Is the local Krav Maga school legit or a McDojo?

[Gerry Seymour]

Thanks for finding that. It looks like takes a combined total of 156 hours of testing (21 days at 8 hours a day). Real question here: What's it take to be able to teach in most martial arts? I've mostly trained in MMA, and I never gave it much thought as long as the instructors knew a lot more than me I was happy. That seems like a lot to me, but what's it take in Kenpo, Hapkido, etc?

In most arts, you'd need many years of training to be able to teach them. I'm only passingly familiar with Krav Maga, but I think part of the original point of it was that there was a fairly limited syllabus, so only a few things to really learn. So, for comparison, in the core of NGA there are 50 different techniques, and students typically learn between 3 and 40 applications per technique. Add to that all the non-core material (groundwork, etc.) and variations on the techniques, and you can see that there's a huge syllabus to learn before becoming an instructor. A shorter syllabus should allow quicker assimilation. If you took someone with a good background in similar techniques and passed them a fairly short syllabus, I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to have them certified as an instructor after a course like that. However, if their background doesn't include very similar techniques, they're likely to miss the principles behind some of them, and teach them ineffectively.

 

[JR 137]

I sound like a broken record...

Don't choose a style, choose a school. The teacher(s) and who you're training alongside are far more important than the style. If what the instructor is doing makes sense, and the students are people you want to train with, then have at it. There's great and crap and everything in between in just about every system.

And the teacher could be the highest respected teacher on the planet, but if you can't relate to each other, then that teacher isn't the right teacher for you.

You've done your homework and observed a class. Go watch a few more. Maybe the class you watched was a fluke, good or bad; maybe it wasn't.

 

[Tames D]

Thanks for finding that. It looks like takes a combined total of 156 hours of testing (21 days at 8 hours a day). Real question here: What's it take to be able to teach in most martial arts? I've mostly trained in MMA, and I never gave it much thought as long as the instructors knew a lot more than me I was happy. That seems like a lot to me, but what's it take in Kenpo, Hapkido, etc?

That's a good question. There are some that feel yellow belt rank is sufficient.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

In most arts, you'd need many years of training to be able to teach them. I'm only passingly familiar with Krav Maga, but I think part of the original point of it was that there was a fairly limited syllabus, so only a few things to really learn. So, for comparison, in the core of NGA there are 50 different techniques, and students typically learn between 3 and 40 applications per technique. Add to that all the non-core material (groundwork, etc.) and variations on the techniques, and you can see that there's a huge syllabus to learn before becoming an instructor. A shorter syllabus should allow quicker assimilation. If you took someone with a good background in similar techniques and passed them a fairly short syllabus, I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to have them certified as an instructor after a course like that. However, if their background doesn't include very similar techniques, they're likely to miss the principles behind some of them, and teach them ineffectively.

According to black belt wiki, there are approximately 115 techniques in krav maga (assuming the wiki is accurate, and I didn't miscount). Although I suppose technique should be defined: in my counting, each strike counts as a technique, and each defense used counts as a technique as well. I would assume they have more techniques than that as well, but as I don't practice KM, I can't state that. Based on the 115 techniques, and 156 hours needed for certification, they need to spend 81 minutes on each technique to be certified. That probably sounds like a lot, but IMO it's not, as it is very easy to forget something you spent basically an hour on, especially if you then go on to learn something else immediately afterwards. The hope probably is that after you spend an hour on it, you spend x amount of time training it, but I don't see any sort of renewal process to confirm you still know the material a year or so down the line, and if you don't practice constantly its not going to stick with you.

So while Krav Maga is easier to learn than other martial arts, I don't think that 115 hours is enough to actually be qualified to teach it.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Thanks for finding that. It looks like takes a combined total of 156 hours of testing (21 days at 8 hours a day). Real question here: What's it take to be able to teach in most martial arts? I've mostly trained in MMA, and I never gave it much thought as long as the instructors knew a lot more than me I was happy. That seems like a lot to me, but what's it take in Kenpo, Hapkido, etc?

I just quote GPseymour in response to his response of this question, but it may be relevant to you as well. the short answer is I dont think a month of intense training is enough to teach, unless it is followed up with continuous training. Although I have no idea how much training your instructor has, so unless you ask him directly what we say on here shouldnt matter, since we know almost nothing about him.

