The way we move during an emergency on a fundamental level is more akin to the way we move in sport, any sport, than anything else. And competitive sport gives you the ability to get better at making things up on the spot as no one....not a single person on the planet.. can know or tell you what exactly will need to be done until it's happening.
Same tired old argument from Badger Ladder. Makes me wonder what I've been doing in lessons when I programme a response from a training partner. Also makes me wonder if all the home office statistics on HAOV are wrong.
I'm going to disagree that training method is the issue. Or rather, take a step back and try to look at what promotes the observed behavior. I will say that experience factors in the most. For example, someone with more applicable real world experience is going to perform better in a real world situation than someone lacking real world experience. Where training method comes in as a factor is in how it promotes the preferred behavior. Training method built off of applicable experience is going to be much better than training method build off of lack of applicable experience. In other words, good experience drives good training methodology but lack of experience can drive bad training methodology. The same applies to techniques. From what I understand, Krav Maga does not teach long combinations or long sequences of preset techniques. Instead, techniques are short combinations that the person can combine in any way seen fit. The choice of technique should be driven by applicable experience. When it is not, the choices can be a sign of bad habits formed. It isn't the pressure but the choice of technique that more caught my eye. For instance, the use of the rising knee to the gut. This type of knee does more damage if you are bigger and can drive the opponent into your knee. If you are smaller, it isn't a very good choice of technique to use on a bigger person, especially if they are in condition. Experience would help to learn to pick a better target for the rising knee (like the face) or if still kneeing to the gut, to realize it needs to be followed up with a whole lot more against a bigger opponent. You can almost predict (although never underestimate an opponent) that the people in the video could enter an MMA match, do awesome for the first seven to 30 seconds, only to realize that the opponent is just getting started. From that point on, it goes downhill for them. IMHO.
You are arguing against a false sense of what we do. The reason KM is not the best training for the ring is that we (in my classes and others) do not spar enough and condition for the ring enough as compared with sports the purpose of which is to spar in the ring. The guy in the video does cope for 4 minutes even though he's a bit pants. KravNess is not a blend of disciplines. Again another indication of your misunderstanding. If you want a better idea of what it is, follow the link back to my school and check the media drop down - a series of articles I wrote for Martial Arts Illustrated. They have the copyright so I can't post here but here's the link if the Mods will allow. http://www.southlondonkravmaga.com/media/ I am sorry the people you've come across have given you such a poor idea of what what we do. What would be a 'good video' in your eyes? Demo? Training?
You may want to consider that you have a false sense of what people that train for MMA and other combat sports do. Are you training three sessions a day in KM? It's not the sparring, it is the hours put in to all aspects of training. The methodology is good, especially the alive/live training or progressive resistance. Sparring happens much less than you might think, except for light sparring and rolling that is very common, but that is just part of training with progressive resistance. The other key factor is experience in the ring. Full speed sparring is like normal speed. Ring fights are like double that speed. Real world fights are like triple normal speed. Experience helps to cope with the speed of real world. Just good hard and sincere training, not a lot of talk, would be a good start at a video. And the full training, not video excerpts.
To be fair, the times I saw this posted was more as a prod to get people to think about their kata/patterns/forms differently, not as a "we know best" point. You may have seen different posts of course. But the key, as you say, is appropriate training methodology for the particular paradigm. Mitch
Show me something that is just krav then And I don't think it's poor, I just find it pretty "meh" overall.
Bingo. Isn't the lower grade stuff just pretty normal kickboxing, and the higher grade stuff similar but more open rules? Forgive me, I didn't watch it all. Nothing wrong with it, or the commitment shown by the people doing it, they're training, and trying, and good for them. But it's most definitely sparring distance, not self defence distance, and nothing unique that I can see. Looks like good fun and a bunch of people going for it though Mitch
And often some bjj bolted on too. I've got a couple of krav books and it's front kicks, jab cross, low round kick, elbows, knees, haov defences, some basic bjj and then the more recognisable krav weapon defence stuff (knife, stick, pistol, ak47, grenade...you know....all the usual stuff that gets used outside the chippy). Certainly a whole bunch of stuff that can be safely and robustly tested in an mma or armoured scenario type set up. I did one taster course of krav and actually liked it. Massively over priced though. I liked that groin guards were worn all the time and it was always target and checking around you for more attackers was really stressed.
