Opinions of Krav Maga [Archive] - BudoSeek! Martial Arts Community Forums

RA Miller

05-26-2004, 19:23

Craig-

At first glance, KM looks good. I do have reservations because I've personally had the opportunity to become a certified KM instructor via a very expensive 3-day course.

Three days seems a little short to me. Less than obediance training.

Experience will clear up most confidence shortages. If you want to get a head start, look at classes that are taught by LEO's or have several LEO students. Failing that, look for a style that has as much contact as you can take safely. BJJ is a good choice, as is judo.

Always use your own judgement, though. Nothing you study will cross over 100% to the job. In your own mind, look at what will and won't work for your purposes and keep that filter in place. Most instructors will be very good at the skills and tactics necessary to get their wins...but they will sometimes be teaching you how to get to a point you don't want to go. EG it will almost never be in your interest to turn a threat from face-down to face up, since you'd just have to put him face down to cuff, but in some styles the winning pin must be with the person on his back.

Also be aware that the control techniques, such as PPCT or joint locks, are good and useful in some situations but you also need serious survival fighting. Those are two very different animals. Very few people are qualified to teach both. They should be separate in your mind, too. My saying: "If you try to use a level 4 technique in a level 5 situation, you get hurt. Use a level 5 in a level 4 situation, you get sued." Be real, real clear on the difference.

Rory

Cliff Hargrave

05-26-2004, 20:58

My saying: "If you try to use a level 4 technique in a level 5 situation, you get hurt. Use a level 5 in a level 4 situation, you get sued."

Can I steal that? I promise I will give you credit :)

Jas

06-03-2004, 10:50

Did you ever see an Aikido class? I work in a maximum security prison in New York state (Attica) and I have studied Aikido for 4 years, it's good for law enforcement because it allows you to use escalation of force, if you have someone in a joint lock and he is compliant hold him there till your help arrives, if they continue to fight break the joint.

dentndude7

06-05-2004, 01:27

Did you ever see an Aikido class?

I thought about Aikido for a while but 90% of the time, the fight (on the street) will go to the ground. The most obvious place to put a combative suspect would be on the ground in order to secure him in handcuffs. To my understanding, Aikido is useless once the fight is on the ground. This is why I have considered Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, which was developed for street fighting. I am highly impressed what I have seen with Krav Maga in regard to gun retention. But, I am still researching and forming opinions.

BUDO BULLDOG

07-04-2004, 13:48

Hello,

I would recommend taking a assessment of your physical abilities – the environment that your actual conflict will be taking place in and the desired results that you wish to achieve.

From this analysis see what works best for you. You may even wish to apply more than one art to what you wish to create.

Please note that I said what you wish to create. Your martial art is an expression of you, it is great to learn a style but not be confined to it. When we practice for combat survival the bottom line is what works.

Hapkido, Yoshoinkan Aikido, Kempo and Aiki-JuJistu all have a history of being very applicable to LOE.

Good luck and enjoy the process.

Ed Barton

Erik

07-06-2004, 17:43

I thought about Aikido for a while but 90% of the time, the fight (on the street) will go to the ground. The most obvious place to put a combative suspect would be on the ground in order to secure him in handcuffs. To my understanding, Aikido is useless once the fight is on the ground. This is why I have considered Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, which was developed for street fighting. I am highly impressed what I have seen with Krav Maga in regard to gun retention. But, I am still researching and forming opinions.

Aikido is not useless on the ground, surprisingly. They have a lot of the pins and joint locks that BJJ does (more, actually). Some of these guys adapt very quickly to Judo and BJJ, which surprised me as aikido was never a "fighting" system I took seriously.

90% of fights do not end up on the ground. That's marketing. Most do, however (though I've only had one go to the ground, if you don't count Jr. High school).

Also, BJJ was not developed for the street. It was and is a sport. It has some outstanding ideas for training (taking the randori concept and running with it) and can very quickly be adapted to street fighting, but it sacrifices mobility, does not include biting and pressure points (poking out eyes, putting a finger in the corner of a jaw, etc.), and spends a lot of time in the guard, which is great, but makes your head very vulnerable to being smashed upon the cement. Nevermind the complete absence of striking.

That being said, I love BJJ and have spent a few years at it (and Judo). If you do that martial art you will certainly learn a lot and better yourself.

peacefulwarrior

07-06-2004, 20:54

i agree with the "hype" thing about all fights ending up un the ground, as 100% of the start standing up.

I started to take Aikido as a fighting art the last time i went to Kuwait, adn there was a memeber of the British Army that taught it, i could not get him to the ground, i had a hard time even grabing him.

As for KM, saw that in the same place, it was good but not anything diffrent than other martial arts. I read a book on it once, it had a section for takeing away hand grenades from people, i can say one thing about that, one mess up(which will happen thanks to Murphy)and you and everyone around you is toast.

From what i have seen, all arts will work for the LEO/ Military settings you just need to look at it the right way.

Mike S

07-07-2004, 07:16

Also, BJJ was not developed for the street. It was and is a sport. It has some outstanding ideas for training (taking the randori concept and running with it) and can very quickly be adapted to street fighting, but it sacrifices mobility, does not include biting and pressure points (poking out eyes, putting a finger in the corner of a jaw, etc.), and spends a lot of time in the guard, which is great, but makes your head very vulnerable to being smashed upon the cement. Nevermind the complete absence of striking.

Many of the BJJ guys that you see today, have been improving their punching and kicking skills. While the gouging, poking and biting may not be covered as they would in a stand up class, it doesnt take much thought to do those things.

Mike Slosek

Erik

07-08-2004, 22:55

Many of the BJJ guys that you see today, have been improving their punching and kicking skills. While the gouging, poking and biting may not be covered as they would in a stand up class, it doesnt take much thought to do those things.

Mike Slosek

This is true, of course, but I would argue that it is worth the time to learn how to defend against such things as you could be doing great, well on your way to taking a guy out, using all your skills, and he bites you and you don't see it coming or counter fast enough.

And yes, it's true, many BJJ guys are working striking and ground 'n' pound into their skillset, which is great, but I'd argue that goes under the category of cross-training and specifically not BJJ.