As an answer to your question about how long it should take to be teach: I practice two forms of kem/npo. In one of them I have been practicing on and off for about 15 years (took a break for a year or so in high school, and only practiced in the summers while I was at college), and still am not qualified to teach there. In the other, 3 years in, when I got my black belt, I was also given permission to teach the system. That's not something that goes by the system, someone else was only given permission once they reached 3rd degree, around the same time I got 1st dan. Not entirely sure why that occurred, but essentially it can vary greatly, but 3 years before being allowed to teach the system was incredibly quick to me.

 

[Tez3]

We has a guy who went off and did a KM instructors course over a weekend, it was pricey and we was unhappy with it because he realised he could already do all the techniques shown because had already done them. He didn't need to learn how to instruct either as he was an Para PTI, all it did was give him a certificate for his CV when he came out of the army. It may have been that particular course and type of KM but looking at it from an experienced point of view it doesn't seem to offer anything much different he thought.
We don't do anything that other styles don't do, we have a knowledge of a few styles between us and there was nothing, he told us, that couldn't be learnt elsewhere...cheaper.

 

[RTKDCMB]

One question I have is about this:

"15 hours of mock teaching should be included in this time"

How does someone mock teach?

 

[Flatfish]

Maybe teach the instructors (who already know the material) instead of real students? Dunno

 

[Gerry Seymour]

According to black belt wiki, there are approximately 115 techniques in krav maga (assuming the wiki is accurate, and I didn't miscount). Although I suppose technique should be defined: in my counting, each strike counts as a technique, and each defense used counts as a technique as well. I would assume they have more techniques than that as well, but as I don't practice KM, I can't state that. Based on the 115 techniques, and 156 hours needed for certification, they need to spend 81 minutes on each technique to be certified. That probably sounds like a lot, but IMO it's not, as it is very easy to forget something you spent basically an hour on, especially if you then go on to learn something else immediately afterwards. The hope probably is that after you spend an hour on it, you spend x amount of time training it, but I don't see any sort of renewal process to confirm you still know the material a year or so down the line, and if you don't practice constantly its not going to stick with you.

So while Krav Maga is easier to learn than other martial arts, I don't think that 115 hours is enough to actually be qualified to teach it.

If there are that many techniques, I'd think even someone in a very similar art would be hard pressed to assimilate that info in that few hours. Perhaps if they already know ALL of the techniques, and just need to learn the organization and teaching method, then it'd be okay. If there was a certification program that taught them to teach 25 techniques (again, assuming they have experience with similar techniques), then the timing would be okay.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

We has a guy who went off and did a KM instructors course over a weekend, it was pricey and we was unhappy with it because he realised he could already do all the techniques shown because had already done them. He didn't need to learn how to instruct either as he was an Para PTI, all it did was give him a certificate for his CV when he came out of the army. It may have been that particular course and type of KM but looking at it from an experienced point of view it doesn't seem to offer anything much different he thought.
We don't do anything that other styles don't do, we have a knowledge of a few styles between us and there was nothing, he told us, that couldn't be learnt elsewhere...cheaper.

This, oddly, is the situation that I consider most suitable for such weekends. If I go in and they convey a curriculum to me, using techniques I already know, then I'm paying for the curriculum and the ability to market myself as a certified KM instructor. And I suppose it's actually fine, ethically, since I'd be teaching KM and have the knowledge to do so (now that I'd know which parts what I know are actually KM). If they only gave the certificates to those who could demonstrate high competence in both performing and teaching after the weekend, that'd actually be okay with me.

 

[Tez3]

This, oddly, is the situation that I consider most suitable for such weekends. If I go in and they convey a curriculum to me, using techniques I already know, then I'm paying for the curriculum and the ability to market myself as a certified KM instructor. And I suppose it's actually fine, ethically, since I'd be teaching KM and have the knowledge to do so (now that I'd know which parts what I know are actually KM). If they only gave the certificates to those who could demonstrate high competence in both performing and teaching after the weekend, that'd actually be okay with me.

As far as he said it was marketed as being all new, all singing, all dancing the absolute pinnacle of self defence and it wasn't. I think it gets an A star for advertising though and between you and me he'll take the certificate and do his own classes for money so he'll make the cost of the course back no problem lol.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

As far as he said it was marketed as being all new, all singing, all dancing the absolute pinnacle of self defence and it wasn't. I think it gets an A star for advertising though and between you and me he'll take the certificate and do his own classes for money so he'll make the cost of the course back no problem lol.

Yeah, that advertising is ethically sketchy. His use of the result is actually (I think) what it was designed for. If I were opening a school full-time, I'd probably go to one of those programs and add a Krav Maga class or two. In reality, it would simply be a limited version of my standard curriculum offered without ranking or tests (something I'd do within my own curriculum if I had a full school, anyway).

