Krav Maga

[MJS]

Systems like Krav Maga have a lot going for them in their realistic training and easily learned and used techniques. I'm not against learning a "reality" based art. But I have a couple of problems with KM, at least what I've seen. First, their weapons defenses- both gun and knife defenses rely on traping the weapon hand or arm in a bent elbow. Too easily countered with a pistol, and worse with a knife, you are more likely to get a crippling cut than to effectively control the weapon. Second, they have a tendency to lean into their strikes or grabs, sometimes to the point that it appears that they are depending on the opponent to hold them up.

Now, I'll be the first to say that I'm not well versed or even too familiar with the style, and what I saw might not be representative of the system as a whole. I'd be interested to hear if anyone has a better perspective on this system. But for what I know at this point, I would not recomend or train in KM.

You bring up many good points. I'll do my best to clear some things up for you. As for the empty hand defense. From what I've seen, its very effective and to the point. Many of the techs. have the same concepts, so that takes away the problem of having to memorize a tech for a front choke and then a different one for a rear choke....both ways of removing the hands can be used no matter how they are grabbing you.

The weapon techs. I'll admit that I'm not impressed with the knife work. I've seen much better in the FMA that I also study. As for the gun defense...its pretty good, but there is always room to improve. One thing that they do, is simultaneously move, block and strike. They are pretty much going on the mult. hit idea, to take the attackers mind off of the weapon and onto the strikes that they are being hit with.

I hope that this was a help. Feel free to ask more questions if you have them.

Mike

 

[MJS]

The biggest problem with styles like KM is that they are developped for the military. A loy of techniques are just too brutal for a civilian confrontation.

Well, I'm not sure what art you study, but in addition to the KM, I also do Kenpo, BJJ, and Arnis, and I can assure you that there are some pretty brutal techs. in Kenpo as well. Its pretty much up to the defender to exercise enough control for the situation that he/she is in. If there was no way of walking away, talking your way out, or doing a controlling move, then a brutal move is the only other option. Also, I look at it like this. If someone tries to attack you, your family, break into your house, etc. then IMO, they ddeserve what they get! And if that means a broken nose, then maybe they'll think twice before they attack someone again!

Also remember that there is no defense against a gun. Somebody points a gun a you, unless you are 200% certain that they will pull the trigger no matter what, you comply.

Yeah, that is a good theory to try and live by, but let me ask you this. How can you be 200% certain? I mean, I've heard about cases where the store owner complies and still gets shot! Youre pretty much in a no win situation. And yes, I know that you're car, wallet, money, etc. can be replaced, but again, how can you be so sure that you won't get shot. I'd rather take the chance and defend myself.

Mike

 

[loki09789]

I got a book on the elite military fighting arts and it mentions Krav.

I think some of the 'weaknesses' that I have seen is the dominance on tactical application over technical skill early in the training. That can lead to the reinforcement of bad habits like 'leaning' and such.

As an outside to the art, I see that the training is organized to be 'effective first' and they rely on training up the grit and commitment to take the initiative in a SD situation. I think that the idea is that the shear agressiveness is more important to focus on early than technical perfection. Later in the training, the technical refinement and such is really more emphasized. I notice that the students who participate in the 'boxing style' conditioning classes and sparring sections really improve technically from the practice.


I have the same concerns about TKD and other systematic rigidness to traditional 'practice' but loosing sight of the systematic 'goals.' With the first, everyone has to follow the same path (totally counter to the idea of being adaptive and fluid in the moment of critical need.), in the second you know what the end results should be, and you know what the tools to get there are and you (as instructor) can set up the training so that it 'fits' the student's current level of skill/fitness/toughness.

Military based systems tend to use training models designed for military troops. This is fine, but it needs to be adapted some for the wider range of types and personal fitness and mentallities walking into a civilian program.

 

[MJS]

As an outside to the art, I see that the training is organized to be 'effective first' and they rely on training up the grit and commitment to take the initiative in a SD situation. I think that the idea is that the shear agressiveness is more important to focus on early than technical perfection. Later in the training, the technical refinement and such is really more emphasized. I notice that the students who participate in the 'boxing style' conditioning classes and sparring sections really improve technically from the practice.

