutes the art; at least in my mind.
> I have a book on Army Combatives, which can be summarized this way, harm or kill them, with any means at hand. And, Krav Maga seems to be the same way.
> 
> That is not a slam against it, but any training in it would have to be sharply defined, and directed by the instructor. Otherwise, it would be easy to get lost, trying to figure out your next move.


I don't think that strict definition is at all necessary. BJJ, for instance, has thrived mostly on NOT trying to put borders around the art. It has naturally graduated (in most places) more and more to ground work and few strikes, but that's not a limitation imposed by the nature of the art. In many BJJ gyms, if something works, it's BJJ. Same thing with MMA gyms (to some extent regardless of the base styles they teach, or whether they teach base styles, at all).


----------



## jobo (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> If we talk reality, stronger muscles are an advantage in any style. Women tend to have weaker muscles (though not in all areas), so will (on average) hit less hard, etc. But any style that works when taught well (and KM is one) will work for a woman when taught/learned well.


well that's most probably a truism, but is very difficult to verify  with actual data, trained  athletes, in this case swimmers, women have about 60% of the strength of their Male counter parts, with the general population is a lot more difficult to come up with a hard and fast figure, 

men, most men have the capacity  to be stronger, but if they dont train and the woman is sporty or works in an industry that has lifting r strength involved then the advantage may be very small or non existent.

8ve met some unfeasibly strong women in my time, girly girls that could seriously embaress a lot males. when I was a teenager, I ended up in a pushing match with my younger sister, she more than held her own as she had spent 6 months messing about with her boy friends bullworker. I immediately purchased a bull worker, no one wants to be beaten up by their little sister

but the same general strength  rule applies,  the stronger you are, the lower the % of people who are substantially stronger than you


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

jobo said:


> well that's most probably a truism, but is very difficult to verify  with actual data, trained  athletes, in this case swimmers, women have about 60% of the strength of their Male counter parts, with the general population is a lot more difficult to come up with a hard and fast figure,
> 
> men, most men have the capacity  to be stronger, but if they dont train and the woman is sporty or works in an industry that has lifting r strength involved then the advantage may be very small or non existent.
> 
> ...


I did say "on average", Jobo.


----------



## jobo (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I did say "on average", Jobo.


I know, but what " average" is this of which you speak, you can certainly say that the " average Male has the capacity to be stronger than the average female, it's a big jump to say that they are. 7nless you are only comparing like with like on age and physical fitness

certainly with a women who has trained say Km, for a year, then theres a good chance she can go head to head with the " average Male "

the who point of ma, is to lift you out of the average


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

jobo said:


> I know, but what " average" is this of which you speak, you can certainly say that the " average Male has the capacity to be stronger than the average female, it's a big jump to say that they are. 7nless you are only comparing like with like


It's common usage, Jobo. You know that.



> certainly with a women who has trained say Km, for a year, then theres a good chance she can go head to head with the " average Male "


Agreed. And she might (depending how she trained, and her personal potential for strength) be stronger than the average male. But she'd no longer be "average", herself.



> the who point of ma, is to lift you out of the average


Yes. But what was YOUR point?


----------



## jobo (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> It's common usage, Jobo. You know that.
> 
> 
> Agreed. And she might (depending how she trained, and her personal potential for strength) be stronger than the average male. But she'd no longer be "average", herself.
> ...


it may be common usage to make claims based on an average that you dont know, or have no idea what methodology was used to arrive at it. but claims made from a made up average are suspect and strength is primarily  a skill, that's only loosely tied to muscle size

my point  is that your statement that a female km,cant hit as hard as an average Male is completely unsuportable. not least because strength is only part of the eqaution


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

jobo said:


> it may be common usage to make claims based on an average that you dont know, or have no idea what methodology was used to arrive at it. but claims made from a made up average are suspect and strength is primarily  a skill, that's only loosely tied to muscle size
> 
> my point  is that your statement that a female km,cant hit as hard as an average Male is completely unsuportable. not least because strength is only part of the eqaution


Actually, you need to go back and re-read what I said, apparently. I never said a female KM can't hit as hard as an average male. You are doing your usual of rearranging things to a meaning you want to argue against.


----------



## jobo (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Actually, you need to go back and re-read what I said, apparently. I never said a female KM can't hit as hard as an average male. You are doing your usual of rearranging things to a meaning you want to argue against.


well we were discussing female km, so it was a fair assumption that what you were referring to, but ok, what makes you believe that an average female cant strike as hard as an average Male. you will need to state your data points for what makes someone average to do this.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

jobo said:


> well we were discussing female km, so it was a fair assumption that what you were referring to, but ok, what makes you believe that an average female cant strike as hard as an average Male. you will need to state your data points for what makes someone average to do this.


That's not even close to a "fair assumption". Re-read the post, this time with the intention of actually responding to what it says, rather than what you want it to say (so you can argue).

In answer to your more reasonable question: mass (women on average weigh less) and strength (both anecdotal and measured evidence shows women have less strength in several key muscle groups). A very simple Google search produced this as the first result:Women in Combat: Physical Differences May Mean Uphill Battle


----------



## jobo (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> That's not even close to a "fair assumption". Re-read the post, this time with the intention of actually responding to what it says, rather than what you want it to say (so you can argue).
> 
> In answer to your more reasonable question: mass (women on average weigh less) and strength (both anecdotal and measured evidence shows women have less strength in several key muscle groups). A very simple Google search produced this as the first result:Women in Combat: Physical Differences May Mean Uphill Battle


but women who do combat arnt average,by your own claim and neither are the men by the same measure, so that not dealing with the claim that an average Male strikes harder than an average female  ?

a quick Google says the average American males between 30 and 40 is 5 ,9 and29.6 BMI  a 39, inch waist.so a fraction of 1% under being obese, so it's fairly clear they are no up on the e exercise thing.  so where is the data that this short fat unfit man punches harder than an average female ?

or if your using a different average, pray tell what it is ?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

jobo said:


> but women who do combat arnt average,by your own claim and neither are the men by the same measure, so that not dealing with the claim that an average Male strikes harder than an average female  ?
> 
> a quick Google says the average American males between 30 and 40 is 5 ,9 and29.6 BMI  a 39, inch waist.so a fraction of 1% under being obese, so it's fairly clear they are no up on the e exercise thing.  so where is the data that this short fat unfit man punches harder than an average female ?
> 
> or if your using a different average, pray tell what it is ?


You're just looking for something to argue about. You have neither a point, nor anything to add. I think we're done here.


----------



## jobo (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You're just looking for something to argue about. You have neither a point, nor anything to add. I think we're done here.


my point remains the same as it was a the beginning, that putting the words on average in a sentence is meaningless unless your going to define average in that context,  and more expressly,  an " average female that does a physical job, of which there are many, could well be stronger than an average" Male who does an office job of which there are also many. more than enough of both for them to be considered average everyday people, unless as above you have some particular data set you wish to impose on it to prove your point


----------



## drop bear (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I did say "on average", Jobo.



On average is a misconception in that context.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

drop bear said:


> On average is a misconception in that context.
> 
> View attachment 22168


Not really. "On average" is a common usage which doesn't actually require an individual be average for the larger population - every subset (including "people who do KM") has an average, as well. The question was about "women" (the generic group, as opposed to any individual women), so we can discuss overall points, without needing to resort to outliers.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Not really. "On average" is a common usage which doesn't actually require an individual be average for the larger population - every subset (including "people who do KM") has an average, as well. The question was about "women" (the generic group, as opposed to any individual women), so we can discuss overall points, without needing to resort to outliers.



Trained fighters are outliers. How does average factor in?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Trained fighters are outliers. How does average factor in?


There are averages within any population. That's how averages work.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> There are averages within any population. That's how averages work.



But they don't apply to the people in question.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 8, 2019)

drop bear said:


> But they don't apply to the people in question.


Yeah, they do. There's an "average" for people who start KM. There's an "average" for people who do 40 years of KM. Every population has an average, and it's going to be a derivative of the average of the larger population. So, if on average, women have less upper body strength than men, then elite women will (on average) have less upper body strength than elite men. It translates.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 8, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, they do. There's an "average" for people who start KM. There's an "average" for people who do 40 years of KM. Every population has an average, and it's going to be a derivative of the average of the larger population. So, if on average, women have less upper body strength than men, then elite women will (on average) have less upper body strength than elite men. It translates.



I see but for krav why are we not setting up elite female athletes vs average Male? Which includes elite males anyway. 

I don't care how soccer moms perform. They don't factor in.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 9, 2019)

drop bear said:


> I see but for krav why are we not setting up elite female athletes vs average Male? Which includes elite males anyway.
> 
> I don't care how soccer moms perform. They don't factor in.


Well, first, most people won't ever become "elite". Secondly, because it was a simple point being made that in every MA, women do start at a physical disadvantage. The second half of the point is what you're making now - that the disadvantage applies less when you're more skilled than the other person. There are certainly elite women in MMA (and other fighting sports) who'd destroy me. Almost certainly within KM, as well.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 9, 2019)

If you don't like to talk about "averages", then you can replace that with the concept of "all other factors being equal."

A woman with typical genetics who sits on her ***, eats junk food, and watches tv all day will be significantly weaker than a man with typical genetics who sits on his ***, eats junk food, and watches tv all day.

A woman with above average genetics who does manual labor for a living will be significantly weaker than a man with equally above average genetics who does that same manual labor job for a living.

