Core Principles of Krav Maga

[Loki]

Before my test for brown belt in late June of this year, I spent two months or so breaking down the curriculum, analyzing it and offering my own insight on it. One of the subjects I covered are the principles behind Krav Maga, it's basic characteristics. Here they are, listed in no particular order:

1) Directing attacks at weak points: Attacks should always be directed at parts of the opponents body where they will cause great pain/damage and won't be blocked by muscle/fat.

2) Quick and powerful impact: Attacks must be quick and powerful, otherwise they have no meaning. Slow attacks won't hit on time and weak attacks won't hurt.

3) Hard style: Krav Maga utilizes force vs force and is characterized by short, quick attacks. Defense isn't based on using an opponents force against him (in most cases), but will rather be blocked or evaded and countered immediately.

4) Emphasis on technique rather than strength: Krav Maga fits everyone, since techniques are utilitarian and not strength-dependant. A teenage girl must be able to defend against an adult male.

5) Improvisation: Reality is seldom a dojo, therefore Krav Maga stresses improvisation. A precise, quick and powerful reaction is preferable to memorizing techniques. The techniques are taught as an ideal, the best possible reaction to a given situation.

6) Lack of rules: Since the issue is self-defense, all means are santioned. We won't be considerate of a person who attacks us, so Krav Maga is devoid of rules. Kicking to the groin, spitting, biting, gouging and hair pulling are all legitimate.

7) Simplicity: Krav Maga techniques are concise. They aren't visually appealing because beauty is luxury, something that an attacked person doesn't have. Simple is effective and efficient.

8) Adjustability to each practitioner: Every person has a different build, and not everyone can create a 180 degree angle between their legs. Krav Maga teaches the "trunk of the tree", and every practitioner finds his or her "branch". A heavy person can emphasizes fist fighting, a small person can take advantage of his frame for quickness, etc.

 

[7starmantis]

I've allways been curious about KM. One thing I dont understand is it seems #3 #4 are a bit contradictory. How can a hard style that meets force with force and not use the opponents energy against them also be effective for a teenage girl against an adult male?

7sm

 

[Loki]

I've allways been curious about KM. One thing I dont understand is it seems #3 #4 are a bit contradictory. How can a hard style that meets force with force and not use the opponents energy against them also be effective for a teenage girl against an adult male?

It's because cicular movements are too long. Even a teenage girl has to use a certain amount of force and be able to absorb an attack to a certain extent (block incoming strikes). When I wrote it's a hard style, I meant that a teenage girl wouldn't defend against a jab by directing it aside, grabbing the hand, taking the attacker with her and then use a wristlock, but rather block the punch by swatting it aside (which is a soft concept though) and punching him in the face.

 

[7starmantis]

Circular movements are too long if you make them that way, your circle could also be the diameter of a toothpick....thus being very very short and fast. Thats not the question in this thread though.

I dont understand. Why must you use force to absorb an attack? Blocking is different from absorbing as far as I use the terms. I think you misunderstand "soft" techniques. It doesn't mean you can't punch to the face, in fact applying a wrist lock from that situation would be a bad decision for any size person.

You said force against force....a teenage girl meeting my force (I'm 6'2" 210lbs) with force of her own will loose. It takes no force of your own to move to the side, "swat" the punch and lay an elbow in the noggin of your attacker....that is very much appropriate in a "soft" style. I also would not call swatting a punch aside a block.

I'm not trying to be rude or anything, just understand your style.

7sm

 

[Loki]

Perhaps my knowledge of hard and soft styles is simply to minimal to draw a distinct line of where Krav Maga stands. The mentioned example of the wrist-lock is from Aikido, prime example of a soft style, and while not an ideal defense, an existing soft defense nonetheless.

You're right, blocking and absorbing aren't the same, I was thinking of a person coming to slap you, in which case what we do is block by meeting force with force. Same for a roundhouse. Perhaps it's more appropriate to say that defenses against circular attacks are met with force, while straight attacks are redirected, meaning the stlye, hard or soft, depends on the attack. I stand corrected.

 

[tshadowchaser]

I like 5, 6, and 7. I think more arts should take these into consideration when teaching self defence

 

[7starmantis]

Perhaps my knowledge of hard and soft styles is simply to minimal to draw a distinct line of where Krav Maga stands. The mentioned example of the wrist-lock is from Aikido, prime example of a soft style, and while not an ideal defense, an existing soft defense nonetheless.

You're right, blocking and absorbing aren't the same, I was thinking of a person coming to slap you, in which case what we do is block by meeting force with force. Same for a roundhouse. Perhaps it's more appropriate to say that defenses against circular attacks are met with force, while straight attacks are redirected, meaning the stlye, hard or soft, depends on the attack. I stand corrected.

I think I understand what your saying, but wouldn't a young teenage girl get hurt trying to meet a full power muay thai roundhouse with force of her own? What about a full power hook, how could she stand a chance against a powerful hook from someone my size?

