Is KRAV MAGA A COUNTER PUNCHERS SYSTEM? - Krav Maga Worldwide™ Israeli Self Defense Forums

Psyops · 05-09-2006, 04:37 PM

Hey guys,

This question was asked yesterday and it is something that I have thought about on a number of occasions. I guess counter striking would be more accurate than counter punching. But I am inclined to answer yes. The main reason is because we train from a \"self defense\" standpoint. So our offense is typically a response to the attacker's offense right?

This is not to imply that we only hit after someone takes a shot at us. However from our defense we strike. We appear passive yet we are aggresive. We bait our opponent and we crush them when they give us an opening. Is this not the essence of counter striking? I am inclined to say yes.

So I thought about this the last time I sparred. I find that I am much more comfortable as a counter puncher than an aggresor. Sparring from that perspective helped me so much. I did not expend as much energy as normal. Also I scored a higher percentage of times and the fight seemed to slow down. Another thing that surprised me is that having strong defense frustrates opponents quickly. Incidentally I was sparring against these Muay Thai fighters they were pretty aggresive and this helped me a lot.

I even saw further proof of this last weekend when I saw the De La Hoya VS Mayorga fight. Oscar was clearly using his hands to defend against Mayorga. It was very similar to what we do in Krav. From there he was able to land counter punches almost at will.

Has anyone else experienced this?

johnwhitman · 05-09-2006, 08:11 PM

I understand why you would say this, but remember to make a distinction between the Fight and Self Defense.

In the Fight, be aggressive, attack first, go on offense.

When we train in Self Defense, we put ourselves in the worst possible position so that we know our defense works from those positions.

kravjeff · 05-09-2006, 08:48 PM

I can see the utility of primarily counter punching when sparring, especially if that is specifically what you're working on (defense and countering). I don't have nearly the experience of some on this board, but IMHO I don't think you can \"fight\" that way all the time; either in the street or in the ring. I know I can't - Perhaps the execution of my defense isn't good enough yet. I've found that I'm most successful when attacking, though I certainly take my share of blows that way - I'm also better at moving away from strikes than I am at blocking and countering, though I'm working hard on \"our\" techniques.

John (naturally) makes a great point - In the street, be aggressive, and be brutal - Don't wait for \"something\" to happen - Your life may depend on it.

John, If you happen to read this thread again, I would ask that you clarify your last point where you said \"When we train in Self Defense, we put ourselves in the worst possible position so that we know our defense works from those positions.\" Do you simply mean that the techniques we learn are so that we are confident that we can be \"victorious\" in the worst of situations?

Psyops · 05-10-2006, 12:15 AM

Thanks John!

I understand your point. Certainly whenever possible we should hit first and every strike should be made with bad intentions. This is one of the things that I struggle with though. Sparring is more like a game. So going down someone's throat is in my opinion a waste of time in sparring because I know that I can do that already. So when I spar I tend to be more patient and wait. I am sure it would be quite boring to watch if the other person is not aggresive.

In the street though, my mentality is different. Probably more in line with what you are saying and that is a distinction that I will be sure to make at next fight class.

G.V. · 05-10-2006, 06:42 AM

We do train in preemptive attacks from a neutral stance. So, it's not entirely just counter striking.

KravmanianDevil · 05-10-2006, 08:05 AM

Psyops I would agree with your initial assessment. If you have ever seen the KM training videos there is clip in there where Darren is clearly in a \"fight\" scenario with his opponent. Both guys have hands up and are in their fighting stances. However, in this clip Darren does in fact lay back and baits his opponent to throw not one but two punches before he inside defends and immediately counters. Darren is clearly not in an offensive, attack first mentality. How do we reconcile that with your post John? (This question is asked with all due respect of course :D )

johnwhitman · 05-10-2006, 10:40 AM

Hey all!

Kravmanian Devil: your question is very fair, but the answer is simple: the videos are marketed as self defense tape, so the promotional sections always depict the defender as the DEFENDER reacting to an attack. That is consistent throughout, even in the sections where a fight has already occurred. I'm not really arguing whether we were right to do that or not...it's just a video segment, so it was what it was. :)

Kravjeff...yes, I mean something similar to what you are saying. Basically, it goes like this: we test defenses from the worst position. If we can perform successfully from that position, then we know that we can also perform if things are better for us (i.e., if we are a little earlier, or a little more prepared, etc.).

Of course, it is always possible to be TOO late, even against a simple attack such as a straight punch. However, we try to test every technique from the worst position just prior to complete failure.

Psyops · 05-10-2006, 11:03 AM

Great Responses!

I think that fight styles are definitely vary from person to person. The attitude of the instructors usually has lots to do with this. Students mimic instructors. One of the things that stands out to me when I have trained @ NTC is the aggresive demeanor of the students and instructors. Certainly this is part of the culture and it is obvious that Krav is recognized for that mindset.