A woman who trains professionally at an elite fight gym with the guidance of an expert strength & conditioning coach, fight coach, and nutritionist will be significantly weaker than a man with the same background who trains equally hard at that same gym with the same coaches - even if they are in the same weight class (which they likely won't be).

The practical upshot of this from a woman's self-defense point of view is that it's in her interest to not allow all other factors to be equal. If she wants to be able to fight off a male attacker, then she needs to train longer and harder and probably smarter than her male classmate would to get the same results.


----------



## jobo (Apr 9, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> If you don't like to talk about "averages", then you can replace that with the concept of "all other factors being equal."
> 
> A woman with typical genetics who sits on her ***, eats junk food, and watches tv all day will be significantly weaker than a man with typical genetics who sits on his ***, eats junk food, and watches tv all day.
> 
> ...


you've just substituted average with typical. what's typical genetics exactly ?

I'm guessing your going to come back and say average ?


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 9, 2019)

Muscular Strength in Women Compared to Men | Livestrong.com

From the article: 
*Muscle Numbers*
Studies have proven again and again that men have a greater amount of skeletal muscle than women. In one such study that examined 468 men and women and was published in a 1985 issue of the “Journal of Applied Physiology,” researchers determined that men had an average of 72.6 pounds of muscle compared to the 46.2 pounds found in women. The men had 40 percent more muscle mass in the upper body and 33 percent more in the lower body.

*Strength Translation*
Men not only have more muscle, but pound for pound, their muscle is slightly stronger than a woman's -- about 5 to 10 percent, says Lou Schuler in "The New Rules of Lifting for Women." A study reported in a 1993 issue of the "European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology" attributed this strength difference to larger muscle fibers in men.

Back to "average" when talking in generalities without getting into tons of scientific papers done to show where the "average" came from.  In the scientific world, when looking at human factors a bell curve has been used.  That means that about 70% (68% if you REALLY want to be anal about the details) of the population fall within what has been measured and deemed "average" in the range (+/- 1 standard deviation of the exact middle point).  Going further, 95% of the population is 2 standard deviations from the middle point, and 99.7% are 3 standard deviations away.  Each of those deviations would also have a range for them.  For example, the shortest man is at one extreme of the curve and the tallest man at the other end, they would be more than 3 standard deviations from the middle. So, breaking it down further, you have about 15% of the population that is either taller than the average height range or shorter than the average height range.  The same is true of everything else that can be measured in human characteristics.  

Now, you can further define your parameters to "test your hypothesis".  

Here is a chart prepared using 8.4 million lifts on the bench press (at the bottom of the page you can link to other lifts), breaking it down between male and female, bodyweight and experience levels (beginner/novice/intermediate/advanced/elite.  An elite 200 pound female has an average bench press of 253 lbs.  A beginner 200 pound male has an average bench press of 138 lbs.  An intermediate female has a bench press of 140 lbs. 

Bench Press Standards for Men and Women (lb) - Strength Level


----------



## jobo (Apr 9, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Muscular Strength in Women Compared to Men | Livestrong.com
> 
> From the article:
> *Muscle Numbers*
> ...


well were the average came from is very important if your claim on gender is on average stronger, and you also need to define stonger, the article identifies that women have greater resilience to exercise and that is most certainly one definition of being stronger

I hope this isn't another debate where you wade in with no evidence whatsoever ever

so, where your 3vidence that an out of condition female is weaker than an out of condition Male? and how are you going to determine they are both equally out of condition to make the comparison in the first place


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 9, 2019)

jobo said:


> well were the average came from is very important if your claim on gender is on average stronger, and you also need to define stonger, the article identifies that women have greater resilience to exercise and that is most certainly one definition of being stronger
> 
> I hope this isn't another debate where you wade in with no evidence whatsoever ever
> 
> so, where your 3vidence that an out of condition female is weaker than an out of condition Male? and how are you going to determine they are both equally out of condition to make the comparison in the first place



did you even read the articles or links provided?  If so, you would not have that question.  Because, like last time it seems you ignore any actual supporting evidence and documentation when it is provided so you won't be wrong.


----------



## jobo (Apr 9, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> did you even read the articles or links provided?  If so, you would not have that question.  Because, like last time it seems you ignore any actual supporting evidence and documentation when it is provided so you won't be wrong.


yes I've read it and it's not there, have you read it, perhaps you could point out the section you claiming answers my questions


----------



## drop bear (Apr 9, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Well, first, most people won't ever become "elite". Secondly, because it was a simple point being made that in every MA, women do start at a physical disadvantage. The second half of the point is what you're making now - that the disadvantage applies less when you're more skilled than the other person. There are certainly elite women in MMA (and other fighting sports) who'd destroy me. Almost certainly within KM, as well.



Everyone with an average level of physicality starts at a disadvantage with martial arts. 

It is why strength and fitness is trained.


----------



## BigMotor (Apr 9, 2019)

Andr said:


> And what about girls? Is Krav Maga useless for them at all? Maybe vice versa, Krav Maga is more applicable for girls because nobody expects any hard struggle from them?



I sparred with a chick in TKD, she was an instructor with a black belt; and her boobs got in her way, and I think that she was self-conscious of it.
It is difficult to spar with an attractive big booby girl, because of distractions, that is what I learned form that.



Saheim said:


> Krav Maga is unmatched...... when it comes to pretending to fight people who are pretending to attack you
> 
> Don't freak, I'm kidding BUT stereotypes do not magically appear out of thin air either.


Ha, ha, ha...funny, in a comical way.



drop bear said:


> I did an rbsd called scientific fighting Congress which attracted some krav guys and looks like it has similar training ideas.
> (A lot of which I don't really like)
> 
> I now do mma and its accompanying sub styles  which in my opinion is what krav should have been.
> ...



That is what I do, I adhere to the KISS principle in fighting; because I don't want to get lost in technique, I want to bust a head.



gpseymour said:


> I don't think that strict definition is at all necessary. BJJ, for instance, has thrived mostly on NOT trying to put borders around the art. It has naturally graduated (in most places) more and more to ground work and few strikes, but that's not a limitation imposed by the nature of the art. In many BJJ gyms, if something works, it's BJJ. Same thing with MMA gyms (to some extent regardless of the base styles they teach, or whether they teach base styles, at all).



Correct, it must work or it is useless, whether it is MMA, or BJJ, or TKD; and I think that people condense things down, to what works for them.
You don't want to go into a fight, and wonder what to do next, because that is a certain way to lose.

A certain way to win, is to think of how to win, and then do it. Punching someone very hard in the face, that is a way to win. And it does not matter what method you prefer to use; as long as you do it. And that move is universal, anyone can do it; and kicking them in the shins, is another universal move, that most people can do. I just imagine breaking their shin with a kick, myself.

A lot of people do not understand what a fight is, but it is a small war; it is not a social gathering. I am speaking of street fights here friends, and not bouts.


----------



## Martial D (Apr 9, 2019)

jobo said:


> well we were discussing female km, so it was a fair assumption that what you were referring to, but ok, what makes you believe that an average female cant strike as hard as an average Male. you will need to state your data points for what makes someone average to do this.



Jobo I never took you for a 3rd wave feminist.

Maybe you and @tez have more in common than you thought!


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 9, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> If we talk reality, stronger muscles are an advantage in any style. Women tend to have weaker muscles (though not in all areas), so will (on average) hit less hard, etc. But any style that works when taught well (and KM is one) will work for a woman when taught/learned well.




You don't always need to hit hard for it to be effective, liver shots for example don't need to be hard to work well. Targeting is a basic key, some areas you can punch hard to and only break your hand others need not much more than a tap to be effective. The other key points of course are training and practice.

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you just using your posts as a jump off for my points.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 9, 2019)

BigMotor said:


> I sparred with a chick in TKD, she was an instructor with a black belt; and her boobs got in her way, and I think that she was self-conscious of it.
> It is difficult to spar with an attractive big booby girl, because of distractions, that is what I learned form that.




Thank you for sharing that with us. Luckily I don't find women attractive in that way and the size of their breasts is irrelevant. Glad you took her seriously though.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 9, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Everyone with an average level of physicality starts at a disadvantage with martial arts.
> 
> It is why strength and fitness is trained.


I think you've entirely missed the point on this one, DB. Tony made it pretty clearly a few posts back.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 9, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> You don't always need to hit hard for it to be effective, liver shots for example don't need to be hard to work well. Targeting is a basic key, some areas you can punch hard to and only break your hand others need not much more than a tap to be effective. The other key points of course are training and practice.
> 
> BTW I'm not disagreeing with you just using your posts as a jump off for my points.


Agreed. Hitting hard is an extra tool. If you hit harder than me, more targets become useful for more purposes.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 10, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. Hitting hard is an extra tool. If you hit harder than me, more targets become useful for more purposes.



Hitting hard is always going to a 'good thing', but just because you can't hit as hard as another person it doesn't mean you are useless.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 10, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Thank you for sharing that with us. Luckily I don't find women attractive in that way and the size of their breasts is irrelevant. Glad you took her seriously though.


I find women attractive but I tend not to notice things like that when they're trying to punch me in the face. Plus ive got enough maturity to not care about such things


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 10, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> I find women attractive but I tend not to notice things like that when they're trying to punch me in the face. Plus ive got enough maturity to not care about such things




The trick there is having maturity isn't it, I don't find it offensive he mentioned 'boobys' ( though that's very schoolboy'ish, usually accompanied with a hand over the mouth giggle) it's just immature. I've sparred with a great many men ( as well as many great men!) and grappled, awareness of gender goes out of the window when, as you say, they are trying to punch you/arm bar you.