Avi Nardia

07-22-2004, 17:09

try those links about Israeli CQB

http://www.realfighting.com/issue7/moniframe.html

http://www.realfighting.com/issue6/nardiaframe.html

Jack Stay

07-25-2004, 15:52

I thought about Aikido for a while but 90% of the time, the fight (on the street) will go to the ground. The most obvious place to put a combative suspect would be on the ground in order to secure him in handcuffs. To my understanding, Aikido is useless once the fight is on the ground. This is why I have considered Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, which was developed for street fighting. I am highly impressed what I have seen with Krav Maga in regard to gun retention. But, I am still researching and forming opinions.

Whatever happened to Taiho Jitsu (arrest and restrain tactics that was used by the Japanese Samurai and contemporary Japanese police)?? I taught Taiho Jitsu techniques to a police department in central Massachusetts in the late '70s. They teach Taiho Jitsu at the Massachusetts State Police Academy. So how would Krav Magna be better than Taiho Jitsu for arrest and restraint?

Also, how is Krav Magna better in a combat application than Russian S.A.M.B.O., which was specifically designed for combat applications for the former Soviet Spetznatz?

And how is Krav Magna an improvement over the hundreds of years of hand-to-hand combat techniques from which came Japanese jiu-jitsu (and Chinese Kung fu) were derived and proven?

Finally, would a Krav Magna expert defeat a Brazillian Jiu Jitsu expert in the ring (as Judoka, Shootfighters, and wrestlers have been doing!)??

If the answer is no to any of these questions, then why should one study Krav Magna?
Thanks!
______________________
John 'Jack' Stay
South Boston, MA.

John Bennett

07-25-2004, 16:05

many BJJ guys are working striking and ground 'n' pound into their skillset, which is great, but I'd argue that goes under the category of cross-training and specifically not BJJ.

That is not true. BJJ has always been a complete martial art.

Perhaps you are only familiar with the sporting component. It also has a self-defense component that includes techniques involving strikes, kicks, throws, weapons, and multiple opponents.

It is after all still jiujitsu no matter how you spell it.

Andrew Green

07-25-2004, 16:43

Why not find a BJJ school with a NHB component?

Or a NHB school with good ground work?

A good deal of clinch stuff might be good too :D

Krav Maga is hit and miss by the sounds of things. As stated it is really easy, but really expensive to get certified as an instructor. Also as stated they seeem to focus on doing a lot of damage real fast to end a confrontation, not subdue and control without causing injury.

Another thing to look at might be wrestling. Great takedowns and pins.

Jack Stay

07-26-2004, 14:51

That is not true. BJJ has always been a complete martial art.

Perhaps you are only familiar with the sporting component. It also has a self-defense component that includes techniques involving strikes, kicks, throws, weapons, and multiple opponents.

It is after all still jiujitsu no matter how you spell it.

Hi John,

Maybe this question belongs on another thread, but the little research I have done on Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, and several videos I have seen on it, I haven't come across any weapons training, or defense against multiple opponents.

The two self-defense books I read by BJJ people showed the simplest and, in my opinion, the least effective self-defense methods out there. Similar to Kodokwan Jiujitsu self-defense techniques.

Could you suggest some BJJ book titles where they defend against weapons or teach the use of weapons? I'd be very curious.
Thanx!
John 'Jack' Stay
Boston, MA.

Mike S

07-26-2004, 14:58

Hi John,

Maybe this question belongs on another thread, but the little research I have done on Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, and several videos I have seen on it, I haven't come across any weapons training, or defense against multiple opponents.

The two self-defense books I read by BJJ people showed the simplest and, in my opinion, the least effective self-defense methods out there. Similar to Kodokwan Jiujitsu self-defense techniques.

Could you suggest some BJJ book titles where they defend against weapons or teach the use of weapons? I'd be very curious.
Thanx!
John 'Jack' Stay
Boston, MA.

As for the mult. attackers....Yes, it is crazy to roll on the ground against mult attackers, but keep in mind that not every fight involves mult. attackers. In addition, there are aspects of standing grappling/clinching, in BJJ, which can be used in the mult attacker situation. When dealing with mult. attackers, having the knowledge to get back to your feet is the most important thing there.

As for weapons, Royce put out a book which addresses self defense and it includes weapon defense.

Mike Slosek

dentndude7

07-26-2004, 23:35

90% of fights do not end up on the ground. That's marketing.

With combative suspects, I am not going to get them against a wall and try to handcuff them that way. Where is the optimal place? On the ground. Therefore, probably 100% off all fights would go to the ground as this is the best place to control a suspect that is fighting, especially with multiple officers involved. It usually gives the suspect the least advantage but on that rare occasion where they'd pull me down too, I want to be able to efficiently and safely repel their attack where I am back in control of that person. This happened to a fellow officer recently. You also have to consider protecting your weapons as well as yourself. If a suspect ever got a hold of my gun, welp, it's just hit the fan in the worst way. Same could be said of my OC spray or baton.

Therefore it's not all marketing. It's an officer thinking of every possible scenario to keep himself and his fellow officers safe.

Don't get me wrong though, I do appreciate your input. I am looking for all aspects after all.

John Bennett

07-27-2004, 08:12

> I haven't come across any weapons training, or defense against multiple opponents.

It's there, but not prominent. Just like in Judo, too many BJJ schools focus on the sporting aspect of their art.

> The two self-defense books I read by BJJ people showed the simplest and, in my opinion, the least effective self-defense methods out there. Similar to Kodokwan Jiujitsu self-defense techniques.

That's because BJJ is based largely on Pre-WWII Judo. The self-defense techniques are simple.

I think they are effective for that very reason. They use sound body mechanics, leverage, and straight-forward moves. They do not include fancy, complicated, intricate movements.

The reason why many BJJ schools do not spend a lot of time teaching the self-defese component is that people can learn basically the same thing far cheaper at a YMCA jujitsu class.

> Could you suggest some BJJ book titles where they defend against weapons or teach the use of weapons?

I'm sorry but I'm not familiar with what books that are out there.

I don't think BJJ teaches anything on using weapons. Most of the interviews I've read said that when it comes to weapons, the Gracies prefer handguns. I know they trained on firearms when they were kids.