Very good points here. Due to the simplicity of the techs. it is possible to combine both the technical aspect and the agressiveness aspect all into one. While this is not looked good upon by some, it is apparent by the effectivenss of the KM material, that this concept does in fact work!

Mike

 

[MMA Combatives]

I just received the 5-DVD set yesterday. Not very impressed to say the least, and concerned about some of the gun disarm techniques. Barrel either pointed directly at a vital area during the disarm, or too close for comfort. I would have to agree with other postings elsewhere that whatever this style has in a dangerous area of the world is lost upon arrival here. However, for a beginner or those who like high quality video productions, it is acceptable, but for an experienced MA instructor wanting to incorporate "reality techniques" into an existing style, I would opt for FIGHT or Jim Wagner's series.

 

[ob2c]

Thanks for the info.

Many of the techs. have the same concepts, so that takes away the problem of having to memorize a tech for a front choke and then a different one for a rear choke....both ways of removing the hands can be used no matter how they are grabbing you.

This simplicity is one of the strengths of the reality/ combative arts. They are quickly learned and effective as far as they go, which is what they were designed for.

weapon techs... One thing that they do, is simultaneously move, block and strike. They are pretty much going on the mult. hit idea, to take the attackers mind off of the weapon and onto the strikes that they are being hit with.

This is generally a good concept in any system. Where KM falls short is in not considering the reaction of the armed opponent. The natural reaction is to back away, especially if the counter assault goes to the head/ eyes. With a knife, trying to trap it in the bent elbow, if you are a little late you've actually put him into the counter and put a target rich part of your anatomy where he can't miss. Then also, he may recognize what you are trying to do and counter on his own, again against a very vulnerable part of your arm, which you gave him.

With a pistol, moving him back is the worst thing you can let him do. Once you've closed the gap, you absolutely have to maintain control of him and the weapon. Trying to trap it in your elbow, all he has to do is drop his own elbow inward to counter the pin and bring the gun into alignment with the underside of your jaw. And again, striking simultaneously at his head might cause him to react by moving back. If you miss the trap by even a little, he has just brought the muzzle into direct allignment with your center, and your own forearm guided him there as your attack forced him into the counter.

I hope these descriptions are clear, and these are just a couple of applications that I see a glaring deficiency in the KM method. But again, I can't speak to the overall effectivness of their system, having had minimal exposure to it.

 

[MJS]

I just received the 5-DVD set yesterday. Not very impressed to say the least, and concerned about some of the gun disarm techniques. Barrel either pointed directly at a vital area during the disarm, or too close for comfort. I would have to agree with other postings elsewhere that whatever this style has in a dangerous area of the world is lost upon arrival here. However, for a beginner or those who like high quality video productions, it is acceptable, but for an experienced MA instructor wanting to incorporate "reality techniques" into an existing style, I would opt for FIGHT or Jim Wagner's series.

I'm assuming that you're talking about the set with the CA. group? If thats the case, then yes, I also have those. Its been a while since I've viewed them, but didnt they turn their body at the same time as they were executing the tech.? I think another thing that they are basing these defenses on, is this. When the attacker is IFO the victim, they are assuming that the attacker is going to be giving the victim an order- "Give me your wallet!" "Put your hands up!" etc. So, going on this movement, they are then basing a defense off of it. The attacker is not going to be thinking, (so we hope) that the victim will do anything but comply with the demands.

I notice that you mentioned the FIGHT series. Now, I was under the impression that this series is pretty much the same as KM, although it has a different name. Also, if you look at that web site, there is a gun disarm clip, that is the same as one that is taught in the KM material. I have not seen that series, but in your opinion, how much difference is there between FIGHT and the KM tapes you have??

Mike

 

[MJS]

Thanks for the info.

You're welcome! Glad I could help! :asian:

This simplicity is one of the strengths of the reality/ combative arts. They are quickly learned and effective as far as they go, which is what they were designed for.

This is one of the main reasons why I like it so much!