----------



## jobo (Apr 10, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Muscular Strength in Women Compared to Men | Livestrong.com
> 
> From the article:
> *Muscle Numbers*
> ...


it's very simplistic to claim human population conform to bell curves, as generally they dont as theres a lot of societal  and environmental factors involved,  so for instance height, if 80 % of a population is malnourished that ties strongly to height then your not going to end up with a bell curve for height  or if a population is of mixed racial background and one has a genetic tendency towards being taller or carry more muscle mass then your not going to have a bell curve unless the % of each in the population is exactly equal

or if 20% of a population does a hard physical job and the other 80% work in offices then your not going to have a bell curve for strenth


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 10, 2019)

jobo said:


> it's very simplistic to claim human population conform to bell curves, as generally they dont as theres a lot of societal  and environmental factors involved,  so for instance height, if 80 % of a population is malnourished that ties strongly to height then your not going to end up with a bell curve for height  or if a population is of mixed racial background and one has a genetic tendency towards being taller or carry more muscle mass then your not going to have a bell curve unless the % of each in the population is exactly equal
> 
> or if 20% of a population does a hard physical job and the other 80% work in offices then your not going to have a bell curve for strenth



Once again, you are changing parameters to try and "be right" and find an exception to the rule and don't read for content of posts and the intent of the post.  Read the line right after I talked about a bell curve. *Now, you can further define your parameters to "test your hypothesis".   *You are further defining your parameters to account for variances in sub-groups of the human population.  Based on your questions, you could now get different test samples to test for the variances and "average" of what you asked about to compare to the larger human population.


----------



## jobo (Apr 10, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Once again, you are changing parameters to try and "be right" and find an exception to the rule and don't read for content of posts and the intent of the post.  Read the line right after I talked about a bell curve. *Now, you can further define your parameters to "test your hypothesis".   *You are further defining your parameters to account for variances in sub-groups of the human population.  Based on your questions, you could now get different test samples to test for the variances and "average" of what you asked about to compare to the larger human population.


well your wrong about human populations  conforming to bell curves, there no point reading on and discussing what came after when your whole premise and  reasoning is badly flawed

we are talking about the world here, that's about 200 countries and nearly 8 billion people, if you want to break it into sub groups and account for variances to prove your point, then please be my guest ? il look forward to your answer


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 12, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Hitting hard is always going to a 'good thing', but just because you can't hit as hard as another person it doesn't mean you are useless.


Nobody has said that.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 13, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Nobody has said that.




I didn't say they did, it's just a comment, why are you being adversarial? Why do you jump down my throat when I just make a comment?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 13, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> I didn't say they did, it's just a comment, why are you being adversarial? Why do you jump down my throat when I just make a comment?


You're reading a lot more emotion in that than was there, Tez. I was just clarifying - making sure you didn't think that's what I intended to say.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 14, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You're reading a lot more emotion in that than was there, Tez. I was just clarifying - making sure you didn't think that's what I intended to say.




Why do you assume 'emotion' is this you thinking that as a female I'm actually more 'emotionally engaged' than a man? I'm asking a question not getting involved, I'm curious, that's all, why you have become so sharp. Why not ask me instead of barking out a statement  'No one said........….' duh I know no one said, you've misread it again.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 14, 2019)

I think it's time for this thread to be locked. The few pages of this are nothing but absolutely stupid arguments


----------



## _Simon_ (Apr 14, 2019)

...

......

................

¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 14, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Why do you assume 'emotion' is this you thinking that as a female I'm actually more 'emotionally engaged' than a man? I'm asking a question not getting involved, I'm curious, that's all, why you have become so sharp. Why not ask me instead of barking out a statement  'No one said........….' duh I know no one said, you've misread it again.


Again, I think you're reading more into my post than is there. If it came across as sharp, it wasn't intended as such. I was probably going fast when I posted that, so put in a short statement rather than anything longer.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 14, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> I think it's time for this thread to be locked. The few pages of this are nothing but absolutely stupid arguments


As long as disagreements don't get too heated, there's no reason not to let folks sort them.


----------



## jobo (Apr 14, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> I think it's time for this thread to be locked. The few pages of this are nothing but absolutely stupid arguments


oh no their not !


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 14, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Again, I think you're reading more into my post than is there. If it came across as sharp, it wasn't intended as such. I was probably going fast when I posted that, so put in a short statement rather than anything longer.




I don't understand why you need to correct posts, ( I know no one said it, everyone knows no one said it because if they had they'd have read it and they didn't!!! but you had to post to say no one had said it, it's like a Monty Python sketch) and as someone has already said it makes for stupid arguments.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 14, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> I don't understand why you need to correct posts, ( I know no one said it, everyone knows no one said it because if they had they'd have read it and they didn't!!! but you had to post to say no one had said it, it's like a Monty Python sketch) and as someone has already said it makes for stupid arguments.


OK


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Trained fighters are outliers. How does average factor in?


Super late to the party, so this may have already been addressed (haven't caught up to the thread yet). But there's a simple way to guesstimate the average of men vs. women strength. Ask random men you know, and random women, how many pushups, pullups, squats, etc. to find out whether men or women have more muscle. Definitely not scientific, but can give a general idea. You could also ask a high school gym teacher what the average is on fitness tests for each. I haven't done that, but I think it's a fair assumption that men's averages would be higher, since from what I remember the tests near me had different standards for fitness for both. I hope that was based on data they had found.


----------



## jobo (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Super late to the party, so this may have already been addressed (haven't caught up to the thread yet). But there's a simple way to guesstimate the average of men vs. women strength. Ask random men you know, and random women, how many pushups, pullups, squats, etc. to find out whether men or women have more muscle. Definitely not scientific, but can give a general idea. You could also ask a high school gym teacher what the average is on fitness tests for each. I haven't done that, but I think it's a fair assumption that men's averages would be higher, since from what I remember the tests near me had different standards for fitness for both. I hope that was based on data they had found.


ask ing  men what there press up count is, is Like asking them how many sexual partners they have had, they tend to exaggerate  by a factor of two or three,

which is a serious issue with any survey of fitness that doesn5 involve them proving it.

I read the " average " 40 yo Male can do 40 press ups ?... not round here they cant,

when looking at elite athletes that do strengh based sports sprinting, swim sprints, high jump etal,then the differance in performance is circa 10% if a man does it in 20 secs,a femail does it in 22 secs. so clearly theres a performance advantage, but it's no where near what some on here have claimed it to be


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> ask ing  men what there press up count is, is Like asking them how many sexual partners they have had, they tend to exaggerate  by a factor of two or three,
> 
> which is a serious issue with any survey of fitness that doesn5 involve them proving it.
> 
> ...


That's what the high school gym test part is about. They actually do have to prove it. Cause I don't think my friends (male or female) will react well to me saying "Oh you can do 50 pushups? Let me see, I'll count."


----------



## drop bear (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Super late to the party, so this may have already been addressed (haven't caught up to the thread yet). But there's a simple way to guesstimate the average of men vs. women strength. Ask random men you know, and random women, how many pushups, pullups, squats, etc. to find out whether men or women have more muscle. Definitely not scientific, but can give a general idea. You could also ask a high school gym teacher what the average is on fitness tests for each. I haven't done that, but I think it's a fair assumption that men's averages would be higher, since from what I remember the tests near me had different standards for fitness for both. I hope that was based on data they had found.



Yeah. But we are comparing women who train to men in general. Some men train some don't.

So elite women to average men would be a better comparison.

If we were suggesting competition then it would be elite men to elite women.

Comparing average to average would be like making a judgement on tightrope walking and using averages for that. 

Training will make people stronger than average.


----------



## jobo (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> That's what the high school gym test part is about. They actually do have to prove it. Cause I don't think my friends (male or female) will react well to me saying "Oh you can do 50 pushups? Let me see, I'll count."


well in that case they are clearly lieing or they would be only to happy to show off.
then  you say, no sorry, no half reps, so that it's only 12, the number of people I've seen that do 30 half reps and say they are press ups is considerable


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Yeah. But we are comparing women who train to men in general. Some men train some don't.
> 
> So elite women to average men would be a better comparison.
> 
> ...


I got lost multiple times in this thread, but my assumption was that the discussion was between men who train krav maga versus women who train krav maga. In which case the men would still be stronger than the women. I would hope that women who train are stronger than man who don't.


----------



## jobo (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I got lost multiple times in this thread, but my assumption was that the discussion was between men who train krav maga versus women who train krav maga. In which case the men would still be stronger than the women. I would hope that women who train are stronger than man who don't.


well no, that's what hasn5 been proved at all, you can only make that assumption when dealing with elite athletes,  where theres data to support it, no one has 3ver carried out a survey of all the km, clubs to find that out


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> well no, that's what hasn5 been proved at all, you can only make that assumption when dealing with elite athletes,  where theres data to support it, no one has 3ver carried out a survey of all the km, clubs to find that out


Again, that was my statement about high school fitness standards. Those are supposed to be based around the 'average' scores for their age group, and are differentiated.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I got lost multiple times in this thread, but my assumption was that the discussion was between men who train krav maga versus women who train krav maga. In which case the men would still be stronger than the women. I would hope that women who train are stronger than man who don't.



Is the end point of Krav to dominate other Kravarians?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Is the end point of Krav to dominate other Kravarians?


For some people, probably


----------



## jobo (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Again, that was my statement about high school fitness standards. Those are supposed to be based around the 'average' scores for their age group, and are differentiated.