John Bennett

07-27-2004, 08:20

Craig,

Check out this list of schools in your area...

http://txmma.com/modules.php?name=Web_Links&l_op=viewlink&cid=9

TonyU

07-27-2004, 11:09

Hey Chris McLean,
I hate to sound redundant, but good post, good advice. I've been on the job for ten years in a high risk unit and I can tell you a few horror stories myself, including the death of an officer.
The lead defensive tactics instructor has also offered free classes to all cops who graduated the academy and in 15 years of teaching only one officer has taken him up on the offer.
The majority of the officers around here once they graduate will spend countles hours studying for the next promotional exam, but won't train and develope their H2H or shooting skills.
Just to give you a percentage, out a 100 man agency there is 2 of us that keep consistantly training.

Sgathak

07-27-2004, 15:01

PPCT? **cringe ** groan ** hide **

Well, I guess its better than FBI

TonyU

07-27-2004, 17:14

No I don't believe it. Nothing's better than the FBI ;)

loppy

07-11-2005, 17:05

Tony: You gotta be kidding me here. A person who is giving free class in it and nobody besides 2 are going?? Good lord what kind of cops are they?/ Wonna be and dont want to do anything for it?? Just telling everybody hey i'm a cop and thats it??

When i come back i better keep more training in Ma's. More technics. Now when we can not trust in the Po's anymore for help , then who can we trust in helping us ??

Lights Out Mikey

07-12-2005, 03:43

Krav Maga opinion: GO FOR IT!

I've started my MA career with aikido, went from there to taekwondo and then to kickboxing. excepting the kickboxing, it all seems like kindergarten compared to krav maga. All the options offered are still "martial arts", krav maga is not. It's classified as 'tactical fighting system', which perfectly describes it. There's no competions, no nonsense, just real life combat.

I have returned from a 10 day seminar in Israel 2 weeks ago, and let me tell that for real life combat there's nothing even close to it. It's (relatively) simple, effective and aims at finishing every sort of conflict in less than 5 seconds (and they mean it). This however might not be applicable for LEO's, but for this situation there is Law Enforcement Krav Maga, which deals especially with the situations might encounter and exactly how much force to use; also deals with issues on how to use your cuffs/baton/gun, etc...

@jack stay:
at this seminar I have met several ex-members of the speznaz that run a bodyguard firm in russia now, they have all switched from sambo to krav maga simply because of the efficiency.

as for the classic arts you mentioned (kung fu and jj), krav maga does not improve these. it has a totally different approach, which is for nowadays somewhat better than kung fu or jiu jitsu. it's designed to simply destroy the attacker/possible threat with the least amount of effort, in the shortest time and with the most damage possible. to my knowledge, none of the classic arts has an approach as direct and violent as this one.

@RA miller:
the instructor's course offered to you is offered by an american organization which markets krav maga more as fitness program than anything else; try www.krav-maga.com for the IKMF's head site, (basic civil) instructor's courses are conducted over 24 days and include 180 hours of training; admittable for everyone with 4 or more years prior MA experience.

as a last note, i don't wanna say krav maga is superior to all other things, but if you're a well rounded fighter it definitely gives you a big advantage; for those who do not believe me, Eyal Yanilov (KM headinstructor) is touring the states with some seminars this summer. attend one and you'll probably be as stunned as i was with my first KM classs

Fletch1

07-12-2005, 11:10

The biggest issue with KM and it's cousins is the widespread marketing hype and licensing that has to a degree, affected quality control. I am sure that there are good KM schools. I also know that there are strip mall TKD schools that are less than competent that are teaching KM/ etc after plunking down big $$$ and attending a 3-5 day "certification".

Caveat Emptor.

Erik

07-12-2005, 11:24

Therefore, probably 100% off all fights would go to the ground as this is the best place to control a suspect that is fighting, especially with multiple officers involved.
Ah, you're police. I understand.

Your goal is to capture the opponent as opposed to pummel him and/or get yourself away. That's a very specific type of engagement and it makes very good sense to expect going to the ground.

Okay, for you guys, 100%! :)

John - what are the self-defense and weapons parts of BJJ? I haven't been fortunate enough to get into that. We're pretty much BJJ tourney and MMA oriented (mostly the former) so I haven't seen all the good stuff!

Anywhere specific I can look to learn more?

creinig

07-12-2005, 11:38

Disclaimer: I'm civilian, only practice Aikido (and that only for ~3.5 years so far) and never have been in a serious altercation. So please take anything I say with a load of salt ;)

With combative suspects, I am not going to get them against a wall and try to handcuff them that way. Where is the optimal place? On the ground. Therefore, probably 100% off all fights would go to the ground as this is the best place to control a suspect that is fighting, especially with multiple officers involved.
I'd like to point out the difference between "everyone on the ground" (the specialty of BJJ etc) and "only the attacker on the ground". I assume we all aim for that second outcome -- and IMHO Aikido has some serious strengths in that area. It teaches takedowns that end with (1) the attacker prone (typically face down), (2) the "good guy" standing or kneeling in a stable and mobile position and (3) the "good guy" effectively pinning the attacker to the ground. Other core elements are stability (i.e. how to avoid being taken down yourself), constant awareness for potential other threats (and the constant ability to effectively react to them), performing technique in a way that is also as safe as possible if the attacker has a knife (Shodokan/Tomiki Aikido really shines in this regard AFAIK) and both awareness for and effective technique against grabs (which should be very useful for weapons retention). All in all a pretty useful approach for LEOs I'd say :)

Of course there's some non-neglible downsides: Aikido is very rarely practiced with both attacker and defender prone (i.e. basically never in most styles) and it takes a comparatively long time to become proficient in it. But still -- if you can find a good instructor who can understand your needs, I'd certainly recommend having a closer look at aikido.

James O'Neill

07-12-2005, 12:04

IMO, you should find a good instructor from any of the arts known for joint locking and restraining techniques. In this area, the instructor is more important then the particular art if you ask me.

Barring finding a teacher who specializes in the Self Defense aspect of their art, you should be able to find a fellow student or officer that you can experiment with - even if your BJJ instructor won't devote an entire class to such techniques, you can probably get him to show you a couple & then practice on your own with your training partner...?

Good luck!