Mine too, but I know that the internet breeds many mistaken impressions. Kung Fu and TKD guys training self defence in riot gear? Obviously never happens My worry is that all the padwork I see is kickboxing, all the sparring I see is kickboxing and some grappling, then there is a claim of it somehow being self defence. But I only see snippets. I'd like to see it start at realistic range, with verbal engagement where avoidance is a genuine possibility, in an environment where there are obstacles, and involving multiple participants, some or all of whom may become involved in any actual physical confrontation. Now, most of my students do TKD style padwork and sparring most of the time. Our self defence training is a bolt on, and I make that clear in every class. Bur if the raison d'etre of my art was self defence, I'd want to show that in everything I do. Mitch
I think you are right, but I don't like the technique oriented evaluation of Krav Maga. If we were talking about an art like Aikido, we could discuss technique and cross-training, but eventually the discussion would turn to combat principles. Whether my limited exposure to Krav is accurate or even an indication of what it could be, I did get exposure to what was more the military side and it was clearly different than much of the youtube video stuff. Were the techniques different, yes, to some extent as expected, but for the most part no. Were the principles different, I think so, at least who in Krav talks about combat principles in their videos. Most I've viewed just talk about technique and self-defense application. Here is what I thought were combat principles built into Krav Maga: 1. No preset combinations. All combinations are done on the fly. In other words, even the 1+2 boxing jab cross is not used in Krav. The reason is any combination can make you predictable by habit forming. Instead, all technique is done as needed and in any order based on the situation. There are still set ups for techniques, just not hard-coded combinations. When I see sparring that looks like kickboxing, that is not Krav... it can be part of TRAINING, but when things start to look a bit too robotic and habit forming... this should be discouraged in Krav. 2. Continuous attack. Hard to explain this principle from a Krav perspective. From a martial arts point of view, it is continuous pressure, but I think Krav might take it more literally as zero to 100% in an instant. More of a straight blast type demonstration of the principle. For example, coming in full speed with a head butt or shoulder butt would not be unusual. Actual Krav folks or others can correct me.
preparation ...just making the point that different preparations prepare you for different things. On a point of law, instant arming will not land you in prison if you have a reasonably held fear for your safety (or someone elses'), and where I live some people do have usable weapons in their homes.
principles You are probably right that it is pretty 'meh' overall in your experience, and just as you are irritated with bad FMA, we are with the mediocrity of KM that promotes your perception. But just so that I might answer your question in such a manner that we understand each other, what is the essence of a discipline? - Is it the catalogue of techniques, or the principles through which they are applied?
OK. So if it's MMA by another name, then the preparation prepares you for that context. Whatever it might contain which does not, does not
design Essentially it is designed to teach a retainable skillset quickly, which will be usable under stress against a variety of common attacks (from people who will probably not be skilled fighters). Efficiency (including safety), simplicity, speed and control are the FEKM by-words. Defences against the most common attacks are taught first, but before that, and practiced at every session, pre-emptive strikes from no guard and various distances (from nose to nose guard down, and up, on your back, hop-kick distance, etc). I could go on. There is more here: http://www.southlondonkravmaga.com/media/ Many of these skills ARE transferable to the ring, and it is notable that they are often taught by people who have been there, with the understanding they bring of application of force, speed, etc. But many techniques have nothing to do with the ring and (to belabour a point, though this is not what you are asking) to enter the ring, train for it. Whether they are taught differently in France, the UK, Israel, (Canadaaaaa), the USA, - undoubtedly, though I have only trained in France and the UK. The differences are not so much national as federal - the style taught depends greatly on who is in charge. Because of the preponderance of combat sports athletes in the FEKM, much of our training derives from that environment. - and those principles are brought to the original principles mentioned above. Also, competitive combat does test how well you assimilate what you have learned, and is excellent especially for people who want to and can do that. For those who cannot or do not want to, we try to import as much of those principles as we can and as is appropriate considering we are teaching SD rather than competition.
Yes and no-;the fear of the imminet threat does not qualify the weapon usage automatically unless it is reasonable and necessary in the circumstances to deploy said weapon Even then there is a difference between made, adapted and intended vis a vis the individuals mindset and how the law views it
Both What you describe as being Krav above in conceptual terms is not unique That does not invalidate it at all, of course What does it offer that has unique idiosyncrasies?