I dont want to state the very obvious, but ok then, they would seem to apply to eeer high school children


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> ask ing  men what there press up count is, is Like asking them how many sexual partners they have had, they tend to exaggerate  by a factor of two or three,
> 
> which is a serious issue with any survey of fitness that doesn5 involve them proving it.
> 
> ...


What % difference have you seen someone on here claim?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 16, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Yeah. But we are comparing women who train to men in general. Some men train some don't.


But that wasn't the original comparison, as I saw it. I said women started out with a disadvantage compared to men because of mass and muscle strength. That's not comparing trained to untrained.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> I dont want to state the very obvious, but ok then, they would seem to apply to eeer high school children


And do you have evidence that this can't be generalized from adolescence to adulthood?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> I dont want to state the very obvious, but ok then, they would seem to apply to eeer high school children


Gerry beat me to it, but we know that it applies to high school students, we know it applies to collegiate athletes, we know it applies to professional athletes, at what point can we accept that it is generalized that men, on average, are stronger than women, on average?


----------



## jobo (Apr 16, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> And do you have evidence that this can't be generalized from adolescence to adulthood?


the evidence burden lies with the one claiming it can


----------



## jobo (Apr 16, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Gerry beat me to it, but we know that it applies to high school students, we know it applies to collegiate athletes, we know it applies to professional athletes, at what point can we accept that it is generalized that men, on average, are stronger than women, on average?


well we dont know any of those things


----------



## drop bear (Apr 16, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> But that wasn't the original comparison, as I saw it. I said women started out with a disadvantage compared to men because of mass and muscle strength. That's not comparing trained to untrained.



How are you disadvantaged in krav?

It is not competitive. 

They don't grade as quickly?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> well we dont know any of those things


My last post in this thread because at this point it's pointless.
1. We can assume a disparity in high school students based on what I said and you agreed to earlier. Not going to repeat for more nitpicking.
2. We know for collegiate athletes because of the existence of men/women teams in different sports, and the abilities of each, which is observable by just about anyone. Along with how women have traditionally fared when entering a sport with a large physical/strength component to it.
3. We know for professional athletes for...read number 2.
4. Based on three separate instances of three different age groups, one taking the totality of the age group and the other two taking the elite and semi-elite of their age groups, (plus, you know, all the science already stating men have a higher starting point for strength than women), we can make the assumption that men, in general, will be stronger than women, in general.

Edit: Just adding this in. Unfortunately it's only the abstract, while I can access the full link the site I use is associate with my hospital and is password protected. But just the abstract explains the physiological differences in strength. Gender differences in strength and muscle fiber characteristics.  - PubMed - NCBI

And this has nothing to do with krav at this point. Since the main goal is SD, and you're not competing against each other, you're not inherently worse at krav by being male or female, and you can obviously improve (either gender) by training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> the evidence burden lies with the one claiming it can


In a pure debate sense, yes. But we're in a discussion about the utility of numbers. Just tossing out "nuh uh" isn't helpful. If you know of evidence that this trend - seen everywhere I've ever seen any measures - doesn't generalize, then please share it. If you're not aware of a problem with the data, then I'm not sure what the issue is.


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> In a pure debate sense, yes. But we're in a discussion about the utility of numbers. Just tossing out "nuh uh" isn't helpful. If you know of evidence that this trend - seen everywhere I've ever seen any measures - doesn't generalize, then please share it. If you're not aware of a problem with the data, then I'm not sure what the issue is.


what data ? no one has posted data, that support this generalisation


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

drop bear said:


> How are you disadvantaged in krav?
> 
> It is not competitive.
> 
> They don't grade as quickly?


The statement I made was that a woman starts with a disadvantage of not being able to hit as hard. I haven't gone back to my original post on that thought, so I'm not sure if I was clear on the implication: it would take more skill to overcome that disadvantage. Meaning that an average untrained woman, compared to an average untrained man, will need more skill to be able to fight against an average man.

I'm pretty sure you understood all that, though.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> what data ? no one has posted data, to support this generalisation


I posted a link to actual data many posts ago.


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I posted a link to actual data many posts ago.


you couldn't even tell me what the average strengh for a Male was, and how you had defined strengh. I've no idea how you have arrived at the firm conclusion that the female average is lower than the Male, when you dont even know what the Male average is ? and what strengh  is .. and if its mean mode or medium


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> The statement I made was that a woman starts with a disadvantage of not being able to hit as hard. I haven't gone back to my original post on that thought,.
> 
> I'm pretty sure you understood all that, though.


you've not even gone close to proving that statment


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> My last post in this thread because at this point it's pointless.
> 1. We can assume a disparity in high school students based on what I said and you agreed to earlier. Not going to repeat for more nitpicking.
> 2. We know for collegiate athletes because of the existence of men/women teams in different sports, and the abilities of each, which is observable by just about anyone. Along with how women have traditionally fared when entering a sport with a large physical/strength component to it.
> 3. We know for professional athletes for...read number 2.
> ...


well you've clearly never done or even read a properly conducted study on anything. you cant take three untypical groups 5hat only make up a small % of the population and make cast iron predictions on " average people" 5hats  silly and just screams selection bias


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 17, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Gerry beat me to it, but we know that it applies to high school students, we know it applies to collegiate athletes, we know it applies to professional athletes, at what point can we accept that it is generalized that men, on average, are stronger than women, on average?



A link was posted to a study earlier that tested the strength and muscle mass of men and women and came up with comparative numbers showing that a non-outlier male (since no one wants to say "average", even though most can agree that it is a descriptive word that communicates the message) has more muscle mass and strength than a non-outlier female.  It was also posted comparative strengths for males/females in regards to lifting based on bodyweight and experience levels, that again men are stronger than women and how to show the level of training for females to make it a more equal playing field in regards to strength. 

But, as they say...

There are two types of people in this world...

1) Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> A link was posted to a study earlier that tested the strength and muscle mass of men and women and came up with comparative numbers showing that a non-outlier male (since no one wants to say "average", even though most can agree that it is a descriptive word that communicates the message) has more muscle mass and strength than a non-outlier female.  It was also posted comparative strengths for males/females in regards to lifting based on bodyweight and experience levels, that again men are stronger than women and how to show the level of training for females to make it a more equal playing field in regards to strength.
> 
> But, as they say...
> 
> ...


that was doing bench pressing at a gym wasnt it. that got a high selection bias as well, not to mention all those steroids that young Male weight lifter are fond of ttend. you need a study where they were screened for drugs for it to have even remote relevance to " average" otherwise your just proving that steroids increase both muscle mass and strengh,  which isn't in dispute


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> you couldn't even tell me what the average strengh for a Male was, and how you had defined strengh. I've no idea how you have arrived at the firm conclusion that the female average is lower than the Male, when you dont even know what the Male average is ? and what strengh  is .. and if its mean mode or medium


How is that a response to the link, which contained actual data? You're being argumentative for the sake of argument at this point. You apparently don't have a point to make, nor any information to contribute.

I can't see how anyone would benefit from continuing this discussion.


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> that was doing bench pressing at a gym wasnt it. that got a high selection bias as well, not to mention all those steroids that young Male weight lifter are fond of attend. you need a study where they were screened for drugs for it to have even remote relevance to " average" otherwise your just proving that steroids increase both muscle mass and strength,  which isn't in dispute



That particular data was posted (it covers more than bench press if you look at it) because of the question about women training in regards to an untrained male.  It was given as a comparative to show different levels of training and strength levels of both men and women.  Which someone had posted that a trained female can be as strong or stronger than certain males.  

But, once again, you have missed the point entirely.  People are trying to find and have a meaningful dialog and all you are interested in is finding the "i" that is not dotted and focusing on that.  What is the purpose of your disagreement, other than to just disagree?  Can a reasonable person look at the data posted and come to the conclusion that, the average male is stronger than the average female?  Can they come to the conclusion that a female can train herself and become stronger than males who remain untrained?  Based on those, can you design a training methodology for your students to help tip the odds in favor of your female martial art students? All the rest is just smoke and mirror just to argue and doesn't matter to what the original topic was.

In NLP, they have a saying that is very appropriate in discussions like this.  "The map is not the territory".  A map is useful in navigating you where you want to go and to get where you need to be, but it is not the actual thing.  People on here are navigating the territory just fine and getting to where they need to go and you are looking at the map and arguing if it is a stream or a creek and demanding to prove that it is really a creek.  It misses the whole point of using the map to get where you need to go.


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> That particular data was posted (it covers more than bench press if you look at it) because of the question about women training in regards to an untrained male.  It was given as a comparative to show different levels of training and strength levels of both men and women.  Which someone had posted that a trained female can be as strong or stronger than certain males.
> 
> But, once again, you have missed the point entirely.  People are trying to find and have a meaningful dialog and all you are interested in is finding the "i" that is not dotted and focusing on that.  What is the purpose of your disagreement, other than to just disagree?  Can a reasonable person look at the data posted and come to the conclusion that, the average male is stronger than the average female?  Can they come to the conclusion that a female can train herself and become stronger than males who remain untrained?  Based on those, can you design a training methodology for your students to help tip the odds in favor of your female martial art students? All the rest is just smoke and mirror just to argue and doesn't matter to what the original topic was.
> 
> In NLP, they have a saying that is very appropriate in discussions like this.  "The map is not the territory".  A map is useful in navigating you where you want to go and to get where you need to be, but it is not the actual thing.  People on here are navigating the territory just fine and getting to where they need to go and you are looking at the map and arguing if it is a stream or a creek and demanding to prove that it is really a creek.  It misses the whole point of using the map to get where you need to go.


no a reasonable person cant look at the very iffy data you've posted and come to that conclusion. nb, I'm defining a reasonable person as one who can critically apply reason. not people searching the web for any half baked nonsense that vaguely support their point

if the study hasn't taken account of steroid use, then its meaningless  when applied to the wider population, that ignoring for now the very obvious selection bias.