Black Fox

07-12-2005, 13:18

KM - i like the look of what i see in it, i like the firearms transition utilization. a very modern/millitary approach. a good choice for full engadgement.

others mention akido - also, a good choice. you will need grappling. firearm/unarmed transition seems very important 4 your position. regardless of style though, even if 'way out there' i think i would forget for a minute about outside circumstances (just 4 1 moment) and think about your personality - what approach will u take in most situations? do u know you can break anothers joints with no guilt or what?

alot of cops/security get back what they put in and frankly some of the most petty and creul b**! out there, who don't really fight well, will billy club someone on the ground and smile about it - these guy's get remembered by the street community and become likely targets for bad things - these types have the worst happen to them - because they want it. like i said their technical ability and physical strength seem 2 lack.

some of the best officers on the other hand - even good martial artists on the side may only rarely get the bad stuff happen 2 them.

even if the guy wears a uniform a person (suspect) can 'sense' most often whether the guy wishes him harm or not. they react accordingly.

Sgathak

07-12-2005, 14:25

Black Fox, can you PLEASE spell out simple words like "to/two/too", "for", and "one".

It takes no additional time, is easier to read, and ends the "he types like a 13 year old" thoughts that your readers might have.

Besides that, its a Budoseek rule that you stay away from "netspeak". Thanks.

loppy

07-12-2005, 14:35

29 yearx old and can not write correct words. how sad. We dont mind spellings but numbers? why not adding smilie's in it. it makes it more colourful

Black Fox

07-12-2005, 15:04

cool, a request of ettiquette easily administerd too.

i did not think that this would confuse anyone.

let me explain:

spelling well never ranked high on my too-do-list, in fact i usually take pride in 'bouncing-one' off of formal public-school education based sensibilities most limited thinkers take for the height of some sort of intellegence.

not to nit-pick.

age-based sensibilities do not hold water in every case either. you can often observe fourty somethings that emotionaly act like ten year olds. you can see eight year olds act like thirty.

here i give you an offer in good faith: it to seems faster for me to write using numbers in substitution for the word entirely spelled out.

i will not let personal preference get in the way of good civil discourse though. i will write in the 'proper fashion to mitigate peoples confusion and their deeper rear-ended :wink2: sensibilities. :eek:

due to my habits of use though, i will not gaurantee this everytime though, and anyone who thinks that they 'just can't handle it' can just skip all my posts and disregard all the thoughts i put down, cause - obviously anyone who cannot sate things on terms of your sensibilities proly don't have any sense of their own anyway.

or cancel my acct. if it gets to bad.

just my 2 cents

Erik

07-12-2005, 15:11

Russ, don't take it the wrong way, please.

Most of us are at work sneaking a little look at a thread or two and don't have a lot of time or energy to try to filter through a post that's tough to read, especially with other responsibilities and distractions.

It's not meant to be an insult, just a request to help us all out a little, like asking someone to speak a little more clearly into the mouthpiece of a cell phone for the sake of easier reception.

Make sense, bro?

:)

loppy

07-12-2005, 15:13

Black Fox

07-12-2005, 15:41

yes, sir (Erick Micheals).

at first i did take it personaly - i do not carry a perfect personality. :(

this lesson keeps getting repeated everywhere in my life - esspecially lately. i spent way too long not taking the feelings of others into consideration. some of the worst types in the worst areas carry the many of the same resentments. and act accordingly.

the coldest people i find carry alot of resentment, lack empathy and think everyone goes out of their way to 'get at them'. so, get them first. you get to 'hate the rules' that condemn you and block your way and you begin playing by a different set - often self imposed, or if with a gang/group clique impossed. now, i see that more and more it looks like this concept carries some fault on the holder.

myself included.

a little consideration and some time and 'boom' you fall into another world where people care, maybe you held mistaken ideas about large demographics of nice/intellegent people, even individuals. maybe you lost friends because of this kind of thinking.

but, the same thing can easily hold true for those who live comfortable with established authority or who carry alot of wealth and the 'perfect' life and who abuse it - freely designating who gets dehumanized and the 'garbage' and who gets treated like royalty and fair treatment, then get better. - do they? - i never wittnessed this.

i respect your ideas. i do not know you persoanly . i respect many others that use this board for dialogue. for you all then:

i will avoid all resemblence to 'netspeak' and i appreciate clear communication between you, me, and everyone else who cares enough to share.

i do request that - if with this correction; if i still sound like a 'kid' in the ideas i present to you you take this up with me directly. i know you wrote it in jest - i still take that kind of statement seriously. i keep it all close to the heart and stuff.

i do, and will hold back my uncivil side, so, we all do. we live in a free country and this board carries pretty free discussion.

thank you. :o

MarcoPolo

07-12-2005, 15:58

Just to get things back on point a bit...

BJJ *DOES* have a complete self-defense curriculum. It's called "defessa pesoao" (personal defense). It hasn't gotten nearly the press that the BJJ ground/sport game has for two reasons:
1. It's not as "unique"
2. Most instructors don't still teach it in the U.S.

A good resource for it is an old series that Carlson Gracie Jr. did (BJJ Self Defense?) as well as the series out of the Gracie Jiu-Jitsu Academy in Torrance (Self-defense series)
The techniques will look a bit like old Kodokan Judo self-defense (which they don't teach much of anymore either!) Not "pretty" but very effective.

I think a GREAT well-rounded art for LE is (and has proven to be) Hapkido. You'll learn striking and some well-rounded self-defense (grabs,chokes,pushes, headlocks, bearhugs, etc.) As well as some stick and knife (and their defenses).

I know the 90% of all fights end up on the ground statistic. I also know who marketed it. (See if you can find a reference to that number before 1990). Also, i'd like to see the supporting data for it (since it's a specific percentage.) MANY fights do end up on the ground.. frankly, a lot of them because one of both of the people don't have good balance, or understand how to off-balance their opponent.

The goal is to have *them* on the ground while you remain standing. I think Judo and Hapkido have been great for this.

From an LE point of view, I think it's better to be able to explain your skills as "the gentle way" or "way of flowing harmony" than the "Street lethal, take 'em out in 5 seconds art of the Israeli Commando!" (just my thought)

Marc

Erik

07-12-2005, 19:17

at first i did take it personaly - i do not carry a perfect personality. None of us do (except maybe Tony...:wink2: ).

That's normal, nothing to fuss over. :)

this lesson keeps getting repeated everywhere in my life - esspecially lately. i spent way too long not taking the feelings of others into consideration. some of the worst types in the worst areas carry the many of the same resentments. and act accordingly.

Sounds like life is conspiring to teach you some stuff. You should welcome it and learn what you can and grow. It's healthy!