This is generally a good concept in any system. Where KM falls short is in not considering the reaction of the armed opponent. The natural reaction is to back away, especially if the counter assault goes to the head/ eyes. With a knife, trying to trap it in the bent elbow, if you are a little late you've actually put him into the counter and put a target rich part of your anatomy where he can't miss. Then also, he may recognize what you are trying to do and counter on his own, again against a very vulnerable part of your arm, which you gave him.

Very true! Giving your attacker the inside of your arm exposes vital areas. However, like the FMA, KM, is using the body as well to ensure that limb stays in place.

With a pistol, moving him back is the worst thing you can let him do. Once you've closed the gap, you absolutely have to maintain control of him and the weapon. Trying to trap it in your elbow, all he has to do is drop his own elbow inward to counter the pin and bring the gun into alignment with the underside of your jaw. And again, striking simultaneously at his head might cause him to react by moving back. If you miss the trap by even a little, he has just brought the muzzle into direct allignment with your center, and your own forearm guided him there as your attack forced him into the counter.

Another good point! Let me clear a few things up here. The defense against the gun from the front: In this situation, you're turning your body at the same time you raise your hands, and are grabbing the barrel of the weapon. You are, at the same time, pushing the weapon down, while taking a slight step forward, and also executing a punch to the face. After a few hits, the gun is then removed from the hand.

From the rear: As you're turning, you are capturing the arm with yours, and again marrying it to your chest. As you complete the turn, you're following up with an elbow to the head.

I do see your points and concerns though. So far, the best gun defense tape I've seen has these 2 guys in it. They are using a gun that fires a wax bullet. They are wearing gear for their own protection, but its very interesting, because there is no way to say that the tech worked if it really didnt due to the red mark.

I hope these descriptions are clear, and these are just a couple of applications that I see a glaring deficiency in the KM method. But again, I can't speak to the overall effectivness of their system, having had minimal exposure to it.

Yes, they were clear!! And again, I am far from an expert on this art. My inst. received his KM training from a KM inst. in NY. He has also had some exp. with the CA group, but prefers the NY inst. due to the quality of the material.

Mike

 

[CanuckMA]

Well, I'm not sure what art you study, but in addition to the KM, I also do Kenpo, BJJ, and Arnis, and I can assure you that there are some pretty brutal techs. in Kenpo as well. Its pretty much up to the defender to exercise enough control for the situation that he/she is in. If there was no way of walking away, talking your way out, or doing a controlling move, then a brutal move is the only other option. Also, I look at it like this. If someone tries to attack you, your family, break into your house, etc. then IMO, they ddeserve what they get! And if that means a broken nose, then maybe they'll think twice before they attack someone again!

I agree. The difference is that styles like KM are so stripped down that there is not much else to teach. It is easier to teach and learn styles like Kenpo, BJJ, etc. as a defensive, 'softer' styles. There is only one way to teach something like KM, which was developed to be lethal. Soldiers do not want to do minimal damage

Yeah, that is a good theory to try and live by, but let me ask you this. How can you be 200% certain? I mean, I've heard about cases where the store owner complies and still gets shot! Youre pretty much in a no win situation. And yes, I know that you're car, wallet, money, etc. can be replaced, but again, how can you be so sure that you won't get shot. I'd rather take the chance and defend myself.

Mike

Yes, but I still think that teaching gun defense is mostly dangerous.

 

[MJS]

I agree. The difference is that styles like KM are so stripped down that there is not much else to teach. It is easier to teach and learn styles like Kenpo, BJJ, etc. as a defensive, 'softer' styles. There is only one way to teach something like KM, which was developed to be lethal. Soldiers do not want to do minimal damage

True, this art was developed strictly for SD. Nothing fancy or flashly like you might find in other arts. It primarily a SD art compared to others that also focus on kata and weapons.

Yes, but I still think that teaching gun defense is mostly dangerous.

I agree. IMO, any time you're dealing with a weapon, the danger factor always goes up. People train for different reasons, but I've always been a believer that if you're going to take the time to learn an art, especially if you're looking for SD, and not just an activity to do after work, then its very important to make sure that you learn how to defend yourself in all ranges of fighting, and against weapons.

What weapon defenses do you have in the art that you study?