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> How is that a response to the link, which contained actual data? You're being argumentative for the sake of argument at this point. You apparently don't have a point to make, nor any information to contribute.
> 
> I can't see how anyone would benefit from continuing this discussion.


all the people who cant critically analyse data, which seems to be most, would benifit greatly from having their gender stereo types challenged.

I've clearly challenged his data for a) selection bias
and b) not taking account of steroid use

the median average American Male is 36 and obese, how many of the selected population met that critia, and how does that result apply to the average Male when adjusted for age life style issues. I'm willing to hazard a guess that Mr average fat middle aged USA is not pumping iron and injecting steriods, unless someone has data that he is ?

with out that its meaning less for establishing the average that every one keeps telling me they know, but wont reveal


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> The statement I made was that a woman starts with a disadvantage of not being able to hit as hard. I haven't gone back to my original post on that thought, so I'm not sure if I was clear on the implication: it would take more skill to overcome that disadvantage. Meaning that an average untrained woman, compared to an average untrained man, will need more skill to be able to fight against an average man.m pretty sure you understood all that, though.


ok, apart from needing some strengh to move the arm, punching power has little to do with how strong you are and much to do with accelerating the arm which is in the most part a neurological  skill,and transfer  of body weight. so, what advantage if any are you claim a allergy stronger Male beginner has over a female beginner based on this alleged strenth benifit and not including any of the above ?, an answer in jewels  or a psi will do fine


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> all the people who cant critically analyse data, which seems to be most, would benifit greatly from having their gender stereo types challenged.
> 
> I've clearly challenged his data for a) selection bias
> and b) not taking account of steroid use
> ...


You say you're challenging a bias, but have presented nothing to show that it is, in fact, a bias. Show some data that even suggests the conclusion isn't true. See, you're making a claim, so...


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> ok, apart from needing some strengh to move the arm, punching power has little to do with how strong you are and much to do with accelerating the arm which is in the most part a neurological  skill,and transfer  of body weight. so, what advantage if any are you claim a allergy stronger Male beginner has over a female beginner based on this alleged strenth benifit and not including any of the above ?, an answer in jewels  or a psi will do fine


Yeah. Take two people who are untrained (both for strength and skill) of roughly equal strength and mass train them both for skill, and one also for strength. We both know what happens. You're making claims without evidence.


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> ok, apart from needing some strengh to move the arm, punching power has little to do with how strong you are and much to do with accelerating the arm which is in the most part a neurological  skill,and transfer  of body weight. so, what advantage if any are you claim a allergy stronger Male beginner has over a female beginner based on this alleged strenth benifit and not including any of the above ?, an answer in jewels  or a psi will do fine



Predicting Straight Punch Force of Impact | House | Journal of the Oklahoma Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance

Baseline for discussion; from the abstract "Thus, it would appear that the greatest factors that determine the straight punch force of impact in untrained subjects are hand speed and 1RM strength in a movement pattern that emulates the straight punch."

I will point out and agree that it is a small sample size, but a good starting point.


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> You say you're challenging a bias, but have presented nothing to show that it is, in fact, a bias. Show some data that even suggests the conclusion isn't true. See, you're making a claim, so...


which claim is that ? the one were I said I was guessing ? , I declare my guess not pass them off as fact


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Predicting Straight Punch Force of Impact | House | Journal of the Oklahoma Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance
> 
> Baseline for discussion; from the abstract "Thus, it would appear that the greatest factors that determine the straight punch force of impact in untrained subjects are hand speed and 1RM strength in a movement pattern that emulates the straight punch."
> 
> I will point out and agree that it is a small sample size, but a good starting point.


 so what about round punches, dont those count as punches? so which excersise other than punching emulates a stpunches punch, dont say bench pressing as it nothing like the same movement


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Apr 17, 2019)

Strength seems like it should reflect on how fast you can make a punch and how much force you can put behind it.  

I cant remember but isnt speed(*see below) measured by how heavy and fast something is going? (i have speed/velocity in my head and i cant think of the right term)

So the mass of your fist isn't likely to change (significantly) but how fast you can move it would  generate more force, and how fast is partially connected to how strong you are.  

Its also kind of why relatively fat people can get more mass behind their punch/swing it faster  as they have more mass around their stomach than relatively thin people.   As we know muscle is denser than fat and muscle actually moves you. 

Im not stating mass cant make up for lack of good technique to get good power or the reverse just both are factors and if you can do both well, you are better than one with good technique and not much strength and vice versa. Soley in the how much power you can give.  

I may have totally neglected putting more body weight behind something but i never claimed to be good at sports science or body mechanics, just apply the formula of how to work out force to this discussion.     I also had a TL;DR moment so excuse if it was covered. 


**Addendum*:   Its force, so replace speed/velocity with force/power when appropriate. Whats what i forgot the name of.


----------



## jobo (Apr 17, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Yeah. Take two people who are untrained (both for strength and skill) of roughly equal strength and mass train them both for skill, and one also for strength. We both know what happens. You're making claims without evidence.


well what will happen, they will both get better at punching, but are unlikely to develop at the same rate, or have the same outcome, unless you have some identical twins in mind and even then! so it will be impossible to tell 8n advance who will be the better puncher,  and if it turns out the one who trained strengh is better, it's impossible to know he wouldn't have been better anyway and then theres the issue that our weight trainer may out on more body mass, so we cant tell if its strengh or extra mass that helping

all in all very inconclusive


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> which claim is that ? the one were I said I was guessing ? , I declare my guess not pass them off as fact


Try again.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> well what will happen, they will both get better at punching, but are unlikely to develop at the same rate, or have the same outcome, unless you have some identical twins in mind and even then! so it will be impossible to tell 8n advance who will be the better puncher,  and if it turns out the one who trained strengh is better, it's impossible to know he wouldn't have been better anyway and then theres the issue that our weight trainer may out on more body mass, so we cant tell if its strengh or extra mass that helping
> 
> all in all very inconclusive


So, you're entirely incapable of thought experiments, hypotheticals (the basis of hypotheses), and drawing conclusions from broad data. That's useful to know.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 17, 2019)

I think I'll step out of this before it escalates again. This discussion is producing nothing useful anymore, for anyone on this forum.


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 18, 2019)

jobo said:


> so what about round punches, dont those count as punches? so which excersise other than punching emulates a stpunches punch, dont say bench pressing as it nothing like the same movement



Prove that dumbbell bench pressing is nothing like a straight punch chambered at your side, since it is YOUR claim.  You keep making all these little snide "what ifs" and add NOTHING to a discussion.


----------



## jobo (Apr 18, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Prove that dumbbell bench pressing is nothing like a straight punch chambered at your side, since it is YOUR claim.  You keep making all these little snide "what ifs" and add NOTHING to a discussion.


  I didn't say DUMBELL bench press I said bench prese.

so just to be clear are you claiming the study cites dumbell bench presses as emulating a chambered punch. or is that a claim your making independently ? and are you claiming the study dealt with chambered punches at all, as i can see no reference  to it ?


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 18, 2019)

jobo said:


> I didn't say DUMBELL bench press I said bench prese.
> 
> so just to be clear are you claiming the study cites dumbell bench presses as emulating a chambered punch. or is that a claim your making independently ? and are you claiming the study dealt with chambered punches at all, as i can see no reference  to it ?



Don't like the game do you?  You said that bench press is nothing like the same movement.  There are multiple variations of the "bench press", barbell bench press and dumbbell bench press just being two of them.  So now it is on YOU to prove how it doesn't mimic a punch and prove it.


----------



## jobo (Apr 18, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Don't like the game do you?  You said that bench press is nothing like the same movement.  There are multiple variations of the "bench press", barbell bench press and dumbbell bench press just being two of them.  So now it is on YOU to prove how it doesn't mimic a punch and prove it.


 yes I know and I said bench press that precludes any of the variation, that have another word in front of bench press. it doesn't mimic a punch coz your lay on a bench, a highly unlikely position to have to punch from and as mimic means to imitate,  then you would have had to see someone else punch something  from lay on a bench in order to imitate them ?


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 18, 2019)

jobo said:


> yes I know and I said bench press that precludes any of the variation, that have another word in front of bench press. it doesn't mimic a punch coz your lay on a bench, a highly unlikely position to have to punch from



It doesn't preclude it.  You are just lazy and said bench press and weren't descriptive of what you really meant.  Or do you mean like other people do when they use commonly accepted terms as a point of reference?  This is exactly what you do to other people and why people get so frustrated.  

SO, if you want to change your premise that the strength shown in the standard barbell bench press doesn't translate to punching power, then prove your premise.


----------



## jobo (Apr 18, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> It doesn't preclude it.  You are just lazy and said bench press and weren't descriptive of what you really meant.  Or do you mean like other people do when they use commonly accepted terms as a point of reference?  This is exactly what you do to other people and why people get so frustrated.
> 
> SO, if you want to change your premise that the strength shown in the standard barbell bench press doesn't translate to punching power, then prove your premise.