John Lucas

07-13-2005, 13:05

So i will give you now my 2 cents here. I'm german. Born raised and went to school in germany. I thought why should i learn english ? I never will use it. So i stink in british gramma. And?? I'm trying my best here.

I want to see here who does not stink in gramma and writing wrong words. Nobody is perfect. also get your grip together.

I just got back from Germany, I know Ive said this about a thousand times and you guys are probably tired of reading about it, but I love it there and I cant help but be excited. I have to say that I was extremely impressed by the level at which the average person there could speak English, I have only had a year's worth of German, and me and my friends went everywhere by ourselves and had no problem getting around or communicating with anyone because of how good their language is, in fact, most of the Germans I met speak better English than the average person here. (especially considering I live in Athens, Georgia, we got a horrible mix of redneck talk and ebonics.

Sorry, now back to the topic. I have a book on KM that is centered on the weapons training alone, and it is a pretty thick volume. Among the things covered is Disarms from pistols, rifles, gernades, submachine guns, the short stick, the glass bottle, the knife, etc etc. It also goes into how to attack with and use improvised weapons including rocks, glass bottles, sticks, chairs, etc.

It also provides good strategy for fighting including multiple attackers, and multiple attackers with weapons. In one such an example you go against a knife and a stick at the same time and the attackers are on both sides of you, and the book quickly breaks down the stick holding opponent with a low kick followed by a punch to the groin and a face grab to a disarm/throw. Then it explains how to use the stick to keep distance from your opponent and disable his weapon hand or use the stick as a lever to lock him out.

I have always wanted to train in KM, but there has never been a school nearby, so I cant say anything about what the class would be like, but the material seems to be on the right track if all you want is a brutally effective defense. But if you are a police officer, in my opinion you would be better off with something less lethal. I know a man who trains police out in Mississippi a mixture of Aikido and Juijutsu, which allows the officers to control the amount of power escalation, as well as supplying them with a huge variety of throws, locks, pins, and holds from any range.

Lights Out Mikey

07-14-2005, 02:42

there's quite a number of schools in georgia, have a look

http://www.kravmaga.com/georgia.asp

KIT

07-14-2005, 09:37

Another thread that is all over the place.

First off, on topic Krav. Good stuff IF you get the good stuff. Even the krav folks I know and train with say there is a big difference between "cardio krav" and police and military krav maga. I have trained with two people who did the latter and they had some good stuff. A little too striking oriented as a combative art IMO, but good for self defense. I have seen some good combatives with a long gun in hand and good handgun stuff that seems to flow well with Israeli shooting and room clearing tactics. Moni Aizik's stuff is similar but adds more of a grappling/jujutsu element that is missing in some of the more percussive stuff I have seen.

Second: lets be careful what we think is "good for LEOs." Frankly, the aikido and arm or wrist lock to the ground, turnover to prone jujutsu based stuff I have been taught and used is suitable for the compliant and semi-compliant, non-combative resistor. Since the majority of police uses of force lie in this realm, this is fine, and it should be taught. Most people simply are not interested in a full on fight with the cops, especially if they are drunk past the point where they can actually stand, or its 4 a.m, their door was just kicked in, they have been flash-banged, and two velcro ninjas just invaded their personal space.

Heck these folks go down with just verbal commands or a stiff wind, so how about kiaijutsu!?

But these methods tend to fall short against the truly combative resistor. These will be the "altercations" that the 90% go to the ground stats come from.

Some background: the 90% stats are a marketing of legitimate stats that were developed through LAPD. Those stats did not say that 90% of police encounters went to the ground. They did say that 95% of police "altercations" went by certain "engagement patterns," for lack of a better word. These altercations are fights - they do not define the typical non-resistor who get lippy but gives up the minute you twist his arm to get him in cuffs. That is not a fight.

Of those fights, the closer percentage is about 66%, IIRC, that go to the ground. A similar informal study showed that when suspects have attempted to take officers to the ground they have similar results. Interestingly, several of these altercation patterns are much closer to civilian dynamics in real fights.

My own informal questioning of people involved in civilian on civilian altercations - from bar fights to domestic violence to random assaults, is that about half of them ended up with one or both (or more if more parties were involved) on the ground (or on the bed, on the couch, on the floor )at some point during the fight.

All of this is of course generalities. Some cops (and people) get in more fights than others, and will have more potential for altercations due to assignment, and may end up going to the ground a lot more.

BJJ, judo, and some styles of jujutsu have a plethora of methods that are far more practical in truly combative ground fight situations - that involve one person kneeling or otherwise on top of a supine or prone subject, and that allow tying up both arms (very important with truly combative suspects) - against total resistance from much stronger subjects - for turnover and cuffing. Or simply turning them over and controlling them while accessing weapons.

These methods, like all martial arts training, need to be practiced with police use in mind, but they work very, very well. They are also trained in a non-cooperative manner which makes for a far greater confidence in using these skills under actual field conditions. They do not require both parties to be lying on the ground, and those methods that do are often either not suitable for police use, or are instead suitable in the most dire officer survival situations.

Coming full circle, Krav seems to be weak in the ground work area, but I know some folks supplment with BJJ or judo (as Moni Aizik, mentioned above) to develop a more complete system.

Black Fox

07-14-2005, 21:04

so 90% police engadgement means simply the 'altercations' involved a specific 'pattern of engadgement'. and so because this involves grappling/going to the ground seems to carry a large focus of what transpires for the outcome of many we must all bow down to one tactic among many and deem this 'real combat'?

but...

the actual percentage of ''full-out resistors' that end up on the ground and thus involve grappling falls around only 66%

so 'full contact' grappling entertainment-sport terms itself 'real-combat/fighting' and bases it's entire image and self-hyped importance on percentages like that? a striker who lacks the experience and 'believes' due to hype promoted by an industry advertising machine and the fans it makes or 'has had THE experience' and 'lost a fight' while testing their 'skillz' - i can only question personal latitude of experience and commitment to their first choosen art.

how many of these all-out resisters in the percentage consist of artists that use striking for the primary tactic of control? of the 'altercations' esspecially the ones that do involve strikes at first - first consider an untrained fighter (police or not) - the one who will almost always take 'the good hit' - will fall down and tend to stay down.