 

[FlamingJulian]

Greetings. So I've trained off and on in MMA over the years and always said if I was going to do anything other than MMA it would likely be Krav. I took a free class at a school last week and it was hitting pads and then doing a "gun to the back" defense.

I then came home and started googling KM and of course there's many different opinions on it's realism, effectiveness, etc. Many people also suggested it depends on the school. My thought has always been that if a school does some instruction against resisting opponents it has value compared to one that doesn't. The instructor assured me that he places value on sparring, as too many times he's seen students fall apart when real punches start coming their way. As such they have a few times a week where light sparring takes place.I realize you can't train groin strikes, etc. when sparring.

What I don't want is to be stuck at a place that simply waters down something good to cater to the masses of soccer moms that want a boost of confidence.

My gut tells me this place is legit based on several factors. One of them is that the instructor has a background in wrestling, kickboxing, etc. I also see many pics online of their upper level folks that appear to be resisting each other with headgear and gloves on. Is there anything more I can do to know this for sure before I commit?

Thanks!

About the only thing you could do is try another school and make sure it isn't better. That's what I did when I was looking for a new Taekwondo school. And I'm more than happy now and getting my black belt soon so hope my advice helped.


-Julian

 

[Mark Lynn]

Greetings. So I've trained off and on in MMA over the years and always said if I was going to do anything other than MMA it would likely be Krav. I took a free class at a school last week and it was hitting pads and then doing a "gun to the back" defense.

I then came home and started googling KM and of course there's many different opinions on it's realism, effectiveness, etc. Many people also suggested it depends on the school. My thought has always been that if a school does some instruction against resisting opponents it has value compared to one that doesn't. The instructor assured me that he places value on sparring, as too many times he's seen students fall apart when real punches start coming their way. As such they have a few times a week where light sparring takes place.I realize you can't train groin strikes, etc. when sparring.

Why can't you train groin strikes, knees or elbow for that matter when sparring different arts do that all of the time, you just need to use control.

What I don't want is to be stuck at a place that simply waters down something good to cater to the masses of soccer moms that want a boost of confidence.

Granted I get your point about not wanting something watered down, but in the area of teaching self defense, self protection based material having the soccer moms in there could be a good indicator as to what and how they teach. Is it watered down technique wise, or are they adapting the power and control to the less experienced students differences? I mean you have been training for a while and what you need or want out of the lesson might be different than the soccer mom, but does the instructor adjust the lesson for both or just for the one? Does the workout challenge you and them, or will it bring you down skill wise?

My gut tells me this place is legit based on several factors. One of them is that the instructor has a background in wrestling, kickboxing, etc. I also see many pics online of their upper level folks that appear to be resisting each other with headgear and gloves on. Is there anything more I can do to know this for sure before I commit?

Thanks!

What I don't want is to be stuck at a place ........Is there anything more I can do to know this for sure before I commit?
Are you signing a long term contract? Perhaps you can negotiate a short term contract explaining your previous experience and ask to see if the school is a good fit for you because of your training goals by having a short term trail period.

What are your goals, is it rank related? If so ask about that. Years ago I taught (as an ongoing guest instructor) at a Krav school, I heard about one of the students who I had taught went out to Cal. to the head office so to speak and was charged a large amount of money for an exam and failed no explanation given, just come back in X amount of months and try again (oh and I think pay again as well). That test fee put all of the horror stories about TKD belt mills to shame.

How high is the instructor certified to teach? Again at the school I taught at (as a guest instructor), they were only "certified" to teach up to an intermediate level, even though they were a senior BB instructor in a different art. Sticking strictly to their curriculum the material seemed pretty basic to me at that time.

There are many different Krav schools and organizations out there now. While Krav was taught as an marketing tool for "traditional" (karate and TKD) schools (I don't mean really traditional MA schools) Krav and the primary style can be mixed in a lot. That said now a days Krav has splintered and so there is more options to choose from than 17 years ago. So I suggest you try out a short period there and see if it works for you.

Bottom line I believe like what Kickboxer 101 said Yeah sure maybe the training won't be as great but to me if a guys enjoying what they do no matter the circumstances who are we to judge.

 

[Mark Lynn]

This, oddly, is the situation that I consider most suitable for such weekends. If I go in and they convey a curriculum to me, using techniques I already know, then I'm paying for the curriculum and the ability to market myself as a certified KM instructor. And I suppose it's actually fine, ethically, since I'd be teaching KM and have the knowledge to do so (now that I'd know which parts what I know are actually KM). If they only gave the certificates to those who could demonstrate high competence in both performing and teaching after the weekend, that'd actually be okay with me.