I didn't say that , I said the movement pattern was nothing like the same, to your unproven premise that 1 rm max translates to punching power.


----------



## punisher73 (Apr 18, 2019)

jobo said:


> I didn't say that , I said the movement pattern was nothing like the same, to your unproven premise that 1 rm max translates to punching power.



Nope re-read and work on your basic language skills.  What did the study test for?  You made the jump to bench press.


----------



## jobo (Apr 18, 2019)

punisher73 said:


> Nope re-read and work on your basic language skills.  What did the study test for?  You made the jump to bench press.


that's the question I asked you ! you made claim on the data the study contains, you back up your interpretation. as your clearly selectively quoting it


----------



## quasar44 (Jan 2, 2020)

Andr said:


> Search out in Youtube a video about Russian Krav Maga. It looks beyond belief.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It’s only a good starter system but many organ are frauds now
 In the USA : I would do Krav Maga World wide and krav alliance


----------



## quasar44 (Jan 2, 2020)

It’s very good for women and middle aged to older men 

Young guys should stick to the mma stuff 

kids should stick to wrestling


----------



## Headhunter (Jan 2, 2020)

quasar44 said:


> It’s very good for women and middle aged to older men
> 
> Young guys should stick to the mma stuff
> 
> kids should stick to wrestling


Oh great another Mma fanboy just what we need


----------



## quasar44 (Jan 2, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> Oh great another Mma fanboy just what we need



I like the back hand fists , knife hand and even the ridge hand


----------



## drop bear (Jan 2, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> Oh great another Mma fanboy just what we need



He said Krav was good for women and old men.

He does Krav by the way.


----------



## quasar44 (Jan 2, 2020)

drop bear said:


> He said Krav was good for women and old men.
> 
> He does Krav by the way.



I did from 2011 - 2015
As a man in my 30s with zero training except basic boxing


----------



## quasar44 (Jan 2, 2020)

Krav is a good starter system but you will get dominated against a trained striker and killed by a basic grappler


----------



## masherdong (Jun 6, 2020)

This video was made by a KMG Affiliate located in Russia. KMG is a legit organization headed by my Instructor Eyal Yanilov.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 7, 2020)

masherdong said:


> This video was made by a KMG Affiliate located in Russia. KMG is a legit organization headed by my Instructor Eyal Yanilov.


Yes kmg is legit but doesn’t mean every one of their schools is. KMG talk a lot of big game but I’ve seen a few of their schools with very sub standard practitioners...at high levels including the instructor


----------



## drop bear (Jun 7, 2020)

drop bear said:


> Ironically  I did read one which I am trying to hunt down.



Here we go. One actual instance of a Krav guy winning a fight.

Did an Australian Military Veteran Beat Up Eight Muslims for Attacking His Wife?


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 8, 2020)

drop bear said:


> Here we go. One actual instance of a Krav guy winning a fight.
> 
> Did an Australian Military Veteran Beat Up Eight Muslims for Attacking His Wife?



This got necroed to hell, but i have seen one of i think a krav maga stick takedown.  the techniques arent unique to it though given its a merger of several styles, but if you see a technique that they use works, then it should work in their system.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2020)

Rat said:


> This got necroed to hell, but i have seen one of i think a krav maga stick takedown.  the techniques arent unique to it though given its a merger of several styles, but if you see a technique that they use works, then it should work in their system.


How do you know if they’re unique or not?


----------



## jobo (Jun 8, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> How do you know if they’re unique or not?


dont ask silly questions , you tube obviously


----------



## drop bear (Jun 8, 2020)

Rat said:


> This got necroed to hell, but i have seen one of i think a krav maga stick takedown.  the techniques arent unique to it though given its a merger of several styles, but if you see a technique that they use works, then it should work in their system.



They are mostly wrestling moves though. Just with a stick.

At a guess I will suggest it was a beef wellington.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 8, 2020)

drop bear said:


> They are mostly wrestling moves though. Just with a stick.
> 
> At a guess I will suggest it was a beef wellington.



Thats to be expected given wrestling is a big influence on krav maga.  But Judo, BJJ and wrestling has effectively over taken some indignious weapon grappling.     Best example i know is with FMA, the indegnious wrestling of that is so-so lost and finding specilists who know it is quite difficult so most have adopted something else in its place especially if its superior to the status quo.      Cant really argue with styles that just throw each other around for their activity.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2020)

Rat said:


> Thats to be expected given wrestling is a big influence on krav maga.  But Judo, BJJ and wrestling has effectively over taken some indignious weapon grappling.     Best example i know is with FMA, the indegnious wrestling of that is so-so lost and finding specilists who know it is quite difficult so most have adopted something else in its place especially if its superior to the status quo.      Cant really argue with styles that just throw each other around for their activity.


You really know nothing do you. Wrestling is most certainly not a big influence. Yes Imi litchfield wrestled but most of Krav is a stand up system yes there’s some grappling defence and a few takedowns but not enough to say it’s a major influence. Just stop...


----------



## drop bear (Jun 8, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> You really know nothing do you. Wrestling is most certainly not a big influence. Yes Imi litchfield wrestled but most of Krav is a stand up system yes there’s some grappling defence and a few takedowns but not enough to say it’s a major influence. Just stop...



Yeah. A lot of military systems went that direction for a while. You could look at defendo, scars, line, krav maga. 

I don't know if any of them had good results though.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 8, 2020)

drop bear said:


> Yeah. A lot of military systems went that direction for a while. You could look at defendo, scars, line, krav maga.
> 
> I don't know if any of them had good results though.


Well you can see why wrestling isn’t a good idea for military. If they get into a close quarters fight it won’t be in wrestling shoes or uniform it won’t even be in street clothes. They’ll be in heavy uniforms, carry heavy Bergens, carrying an assault rifle, a hand gun, a knife and everything else on them so shooting a takedown with a massive bag on your back probably isn’t the best plan.


And that is me trash talking wrestling, wrestling’s a good sport and good to know just not for that specific situation


----------



## drop bear (Jun 8, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> Well you can see why wrestling isn’t a good idea for military. If they get into a close quarters fight it won’t be in wrestling shoes or uniform it won’t even be in street clothes. They’ll be in heavy uniforms, carry heavy Bergens, carrying an assault rifle, a hand gun, a knife and everything else on them so shooting a takedown with a massive bag on your back probably isn’t the best plan.
> 
> 
> And that is me trash talking wrestling, wrestling’s a good sport and good to know just not for that specific situation



You realise most modern military's do grappling based martial arts now?

Mat Larsen. Of Mcmap.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 9, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> Well you can see why wrestling isn’t a good idea for military. If they get into a close quarters fight it won’t be in wrestling shoes or uniform it won’t even be in street clothes. They’ll be in heavy uniforms, carry heavy Bergens, carrying an assault rifle, a hand gun, a knife and everything else on them so shooting a takedown with a massive bag on your back probably isn’t the best plan.
> 
> 
> And that is me trash talking wrestling, wrestling’s a good sport and good to know just not for that specific situation



No, grappling is perfectly fine for the military.   Fighting over weapons is a grappling game more than a  striking.  (if we want to break it down into those two)     If you want to disable somone weapon you either have to destroy the weapon, the hand that has the weapon or close in and grapple.    If we also account for armour in the military, striking can easily equate to breaking your hands or knees on somone helemt or plate etc.

I belive history also backs me up on this one, grappling is the primary method for fighting in weapon systems, for the above reasons. (obviously striking exists, but its predominately about grappling the person, thats the folly with dividing it up into grappling and striking, you do both usually when doing either)


You also would ditch your pack in any actual fighting, especially if its a proper bergen, its too encumbersome to properly fire and move in for any signficant peroid of time (or at all), you would especially ditch it if you are room clearing or trench clearing or in any situation where you would engage in hand to hand with somone.     Assualt packs can vary, but they are vastly less encumbersome than bergens, and are carried for as the name implies, assualting somewhere. (effectively where you dont need to lug around more than say 24 hours worth of equipment and food etc)

Uniforms are lighter today (at least for modern militaries) than they have been with full wool issue also and are pretty much neglible for the most part.  Wool did have the issue fo it took on water, but thats only a safety issue for amphibious things.   Plenty of people drowned that way or at least the wool didnt help in the invasion of normandy for example.  (i dont think not wearing wool would have saved you if you couldnt swim and jumped off not remotely close to the beach)


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 9, 2020)

Rat said:


> No, grappling is perfectly fine for the military.   Fighting over weapons is a grappling game more than a  striking.  (if we want to break it down into those two)     If you want to disable somone weapon you either have to destroy the weapon, the hand that has the weapon or close in and grapple.    If we also account for armour in the military, striking can easily equate to breaking your hands or knees on somone helemt or plate etc.
> 
> I belive history also backs me up on this one, grappling is the primary method for fighting in weapon systems, for the above reasons. (obviously striking exists, but its predominately about grappling the person, thats the folly with dividing it up into grappling and striking, you do both usually when doing either)
> 
> ...


You training yet?


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Jun 9, 2020)

drop bear said:


> You realise most modern military's do grappling based martial arts now?
> 
> Mat Larsen. Of Mcmap.



You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 9, 2020)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...