the cops want people on the ground eventually if they put up serious resistance - remember, the perp doesn't run quite the same way on the ground; and a perp often wants to control a holsterd gun and may 'stay with it' and fall to do so. a number of our honored men/women in blue fell in the line of duty this way. too unfortunetly a significent number to completely dismiss without pause.

so percentage-wise the number of 'altercations' with no knowledge of training and background of the participents on either side, sets a number pretty close to 50/50 shows up.

the percentage of fighters/resisters that also carry 'serious' training does not fall in a catigory covered by the survey. these fighters actually going through years of rigerous training and discipline getting into a real falling out with the police and letting it degenerate to the point of violence prolly ain't too high and might very well stand rare to near nil.

a good striker forced into the situation of actively resisting police will possess serious advantages in most all circumstances - the police first tell you to surrender. his art develops in training to 'control the situation' and he will generally tend to avoid the mistakes that take him to the ground.

quantified for trained strikers - considering most fights they will tend to involve themselves will engade, with only full control over their timing/space relationships - in fact - will only rarely - will anyone get an opportunity to take the control away and then subsiquently 'take it to the ground'.

such a person would need to actually possess experience equal or greater than the striker and also carry a 'grappling' style. weapons add a dimension to this. i do catigorize (even though unarmed) all well developed martial arts a weapon.

i do not think grappling 'is better than' striking or the reverse of this. i do not mind mixes. people do what suits them and develops tactics to counter that of the opponents. people like and dislike all too often, they possess strengths and weaknessess - your style should consist of what you ----------------------------------------------Know You Can Use --------and not what someother people over there think you should do - or what gets them 'off'.

Krav Mag seems top notch by style alons - a full combat discipline - even if 'just striking' - it got developed during warfare, carries an array of completely modern tactics, it counters situations and weapons for these situations - if the developers designed it with little or no grappling - there could exist a 'real' tangible reason for this. it seems obvious to me - i will let you think about it.

the style does contain a very lethal aspect specificaly in the basis of design/intent and eventual successful application. other arts can match this if the intent of the prectitioner requires and uses in full knowledge in the process of training what he/she will do to the opponent upon resolution. most arts require lethality - most, allow for a 'way out' of simply killing.

the designers said - "we need a killing art" - in this case we do not need any other result and it ain't gonna' be sport. of course some masters change things for a buck to catter to the tastes of an entertainment industry of their own - and hype that.

KM deals w/ modern weapon disarms this hold superior for battlefeild conditions and i respect it's development and with the right instruction (like i do All arts) do not lightly dismiss it's 'effectiveness' in combat.

basic karate or your good old judo can overtake any enemy just as fast with equal training. you end up in different places holding different things and killing a different number of people 'all at once' - which Is why we do it, right?

or we jus stroken hype & ego so some guy producing the 'show' can make a buck or two and a live well?

KIT

07-14-2005, 22:07

Okay......

Fletch1

07-15-2005, 01:14

so 90% police engadgement means simply the 'altercations' involved a specific 'pattern of engadgement'. and so because this involves grappling/going to the ground seems to carry a large focus of what transpires for the outcome of many we must all bow down to one tactic among many and deem this 'real combat'?

I think your choice of words reveal your perspective here already.

the actual percentage of ''full-out resistors' that end up on the ground and thus involve grappling falls around only 66%

so 'full contact' grappling entertainment-sport terms itself 'real-combat/fighting' and bases it's entire image and self-hyped importance on percentages like that? a striker who lacks the experience and 'believes' due to hype promoted by an industry advertising machine and the fans it makes or 'has had THE experience' and 'lost a fight' while testing their 'skillz' - i can only question personal latitude of experience and commitment to their first choosen art.

I believe that we have seen that unarmed street fights/ altercations that go the distance and are not determined quickly and decisively, seem to predictably if not ultimately, end up horizontal or pushed up against a fixed solid object. This is reflected in a more sterile, lab setting in the "full contact grappling entertainment-sport terms itself 'real-combat/fighting" you mentioned. There is a connection and I do not believe it was manufactured in the way that you imply.

the cops want people on the ground eventually if they put up serious resistance - remember, the perp doesn't run quite the same way on the ground; and a perp often wants to control a holsterd gun and may 'stay with it' and fall to do so. a number of our honored men/women in blue fell in the line of duty this way. too unfortunetly a significent number to completely dismiss without pause.

No real argument there. We want to limit mobility. But cops also find that the counter pressure of the ground or a fixed solid vertical object gives a significant advantage in leverage for grappling, striking or the two together.

a good striker forced into the situation of actively resisting police will possess serious advantages in most all circumstances - the police first tell you to surrender. his art develops in training to 'control the situation' and he will generally tend to avoid the mistakes that take him to the ground.

If his training supports the strategy of avoiding takedowns, yes. If not, I think this has been played out already, with predictable results.

quantified for trained strikers - considering most fights they will tend to involve themselves will engade, with only full control over their timing/space relationships - in fact - will only rarely - will anyone get an opportunity to take the control away and then subsiquently 'take it to the ground'.

No way of knowing as everyone and every scenario is different. We can all try to predict. We have seen however, that it is often easier to clinch than to avoid clinching. Once in that range, without the appropriate skills, ending up on the ground becomes an increasing probability.

such a person would need to actually possess experience equal or greater than the striker and also carry a 'grappling' style. weapons add a dimension to this. i do catigorize (even though unarmed) all well developed martial arts a weapon.

See my above response. All things being equal, it can be easier to force a clinch than to counter simply by striking. I see no reason that someone seeking to use the clinch as their primary strategy, must first have equal or superior striking abilty and experience. That does not seem logical.