Here is an example that I would use which would be from mantis and (arguably) a soft technique. The attacker throws a right hook (maybe like a bubba punch) you get your left block up but move in as close as you can to the attacker while also circling the same way as the punch is going (to your right) while applying a right punch or elbow to the head. An even better example of a "soft" defense would be to drop (duck) the hook while moving behind the attacker and using an elbow to the back of the head or a good kick to take out the knee. That is what I would consider not meeting force with force. When I think of force on force, I think of standing your ground and just blocking the punch completely.

Please dont think I'm trying to be rude or anything, I'm seriously curious as to how you guys handle these situations.

7sm

 

[Loki]

I think I understand what your saying, but...

7sm, no offense is taken, I fully understand where you are coming from and what the point of your questions is. If I cut you off and didn't answer or try to answer your questions, I'd be stopping myself from a deeper understanding of what I attempt to teach, which is downright stupid. I thank you for all your comments and your interest in my style. Keep 'em coming.

As for what you're saying, you're right. For a teenage girl to stand in place and block against a full-powered roundhouse to the head is suicidal. What we advocate is blocking while moving towards the attacker diagonally, forward and in the direction opposite the kick. If the definition of a hard style is that it makes no attempt whatsoever to circumvent force and will always meet it head on, then it can't be practical unless you're built like a gorilla, and even then...

Maybe I'm mistaken in calling Krav Maga a hard style.

 

[7starmantis]

Ok, I think I understand what your saying. I think the lines between hard and soft are pretty blurry in reality.

7sm

 

[7starmantis]

So does KM rule out all joint lock type techniques in general?

7sm

 

[Loki]

Not at all, we used them often, but usually if the attacker isn't too dangerous (trying to pick a fight, drunk, kid) and it's then used as more of a warning. In some cases they're effective methods of disarming, but why bother with a joint lock if you can (and should) kick the guys nuts up to his throat?

 

[7starmantis]

I completely agree! Heh, I allways tell people that. In fact I use that when people ask about disarms. People allways want ot learn to hit the knife hand and make them drop the weapon and such. I'm allways saying, why hit the knife hand when you could lay an elbow through thier cheekbone?

7sm

 

[Navarre]

I didn't see any mention of throws. Typically I think of a throw as a soft technique but, as discussed, it's sometimes difficult to distinguish hard from soft.

The pavement is a readily available and effective way to do additional damage to an opponent. Would one in Krav Maga be likely to execute a throw or not?

 

[arnisador]

I'm allways saying, why hit the knife hand when you could lay an elbow through thier cheekbone?

Well, being close enough to lay an elbow on someone's cheek when that person is holding a knife sounds riskier than staying further out and chopping the hand...but maybe I'm picturing what you mean incorrectly. I'm not crazy about chopping at the hand, but a crossada can do wonders at the right time.

 

[7starmantis]

I just dont like focusing on the blade too much. In my example it doesn't have to be an elbow it could be a punch or kick. What I was trying to say is people get so focused on a disarm that they forget to simply destroy the attacker. Focusing on the blade can get you killed, lets not forget we have many other weapons at our disposal

7sm

 

[arnisador]

Here I agree with you. The best disarm for empty hand vs. the knife is controlling the weapon arm and beating them until they drop to the ground and drop the weapon, in my opinion. Never look for the disarm--keep hitting until they drop.

 

[Navarre]

Do you feel that maintaining control of the knife hand places you at additional risk? The knife can easily do damage with the slightest cut.

If we must place continuing focus on maintaining control of the weapon arm aren't we limiting ourselves in our available options? If the knockout is quick I'd agree but, if it becomes prolonged, it would seem to be time to disarm so we could open more options.

 

[Navarre]

I didn't see any mention of throws. Typically I think of a throw as a soft technique but, as discussed, it's sometimes difficult to distinguish hard from soft.

The pavement is a readily available and effective way to do additional damage to an opponent. Would one in Krav Maga be likely to execute a throw or not?

I didn't want this to get lost in the shuffle. I'd really like to know how a Krav Maga practitioner feels about the use of throws in combat.

I'm also interested to know if they have a ground game or if they try to regain their feet if taken down. Hoping somebody knows. *Bump*

 

[7starmantis]

Do you feel that maintaining control of the knife hand places you at additional risk? The knife can easily do damage with the slightest cut.

If we must place continuing focus on maintaining control of the weapon arm aren't we limiting ourselves in our available options? If the knockout is quick I'd agree but, if it becomes prolonged, it would seem to be time to disarm so we could open more options.

Um I dont think maintaining control neccessarily puts you at additional risk, but I dont think you should limit yourself to maintaining control. There are situations where an attack while moving is worth releasing control. Also, I think if the engagement becomes prolonged, you have allready lost. It should be ended quite quickly. As the engagement prolongs the guy with the knife gaines advantage in my opinion.

I'm also interested in the Krav Maga theory regarding throws.

7sm

 

[Connovar]

When I did KM we didnt do throws in the combatives classes However we did take downs (usually single and double leg) during our fight classes. I only did KM for a year and I really liked it especially the fight classes. Make sure if you do KM not to miss the fight classes as thats where you get to put your skills to the test!