I presume that would be in the context of against somone who isnt a soldier or in a well equiped military.    I would love to see how well grabbing the testicles goes when they are wearing groin armour.   (it wouldnt go down well at all)


----------



## jobo (Jun 9, 2020)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...


 im not convinced that grabbing people balls is that effective to be honest not in reasonable tight fitting trousers anyway.

an ex solderer did it to me of over a slight miscommunication, he thought i had called him a mindless parasite, suppressing people over oil rights

he was seated i was standing, he grabbed my balls and squeezed very hard, it was unpleasant, rather than painful, and didnt in anyway prevent me from smashing him repeatably in the head with my fist, which seemed far more effective, judging by the fact he quickly relinquish his grip


----------



## Oni_Kadaki (Jun 9, 2020)

Replace the ball grab with an uppercut then, or a foot stomp on the instep. Point being, grappling takes time to become proficient, and unless you're special ops, you probably aren't allotted that much time to train hand-to-hand. Striking can be taught to reasonable proficiency in two weeks. I don't think grappling can.


----------



## jobo (Jun 9, 2020)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> Replace the ball grab with an uppercut then, or a foot stomp on the instep. Point being, grappling takes time to become proficient, and unless you're special ops, you probably aren't allotted that much time to train hand-to-hand. Striking can be taught to reasonable proficiency in two weeks. I don't think grappling can.


 but as with a lot of ma discussion on competence, theres no objective measure of proficiency,

grappling is what children who fight do instinctively, they need to actually learn to strike, i remember my first fight where someone punched me repeatedly, it came as a real shock at the time, i had to go away and learn that as part of my physical development

any measure of proficiency is then totally dependent on the proficiency of your opponent, if you learn to grapple to such an extent that you can put people on the ground quickly, then you, by any meaningful measure have proficiency,

i could teach someone that in a couple of hours, allowing they had reasonable physical development,, if you want to be able to tangle with people who have twice your body weight or are themselves experienced grapple'rt hat takes time

but the same is equal true of striking, an hour on a bag can teach you to punch, hitting a fast and mobile target takes a good  while longer


----------



## drop bear (Jun 9, 2020)

Rat said:


> No, grappling is perfectly fine for the military.   Fighting over weapons is a grappling game more than a  striking.  (if we want to break it down into those two)     If you want to disable somone weapon you either have to destroy the weapon, the hand that has the weapon or close in and grapple.    If we also account for armour in the military, striking can easily equate to breaking your hands or knees on somone helemt or plate etc.
> 
> I belive history also backs me up on this one, grappling is the primary method for fighting in weapon systems, for the above reasons. (obviously striking exists, but its predominately about grappling the person, thats the folly with dividing it up into grappling and striking, you do both usually when doing either)
> 
> ...



If I double leg you with a heavy pack on that should put me in the best position to fight you as my mobility is no longer compromised and I have all this extra weight in which to pin you down. 

Which is pretty much the same method I use for younger more agile guys. In that I won't beat their scramble but I might beat their grind.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 9, 2020)

Oni_Kadaki said:


> You're right, at least as far as MACP (Modern Army Combatives Program) level one, and Security Forces Combatives are concerned. That being said, I've never been thrilled with the decision. Don't get me wrong, grappling has saved my life, but it takes time to train it... Why are we being trained a grappling technique to escape a guillotine when grabbing and ripping the balls is a much easier, less nuanced technique to train a newbie in? Especially when we have two weeks to train them...



Because the fundamental escapes are more important to know.

So say I teach you all of these guillotine escape and train them for a week and then at the last second say slap them in the balls.

You could probably do that.

Say I teach slap them in the balls for a week and then at the last second say do the guillotine escape.

You would have no hope.






How much time do you want to spend training  slapping a guy in the balls from here? I mean anyone can figure that out. Don't get choked is the trick.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 10, 2020)

drop bear said:


> If I double leg you with a heavy pack on that should put me in the best position to fight you as my mobility is no longer compromised and I have all this extra weight in which to pin you down.
> 
> Which is pretty much the same method I use for younger more agile guys. In that I won't beat their scramble but I might beat their grind.



They wouldnt have it on most of the time.   You cannot fire and manover with a expedition pack on, in any circumstance you would have hand to hand combat, either you or the enemy would have to fire and manover to you.   They especially wouldnt have it on for trench and building clearing, thats just madness.

The only real expetion for expidition bags is if you arent going to resupplied any time soon and you wont be able to hike back on the supplies you keep on your person unless its for emergencies (you more than likely going to die if you keep it on as opposed to getting sporadic fire that breaks off) 


So that is just largely a non issue.   And its not really exploitable either as they are more than likely going to be ditched by the enemy.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 10, 2020)

Rat said:


> They wouldnt have it on most of the time.   You cannot fire and manover with a expedition pack on, in any circumstance you would have hand to hand combat, either you or the enemy would have to fire and manover to you.   They especially wouldnt have it on for trench and building clearing, thats just madness.
> 
> The only real expetion for expidition bags is if you arent going to resupplied any time soon and you wont be able to hike back on the supplies you keep on your person unless its for emergencies (you more than likely going to die if you keep it on as opposed to getting sporadic fire that breaks off)
> 
> ...


You been in the army?


----------



## drop bear (Jun 10, 2020)

Rat said:


> They wouldnt have it on most of the time.   You cannot fire and manover with a expedition pack on, in any circumstance you would have hand to hand combat, either you or the enemy would have to fire and manover to you.   They especially wouldnt have it on for trench and building clearing, thats just madness.
> 
> The only real expetion for expidition bags is if you arent going to resupplied any time soon and you wont be able to hike back on the supplies you keep on your person unless its for emergencies (you more than likely going to die if you keep it on as opposed to getting sporadic fire that breaks off)
> 
> ...



That too. But there could be an argument made about weight and backpack on or off doesn't really change it. 

Otherwise it just changes from back pack to body armour and webbing. 

I had a police officer once try and tell me his tool belt and the flashing lights of a cop car completely changes the dynamic.

But considering we can see people these days who fight in plate male. I think these arguments are pretty inconsequential.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 10, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> You been in the army?



Is he right or wrong?

I mean fire and movement with a backpack on winds up being pretty silly which is why a military pack has breakaway toggles in the straps.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 11, 2020)

drop bear said:


> That too. But there could be an argument made about weight and backpack on or off doesn't really change it.
> 
> Otherwise it just changes from back pack to body armour and webbing.
> 
> ...



Body armour would depend heavily, but it at least is balances, same with webbing.   Its not like a big 30kg weight straight on your back, its 10 or so balances across your body.   (which the other person probbly has close to the same amount on unless they are a irregular)

The trend nowdays for armour is ceramic plates, which weight less than 4 steel plates in soft body armour.  Its not always worn as well, if your not likely to get shot at and you are in a  climate were you are more likely to get heat exaustion its probbly better to leave it off and just keep your helmet on you.   Proper fire and movement negates the chances of being shot quite a bit.


But yeah, wearing this does change the dynamic a bit.   It also means you cant punch somone in the stomach who has 2 plates and soft body armour on without breaking your fists unless you have a armoured glove on.  And then it wouldnt do much down to displacement of the force.  Its effectively jsut fighting over your weapons and trying to shoot them with your rifle or drawing a auxilary.   thats why grappling is better for it and more common, basically that video summed it up niceley "there is a reason why we/they didnt shoot them/us"

Diffrent animal by a longshot, thats pretty much fighting with weapons involved when you are used to no weapons, diffrent animal, habits can get you killed from the latter when you are in the former. 


Fun thing though, apparantly the creator of MCMAP wanted to use sambo as a base, but couldnt find enough instructors for it.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 11, 2020)

Rat said:


> Body armour would depend heavily, but it at least is balances, same with webbing.   Its not like a big 30kg weight straight on your back, its 10 or so balances across your body.   (which the other person probbly has close to the same amount on unless they are a irregular)
> 
> The trend nowdays for armour is ceramic plates, which weight less than 4 steel plates in soft body armour.  Its not always worn as well, if your not likely to get shot at and you are in a  climate were you are more likely to get heat exaustion its probbly better to leave it off and just keep your helmet on you.   Proper fire and movement negates the chances of being shot quite a bit.
> 
> ...


So you’re ignoring my questions then and continuing to talk about stuff you don’t know about?


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 11, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> So you’re ignoring my questions then and continuing to talk about stuff you don’t know about?



I will humour it with this alone:    If you propose a counter argument i will reply, until then i will refer you to drop bears reply to yours which you have also ignored.         It is as it stands a ad hominem and potetional strawman. (if the argument were to switch to arguing about my chracter (personal knowledge) instead of my argument)   The question is also flawed, but i will leave that up to you to self diagnose. So good day.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 11, 2020)

.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 11, 2020)

Headhunter said:


> .


Well said.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 11, 2020)

Rat said:


> I will humour it with this alone:    If you propose a counter argument i will reply, until then i will refer you to drop bears reply to yours which you have also ignored.         It is as it stands a ad hominem and potetional strawman. (if the argument were to switch to arguing about my chracter (personal knowledge) instead of my argument)   The question is also flawed, but i will leave that up to you to self diagnose. So good day.


Character and personal knowledge are two different things. I know squat about thermodynamics, if someone told me that it wouldn't be an attack on my character. Just a statement.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 11, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Character and personal knowledge are two different things. I know squat about thermodynamics, if someone told me that it wouldn't be an attack on my character. Just a statement.


Yep I don’t care about rat either way. I don’t like him I dont hate him. I don’t know him I have no opinion on him My point is he’s talking like He’s an expert in martial arts though he’s never done a day of training just watched YouTube


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Character and personal knowledge are two different things. I know squat about thermodynamics, if someone told me that it wouldn't be an attack on my character. Just a statement.