Black Fox

07-15-2005, 09:33

Quote from Fletch Fuller : I see no reason that someone seeking to use the clinch as their primary strategy, must first have equal or superior striking abilty and experience. That does not seem logical.

yes, i did say experience - this looks like a good time to clarify: i do think a 'less experienced' man can well take a more experienced one, if his abilities allow it. in this case i simply refered to the expertise in the art sometimes refered to and called 'experience'.

to make it simple though: in this case experience simply refered too any fighting 'experience' and the ability to apply unarmed fighting technique or respond well to a situation. i gave no indication that i ment a striking art only - forgive me if i lacked clarity.

so, - i did say the opponent then must also possess a grappling art - he may not need one - but if in police work you use a 'clinch' everyday without training in an 'art', then for many respects the practice of technique will produce results that match a martial artist in every practical sense and it comes down to how you define it.

a grappler/policeman/robber will to varying degrees in some cases seek to take the opponent to the ground.

you then will need to possess the 'equal-experience/expertise' to 'take down' a trained striker. as a grappler or perp who wants it, will almost always just follow you down, - and this can hardly go on to truly be defined as a 'struggle to get them down' - more than it simply facilitates the struggle between two grapplers.

i just clarify this to help you understand my veiws, nothing more.

the rest of what you wrote seems very reasonable and you very well could carry a more accurate assesment than i on these particular subjects.

thanks.

i do not see any argument.

jackhammer

07-23-2005, 00:56

My humble (and usually un-asked for) opinion

I'm am always sceptical of any system of martial arts developed "for the military and special forces!" While it's true that Israel has some of the best Special Operations in the world, and that Krav Maga is naturally up to their standards, the military is not around to train people in martial arts. Systems designed for the military are meant to be learned in a few weeks time. Martial Arts systems take years of dedication. Military systems are tailored to the units they are designed for. When I worked with Israelis, their instructors taught us things like proper use of the garrot, and using cloth soaked in chemicals to suffocate. Many of the principles taught can be carried over into self-defense. But whether or not the move meant to take an automatic rifle out of your opponents hands can be used on someone with a stick, you have to remember where it came from, and what it was designed for. I remember learning some aikido strikes which I thought were somewhat combersome and questionable. When I asked my sensei about them, he said they were originally designed for cuts with a sword. A sword to the top of the head made a lot more sense than the ridge of my hand. The point is, the system was designed to ensure maximum lethality and combat technique in as little time as possible. How well it can carry over into the realm of martial arts and self-defence is questionable.

Then again, krav maga has grown and changed substantially since its birth. Just be wary of any claims of "super martial arts taught to elite forces!" and whatnot.

Mikael151

07-23-2005, 23:48

With combative suspects, I am not going to get them against a wall and try to handcuff them that way. Where is the optimal place? On the ground. Therefore, probably 100% off all fights would go to the ground as this is the best place to control a suspect that is fighting, especially with multiple officers involved. It usually gives the suspect the least advantage but on that rare occasion where they'd pull me down too, I want to be able to efficiently and safely repel their attack where I am back in control of that person. This happened to a fellow officer recently. You also have to consider protecting your weapons as well as yourself. If a suspect ever got a hold of my gun, welp, it's just hit the fan in the worst way. Same could be said of my OC spray or baton.

Therefore it's not all marketing. It's an officer thinking of every possible scenario to keep himself and his fellow officers safe.

Don't get me wrong though, I do appreciate your input. I am looking for all aspects after all.Definately a situation where you'd need to be in control.
I'm new here and still young when it comes to martial arts. But in my humble opinion, try to learn both Kenpo and BJJ. Believe it or not, American Kenpo has locks, restaints, and even ground techniques. Not to mention techniques for multiple attackers. For some reason your Kenpo technique is a "deferred success" you could literally fall back on BJJ.

Mikael151

07-23-2005, 23:59

Krav Maga opinion: GO FOR IT!

.

as for the classic arts you mentioned (kung fu and jj), krav maga does not improve these. it has a totally different approach, which is for nowadays somewhat better than kung fu or jiu jitsu. it's designed to simply destroy the attacker/possible threat with the least amount of effort, in the shortest time and with the most damage possible. to my knowledge, none of the classic arts has an approach as direct and violent as this one.

I'm quite sure KM is effective. How do you think that system deals with a trained martial artist?

Black Fox

07-24-2005, 05:34

I could not even understand my previous postings.

The art itself (KF, JJ) does not focus directly on such a ‘final outcome’. It comes down to him to select such a line of efficiency. The idea here comes down to 'intent' at any one moment that resides behind the execution of your training.

KM trains to kill and the style itself to avoid confusion does not often get into other formats of 'control' of an engagement beyond the death of an opponent or crippling injury – good for a warfare basis and very short training period requirement – nothing special except possessing an ‘eye for firearms’. KM possess an intent to kill (usually) a target to strike and a process to get there – many martial-arts carry not just that way to ‘get there’ but possibly a few extra beyond the curriculum offered by KM.

A good martial artist knows efficiency carries well known limits. The ‘best’ styles were made thousands of years ago and everything from Kung-Fu to Japanese Swordsmanship is based off that framework. The basis of the ancient arts in the physical setting defines efficiency. An artist in these systems carry full access to most every 'fast, deadly, and efficient' means to destroy an opponent found in KM. Using the same clear intent to kill (unfortunately) the ‘artist’ (KF, JJ ect…) produces the very same level of efficiency and final results of the same magnitude as KM. These arts do come with a far wider potential and an extended arsenal for control of an opponent than KM. The long-term artist learn many more things beyond the simple killing methods, and frankly it makes him a better fighter (personal control and expansion of options) in the end – non-lethal options, meditation and depending on the art, advanced fighting strategies involving such things like sensitivity. Older martial-arts styles (most) attempt to promote an intent that limits the need to use force – and possibly spare the targets life when control of a fight is obtained. Being able to spare your opponent (with as little harm) is a Life affirming activity.

The individual selects the techniques to use and knows his intent – if the intent becomes to merely kill – then the result will display maximum efficiency and speed w/lethal results to that end – KM as a style development is only an improvement in the short-term = solders in battlefield settings that need efficiency ‘in conception’ implanted into their minds, a need to ‘pick it up fast’ and under limited conditions they ‘cut out the complications’ of leaving survivors and dealing with swords.

I like KM for what it is – a solders art of fighting and survival. It deserves respect and will function well with (short training periods aside) good instruction. I do not think it offers much beyond the physical concerns of survival on a modern battlefield and referal to small arms control. The older arts now gear themselves for the demands of a civil and not battlefield equipped population. The concept of fighting with or against blades longer than a knife now fall into disuse and commonly even misapplication in modern civil arts.