I have a friend who teaches currently at a KM school and has been in the MA for about 40 years or so. He went and tested for a beginning level of instructor ship and part of the testing was in fact teaching the techniques that were covered over the weekend to his level in the curriculum. This is how I understand it. So I agree just because the course says that over the weekend your going to learn this or that and be certified it doesn't mean it is for the new guy walking in off of the street. But a skilled experienced martial artist, or someone with a background LOE, military, etc. etc. could learn the material and be certified. What you are really paying for is to be able to market you as a KM instructor as a source of income in some fashion. Whether you are a school owner or an instructor at a school. He told me that it was a hard physically demanding test over all. But like I told him what did you learn really that you didn't know in your previous study?

 

[Mark Lynn]

Yeah, that advertising is ethically sketchy. His use of the result is actually (I think) what it was designed for. If I were opening a school full-time, I'd probably go to one of those programs and add a Krav Maga class or two. In reality, it would simply be a limited version of my standard curriculum offered without ranking or tests (something I'd do within my own curriculum if I had a full school, anyway).

Here is what I don't get with this approach. I understand it from a marketing angle because KM is the latest and greatest. But like at the school I taught at back in early 2001-02, they taught Tang Soo Do and KM. They marketed both for adults and in a sense watered down the TSD to drive people to the KM program because was where they had a heavy investment. So they held back sparring and some other things from the TSD students to drive them into the KM, which I think is wrong.

I teach both Modern Arnis and TKD, I offered the TKD to kids teens and Modern Arnis to adults and kids 10+. I freely blend both arts and I don't hold anything back from one, in fact the MA material enhances by TKD (American Karate). As an instructor who teaches each art based on the idea of self protection side of things, how do you market one over the other? Are the two arts compatible?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here is what I don't get with this approach. I understand it from a marketing angle because KM is the latest and greatest. But like at the school I taught at back in early 2001-02, they taught Tang Soo Do and KM. They marketed both for adults and in a sense watered down the TSD to drive people to the KM program because was where they had a heavy investment. So they held back sparring and some other things from the TSD students to drive them into the KM, which I think is wrong.

I teach both Modern Arnis and TKD, I offered the TKD to kids teens and Modern Arnis to adults and kids 10+. I freely blend both arts and I don't hold anything back from one, in fact the MA material enhances by TKD (American Karate). As an instructor who teaches each art based on the idea of self protection side of things, how do you market one over the other? Are the two arts compatible?

Basically, I'd be teaching a lot of the same material, as there's little in KM that couldn't be found within the NGA curriculum. All I'd really do is market one (KM) toward folks who want to come in less frequently, focus on practicing fewer moves, and not have to test. The other (NGA) would be my full curriculum, including ranks and testing. I'd actually considered doing this by offering two NGA curricula in the same manner - not so much holding something back on the limited curriculum, as focusing to fewer techniques to allow folks to maintain proficiency with lower attendance, and to allow new students to be able to work in with everyone fairly quickly on the same techniques. In the short run, they'd be quite similar. In the long run, anyone wanting to stay with it would probably want to switch to the full curriculum.

 

[frank raud]

Here is what I don't get with this approach. I understand it from a marketing angle because KM is the latest and greatest. But like at the school I taught at back in early 2001-02, they taught Tang Soo Do and KM. They marketed both for adults and in a sense watered down the TSD to drive people to the KM program because was where they had a heavy investment. So they held back sparring and some other things from the TSD students to drive them into the KM, which I think is wrong.

I teach both Modern Arnis and TKD, I offered the TKD to kids teens and Modern Arnis to adults and kids 10+. I freely blend both arts and I don't hold anything back from one, in fact the MA material enhances by TKD (American Karate). As an instructor who teaches each art based on the idea of self protection side of things, how do you market one over the other? Are the two arts compatible?

Do you teach TKD or American Karate? Slightly confused.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, it makes plenty of sense to me. It makes me think that he comes from a background of styles with resisting opponents, which I place a lot of value in. My hope would be that if it was total crap he'd modify it to be more realistic. However, you're correct in that I do need to do more research in the instructors actual KM background.

Krav generally takes its basic fundamentals from the arts the instructor has done previously. so the better the martial artist the better the Krav.

very much like mma.

 

[Flying Crane]

Krav generally takes its basic fundamentals from the arts the instructor has done previously. so the better the martial artist the better the Krav.

very much like mma.

So...Krav really does not exist as a distinct system or methodology? Why would someone with training in some legitimate method turn around and just slap a Krav label on it? Very odd.