Has headhunter been in the military?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 11, 2020)

drop bear said:


> Has headhunter been in the military?


No clue. But I wasn't commenting on that either. Just stating that questioning knowledge is not an attack on character.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> No clue. But I wasn't commenting on that either. Just stating that questioning knowledge is not an attack on character.



Have you been in the military?

And you will see how this is an ad hominem in a moment.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 11, 2020)

drop bear said:


> Have you been in the military?
> 
> And you will see how this is an ad hominem in a moment.


I have not. I also haven't made any comments about what works/doesn't work in the military though. And I made no statements about whether headhunters argument was legitimate or not. I really don't care, I find very little use for a discussion about military tactics personally. I was just stating that questioning knowledge is not an attack on character.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 11, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I have not. I also haven't made any comments about what works/doesn't work in the military though. And I made no statements about whether headhunters argument was legitimate or not. I really don't care, I find very little use for a discussion about military tactics personally. I was just stating that questioning knowledge is not an attack on character.


And FWIW, I would not state what would be effective or not in the military, wearing their gear, because I have not done it. Unless someone who has, has told me that something does/doesn't work. Or if it's something incredibly obvious (being in the military does not grant you the gift of flight for instance).


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> I have not. I also haven't made any comments about what works/doesn't work in the military though. And I made no statements about whether headhunters argument was legitimate or not. I really don't care, I find very little use for a discussion about military tactics personally. I was just stating that questioning knowledge is not an attack on character.



I have been in the military. (No really I qualified as a sapper)

And so by definition everyone but me is automatically wrong. 

Which then becomes an attack on the poster not the post.

And therefore an ad hominem.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 11, 2020)

drop bear said:


> I have been in the military. (No really I qualified as a sapper)
> 
> And so by definition everyone but me is automatically wrong.
> 
> ...


It's an attack on the poster's knowledge, and stating that they do not have the information to discuss it. Whether or not that's valid is a different argument altogether. But again, I was not stating I agree with headhunter vs. rat, I was not stating that headhunter was not using an ad hominem argument. I was *only *saying, and this is the third time I'm clarifying this, *questioning knowledge is not an attack on character. *It may be an attack on the poster in terms of attack on their knowledge level (if you want to use a really lose version of the word 'attack'), but no judgments at all were stated about his character.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 11, 2020)

drop bear said:


> I have been in the military. (No really I qualified as a sapper)
> 
> And so by definition everyone but me is automatically wrong.
> 
> ...



Automatically less credible (unless they present some alternative credibility), but not automatically wrong. I'm unclear whether that falls under ad hominem, though. I'd need to see how it's fully defined. It is an attack on the credibility of the person making the statement (rather than the statement, itself), so it might fit.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> Automatically less credible (unless they present some alternative credibility), but not automatically wrong. I'm unclear whether that falls under ad hominem, though. I'd need to see how it's fully defined. It is an attack on the credibility of the person making the statement (rather than the statement, itself), so it might fit.



Either an hominem or an appeal to authority. But it is almost always a terrible argument. 

I can see why rat just went screw you I am not playing.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 11, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> It's an attack on the poster's knowledge, and stating that they do not have the information to discuss it. Whether or not that's valid is a different argument altogether. But again, I was not stating I agree with headhunter vs. rat, I was not stating that headhunter was not using an ad hominem argument. I was *only *saying, and this is the third time I'm clarifying this, *questioning knowledge is not an attack on character. *It may be an attack on the poster in terms of attack on their knowledge level (if you want to use a really lose version of the word 'attack'), but no judgments at all were stated about his character.



It doesn't attack the post. It attacks the poster. Ad hominem. 

If that has knowledge or not doesn't matter. He is either right or wrong. 

Grass is green.
Yeah but you have No knowledge.

 Is an ad hominem. 

Because regardless of a person's knowledge or military background. Grass is still green.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jun 12, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> It is an attack on the credibility of the person making the statement (rather than the statement, itself), so it might fit.


It's no fun when this happen.

I still miss "the true hero of the east", and his teacher "the blind Shaolin monk". He did bring some happiness into this forum.

A: I'm the true hero of the east. My teacher is the blind Shaolin Monk.
B: I'm the Kung Fu king. My teacher is the Chinese wrestling king.
A: 
B:


----------



## _Simon_ (Jun 12, 2020)

I believe it's pronounced, krAAHV magAHHHH. And not KRAV MAGGAH!

My knowledge of it! *thumbs up*


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 12, 2020)

drop bear said:


> It doesn't attack the post. It attacks the poster. Ad hominem.
> 
> If that has knowledge or not doesn't matter. He is either right or wrong.
> 
> ...


You keep repeating that, and I keep telling you that I'm not disagreeing with you, and was making an entirely different point. Clearly that doesn't matter since you're in your "need to win" mode, rather than actually reading my post and seeing there's nothing to win. So I'm done here.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 12, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> Automatically less credible (unless they present some alternative credibility), but not automatically wrong. I'm unclear whether that falls under ad hominem, though. I'd need to see how it's fully defined. It is an attack on the credibility of the person making the statement (rather than the statement, itself), so it might fit.


Oh, it's definitely an attack on credibility, not an actual attack of the argument. And rat not being in the military doesn't disprove anything he said. But that doesn't mean it's an attack on his _character._ Which rat was suggesting is the same thing.


----------



## drop bear (Jun 12, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> You keep repeating that, and I keep telling you that I'm not disagreeing with you, and was making an entirely different point. Clearly that doesn't matter since you're in your "need to win" mode, rather than actually reading my post and seeing there's nothing to win. So I'm done here.



Well when you just completely subject change mid conversation. You realise it is going to be hard for people to follow?

So yeah. In a completely different conversation to the one we were just having you could question a person's knowledge without questioning a person's character.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 12, 2020)

Monkey Turned Wolf said:


> Character and personal knowledge are two different things. I know squat about thermodynamics, if someone told me that it wouldn't be an attack on my character. Just a statement.



Diverting to knowledge is a appeal to authorty/Ad  Hominem.    down to the grounds you are no longer attacking the argument you are attacking the person, you might not know squat about thermal dynamics but if you relay a basic concept in it, you have relayed a basic concept in it and that doesnt give somone the ability to go "because it works like this" and shrug off any argument.   Or state "your not a authorty so you dont know".    As Drop bear wrote, "is he right or wrong".

I dont make what the logical fallacies are either.  (ironically)   But its not the end all be all.     As i wrote if a proper counter argument was written i would reply, that was not a proper counter argument, it didnt object to any premise or conclusion.   (how ever terrible they may or may not have been, but thats to point out in a actual counter argument)       Now to reiterate, the key part in this is the lack of a proper counter argument.     Let me use a example, say if i was preaching about something, and somone walked up and went "your stupid" and left, that wouldnt be a basis for any argument, it would just be a Ad hominem/appeal to authority.  (i slash the two as pending on specfics it can be either or both)


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Jun 12, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> Automatically less credible (unless they present some alternative credibility), but not automatically wrong. I'm unclear whether that falls under ad hominem, though. I'd need to see how it's fully defined. It is an attack on the credibility of the person making the statement (rather than the statement, itself), so it might fit.



If you havent done a proper class in it with the direction of a academic, it is a shitshow in looking this up and using it.     And then there is little point or basis for listing to a partisan in a argument about what is and is not a fallacy (ironic i know).     The fundemental bit i got was, you always attack the argument, what the person has or has not done has very little to do with anything 9/10.  (playing off appeal to authorty and appeal to anecdotes as well as ad hominem)       I just trust my premise is apt for the conclusion of a logical fallacy in this instance.


----------



## geezer (Jun 12, 2020)

Ho-hum. At this point I honestly couldn't give a Rat sass!


----------



## geezer (Jun 12, 2020)

BTW, Rat, I don't know if you folks use the term sass for impertinence. You probably say ...cheek? Very well. I won't give a Rat "cheek". Of course _a cheek_, by coincidence also refers to the same piece of the rat's anatomy I alluded too above, but is restricted to only _one side_. So you get double your money's worth the way I stated it, ...but I digress...


----------



## jobo (Jun 12, 2020)

rats dont h


geezer said:


> BTW, Rat, I don't know if you folks use the term sass for impertinence. You probably say ...cheek? Very well. I won't give a Rat "cheek". Of course _a cheek_, by coincidence also refers to the same piece of the rat's anatomy I alluded too above, but is restricted to only _one side_. So you get double your money's worth the way I stated it, ...but I digress...


rats dont have sass cheeks, its rather only primates that i can think of


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 13, 2020)

geezer said:


> BTW, Rat, I don't know if you folks use the term sass for impertinence. You probably say ...cheek? Very well. I won't give a Rat "cheek". Of course _a cheek_, by coincidence also refers to the same piece of the rat's anatomy I alluded too above, but is restricted to only _one side_. So you get double your money's worth the way I stated it, ...but I digress...


Less coffee. Or more. But do something about this, Geezer.


----------



## geezer (Jun 13, 2020)

jobo said:


> rats dont h
> 
> rats dont have sass cheeks, its rather only primates that i can think of



Perhaps I tend to anthropomorphize the critters in my mind. Like in this cheeky little fellow:


----------



## geezer (Jun 13, 2020)

gpseymour said:


> Less coffee. Or more. But do something about this, Geezer.



Not sure.... so I went with more  ....a lot more!


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jun 14, 2020)

geezer said:


> Not sure.... so I went with more  ....a lot more!


That's always my approach. Seems less dangerous to err in that direction.


----------