Word Programs Rule!!! :D

Cin-Na supposidly started off with the chinese millitary in ancient times. Elephant-style: Eagle claw, White crane, Hung-Gar carry this subsystem within all these styles for it's basis. All considered using this Chi-Na component - began from roots heavily influenced by millitary success.

fight1

07-30-2005, 06:23

I have to agree,
I just got the full set(5 DVDs) of combat survival commando krav maga by Moni Aizik and they are the best I have seen so far!!!!!!!!!!!!
Check out the new video clips at: www.combatsurvival.com

Fletch1

07-31-2005, 02:57

Oh boy.

:D :D :D

mleone

08-20-2005, 14:24

Krav Maga is a bastardized system. Its not what it used to be.

ob1 kanobi

03-14-2006, 12:03

ive been practising krav maga for 5 mo's now and do not want to discredit any of the martial arts styles as they all have their place, however krav maga is a practical system of defence ,it's attacks are violent and quick and realistic just as the martial arts have developed over the course of a thousand years in the orient and elsewhere this new system is a modern way of fighting which will be used in the next 1000years just as the martial arts is . anyhow. sianara.

Lights Out Mikey

05-11-2006, 09:19

I'm quite sure KM is effective. How do you think that system deals with a trained martial artist?

depends on the what the martial artists in question. it definitely beats the hell out of traditional martial arts, since these normally have very little 'real life' reference. judging from my own aikido/teakwondo experience I had before training Krav Maga, I can honestly say that these martial arts would hardly stand a chance. It also has the advantage of combining stand up combat with grappling elements, so you could always go standup with e.g. a judoka or on the ground with e.g. a kickboxer.

however, if there's somebody that is cross trained in standup and grappling, he might stand a very good chance against a krav maga practitioner. that is, as long as he or she is ready for anything that comes, since most martial arts do not include eye gouging, groin kicking and other moves generally known as 'cheap shots' in their training.

as stated before, I wouldn't describe KM as a superior martial art, but if you know a good deal about punching and kicking, it will be the ace up your sleeve.

Jeff Burger

05-18-2006, 05:29

Fletch1

05-21-2006, 19:06

"I just got the full set(5 DVDs) of combat survival commando krav maga by Moni Aizik and they are the best I have seen so far!!!!!!!!!!!!"

LOL
I had them, they are garbage.
Nice Judo roll over the park bench by his student though.

Jeff

LOL

I suspected as much after watching the teaser vids.

Funny that people have a way of crediting anything and everything to their favorite system, whether it is legitimate or not. Azik is a great Judo coach. He was Carlos Newton's coach for a while although I believe that Carlos has been doing his own thing for quite a while now. People erroneously credit Azik's Judo proficiency with his "Krav Maga" or worse yet, use Newton as an example of Krav training now that Azik is marketing his own KM.

My opinion is that KM and just about every other "military" program is a generic collection of moves that are shown to recruits in the hope that they might remember something useful out of a very short exposure. This becomes a selling point that the system is ideal for "self defense" and *shudder* "Law Enforcement".

I think people realize that members of the IDF are tough because they have to be in their environment. It doesn't necessarily mean they have the best thought out program. It just means that they are sticking with what they already have, whether it is out of a sense of tradition, national pride, whatever. They would not be the first nation to stick with a program for reasons other than combat efficiency.

Now, we have soccer moms and executives training in a "military" program and being taught the moves allegedly taught to IDF recruits under the label of KM. "Must be the best if the Israeli's use it" ends up being the unofficial slogan. One look at some of the firearm related training coming from "former IDF soldiers/ instructors" should reveal that there are many other programs that are just as effective or more so.

Not bagging on KM. It is what it is though.

swchiro

06-10-2006, 00:13

The one martial art for you is the one your body and mind underatand and do best. Every "body" is different, short, tall, round, square, fast feet, slow feet, fast hands, slow hands, etc..There is no one better martial art than the next. If you study the one with all your spirt, train hard to your full potential, then that martial art is for you...find one that you love and follow the path....me, after several years of 3 different martial arts, I love Aikido and have been training in it for 12+ years, follow your gut, it is alway correct....good luck

KHF Kyung Mu Kwan

07-04-2006, 22:30

I have some exprience with Krav Maga when I was teaching Hapkido in my country to some forces. Well this is what I think of Krav Maga and hope nobody is offended.

Well Krav Maga is basically a form of physical exercise training on reflex rather then anything else. Most of their techniques and tactics are in fact found in most martial art basic syllabus. However, I still feels that it is a concept & system; not a form of martial art.

If you observed all the techniques properly and carefully; their block and strike (two actions in one go) resembles a lot on Chinese Wing Chun. I have tried some exchange training with one of my student who was also trained in Krav Maga in the Military in m country; I fnd that it is somehow similar to JKD (Jeet Kune Do). The founder tries to put in what he have gathered in his martial art knowledge and put it as direct as possible.

Now to me irrgradless what art one may train; but so long as the person did not put in the hard work and constantly update or train himself, he may face problem in realistic.

Like Hapkido, many taught that it is an art similar to Aikido or Jujitsu etc. But the fact, it was not because; Hapkido has two syllabuses which are: Public, Military & Police syllabus. Generally speaking, most valid Hapkido training is just for self defense purpose and for the public. Likewise, the Military & Police training was never allowed to be taught to the public (only selected person will be trained). That is because; the Great Masters and government of Korea knew the importance to seperates the syllabus bewteen public and government service. If the training syllabus of the Military & Police are taught publicly; then it will no longer be special or exclusive. Furthermore, they do not want the public to complicate or contradict their operation.

If one trains street defense, it is always good to constant train with scenarios and specific drills thatis realistic. However, if what you train is still unable to neutralize or defeat your assailant; then my friend, you are now ruly in a combat situation, and will need more than what you have been training.

Street and ring fight is always different because; the ring has rules & regulations to follow (even in UFC, Pride etc). Likewise, the street will be different because; there are wo knds of situations: Organized attack and unoganized attack. At times, there are lone fighter or worst group assailants.

Self defense is self defense and is always generally misled. Self defense tactics is to neutralze and get out of danger rather hen pursuing or prolong the fight. Fighting means offensive; where t is a sudden exchange of blows and kick ecs will extreme power and speed. For example: I you had an arguement in a pub and the other party pushes you back. Now in this situation, either one party will throws a punch or kick. Now that is not self defense but a fight instead.

I hope with this, one will have a better vision of what is what and no art is ultimate. if there is an ulimate art exist, then, that art will and would have dominated the world and no other art wil exist.