Mike

 

[CanuckMA]

True, this art was developed strictly for SD. Nothing fancy or flashly like you might find in other arts. It primarily a SD art compared to others that also focus on kata and weapons.




I agree. IMO, any time you're dealing with a weapon, the danger factor always goes up. People train for different reasons, but I've always been a believer that if you're going to take the time to learn an art, especially if you're looking for SD, and not just an activity to do after work, then its very important to make sure that you learn how to defend yourself in all ranges of fighting, and against weapons.

What weapon defenses do you have in the art that you study?

Mike

We concentrate on non-firearms.

 

[MJS]

We concentrate on non-firearms.

So you do nothing for a gun, but you have defenses against club, knife, etc??? Why nothing for a gun?

Mike

 

[CanuckMA]

So you do nothing for a gun, but you have defenses against club, knife, etc??? Why nothing for a gun?

Mike

Oh, I don't know, let's see. Defense against a gun requires that the gun be close enough for you to grab, that you can move fast enough to grab the arm and move it far enough to clear your body faster than the assaillant can pull the trigger?

I don't like those odds. Take my wallet. Got no cash and the cards are maxed anyways.

 

[MJS]

Oh, I don't know, let's see. Defense against a gun requires that the gun be close enough for you to grab, that you can move fast enough to grab the arm and move it far enough to clear your body faster than the assaillant can pull the trigger?

I don't like those odds. Take my wallet. Got no cash and the cards are maxed anyways.

I gave the following example to MMA Combatives. I copied it here again.

I think another thing that they are basing these defenses on, is this. When the attacker is IFO the victim, they are assuming that the attacker is going to be giving the victim an order- "Give me your wallet!" "Put your hands up!" etc. So, going on this movement, they are then basing a defense off of it. The attacker is not going to be thinking, (so we hope) that the victim will do anything but comply with the demands.

This being said, if you stop and think about it, in order to do any disarm, regardless of what the weapon is, you need to be within arms reach of it. I do see where you're coming from though...why take the chance? But again I go back to...how can we tell if the attacker is going to shoot or not? There really is no way to tell.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Oh, I don't know, let's see. Defense against a gun requires that the gun be close enough for you to grab, that you can move fast enough to grab the arm and move it far enough to clear your body faster than the assaillant can pull the trigger?

I don't like those odds. Take my wallet. Got no cash and the cards are maxed anyways.

So, basically, you have no gun defense and if confronted by a gun, you're just going to take your chances that by giving the attacker your wallet, keys, etc. that that will be the end of it??

Mike

 

[CanuckMA]

So, basically, you have no gun defense and if confronted by a gun, you're just going to take your chances that by giving the attacker your wallet, keys, etc. that that will be the end of it??

Mike

Yes. That and the odds of me being confronted by a gun-totting thug are incredibely small.

 

[MJS]

Yes. That and the odds of me being confronted by a gun-totting thug are incredibely small.

Ok. Thank you for the reply.

Mike

 

[MJS]

OK, I noticed that this thread slowed down a little, so I thought I'd try to bring it back to life!!! It seems like the biggest talk that we've had about KM is the weapon disarms. What changes, if any, would you make to the current way the disarms are done?

I'm sure with the diverse group of people that we have on here, we should be able to come up with some pretty good ideas!


Mike

 

[MJS]

Nobody has any ideas!! :idunno:

Mike

 

[loki09789]

Nobody has any ideas!! :idunno:

Mike

I don't know if there is a prob with the disarms as much as it is with the 'sloppiness' (because of the emphasis on agressive/tactical sense over technical refinement) that could lead to amplified problems because of the higher risk factor of the gun. The disarms generally seem to be based on sound principles.

I saw one where the gunman is in the mounted position and the defender in the guard pulls the muzzle down into the ground, purposely trying to disfunction the weapon if it fires by jamming in in the deck. It also reduces the chance that any twisting motion will point the gun at the defenders head.

Over all I would say the the immediate, agressive and spirited response - how ever technically 'sloppy' it may be is a good thing for early phases of training. The early focus of a system as well as individual techniques for self defense should be effectiveness first, then refinement and variation.