Is agression the most important aspect of what we do? Is this what we are trying to convey to our students? I am speaking about fighting not self defense, just to clarify. I think that aggresion is great absolutely essential but I worry that students take from us that aggresion alone will be enough. Do you believe that a person can still be aggresive even though he/she may not strike first? I ask this because I have found that even with trained fighters there usually is an opening once the initial attack is properly defended. Of course waiting to find out is not always suggested but I feel there should be a mix of aggresion then faux passiveness. What your thoughts?

By the way...

The best thing about Krav is that John and the other lead instructors at NTC will answer questions directly. Try that with other systems!

kravjeff · 05-10-2006, 11:07 AM

Thanks for the clarification - It's always great when you join the \"fray\" !!

Anonymous · 05-10-2006, 03:42 PM

About striking first, this makes me think of this incident they were talking about at the NTC. I don't know all of the details, but apparently a Krav instructor got into an altercation right in front of the NTC. There was a traffic accident and one guy whose car got hit jumped out and for some reason went toward the instructor, who was just a bystander standing on the sidewalk. Anyway, the Krav instructor apparently felt threatened and at some point threw a punch and a few knees, defeating the guy, but ending up getting arrested for aggravated assault.

So, from a legal standpoint, it is probably better to defend first, then counter. If you throw the first punch, potential witnesses might see you as the aggressor and you might get into trouble.

As for sparring, I've noticed the same thing. Sometimes we will work on a one attack, one defend exercise and I defend almost every punch. But then, during sparring, I will see a lot less of them, because now I'm not only thinking about defending but also attacking, so my brain will have to deal with two things at the same time, making it harder to effectively defend.

So, if you focus solely on defense you may end up defending more punches and even scoring more. I think that is because you are now only concentrating on one thing, seeing the punches, and as a result you will defend more of them. If you think too much about offense, you may open yourself up too much and you may lose focus on the kind of attacks your opponent is throwing.

KravmanianDevil · 05-11-2006, 06:46 AM

Thanks for the reply John. Knowing the context in which the scene was shot clears up the confusion for me.

GiantKiller: I agree with your thoughts on sparring. When sparring I too find myself focusing soley on how I am going to attack my opponent in terms of attack angles, combinations, ring strategy and the like. I get so absorbed in those thought processes that I rarely think about the self defense aspect of sparring and end up eating kicks and coverning up more than I would like. And to be honest I feel like a fish out of water at times in the fight aspect because I am so much more comfortable attacking from a position of disadvantage. I think that is why sparring/fight class is so important. You have to get good at it becasue as John mentioned in his post regarding the Darren video clip the clip evidently picked up from the point where Darren had already been attacked, defended and then found him self in a full fledge fight scenario. Sometimes you are going to have to fight from a position of advantage or at least on equal footing and you better know how to do it.

dkst · 05-11-2006, 08:48 AM

You best be in danger if you are going to swing first or even use self-defense. The law is not on the winner's side anymore. A lawyer would eat you in court if he finds out you take Krav Maga. The only time to swing is in self-defense and then follow the number one rule, get out of there. Feel free to call the cops on your way home, but do not stay there. We do drills all the time, know where the exist is, not just because they have more friends.

There are lawyers on this form, hell isn't Darren, I wonder what he has to say on the subject.

I hate sparring, but it is by far the best way to learn how to fight offensively and deffensively. You can practice strokes along the side of the pool, if fact you can get really good at it, but until you jump in the water, you will never know if you can swim. Sparring is the closest you will get with out actually fighting.

Psyops · 05-11-2006, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by \"Giantkiller\"

About striking first, this makes me think of this incident they were talking about at the NTC. I don't know all of the details, but apparently a Krav instructor got into an altercation right in front of the NTC. There was a traffic accident and one guy whose car got hit jumped out and for some reason went toward the instructor, who was just a bystander standing on the sidewalk. Anyway, the Krav instructor apparently felt threatened and at some point threw a punch and a few knees, defeating the guy, but ending up getting arrested for aggravated assault.

So, from a legal standpoint, it is probably better to defend first, then counter. If you throw the first punch, potential witnesses might see you as the aggressor and you might get into trouble.

As for sparring, I've noticed the same thing. Sometimes we will work on a one attack, one defend exercise and I defend almost every punch. But then, during sparring, I will see a lot less of them, because now I'm not only thinking about defending but also attacking, so my brain will have to deal with two things at the same time, making it harder to effectively defend.

So, if you focus solely on defense you may end up defending more punches and even scoring more. I think that is because you are now only concentrating on one thing, seeing the punches, and as a result you will defend more of them. If you think too much about offense, you may open yourself up too much and you may lose focus on the kind of attacks your opponent is throwing.

GK,

You hit it out of the park! Thanks for the response. Since the legal issue of being the aggressor has been addressed I think we should focus even more on counter punching and becoming great defenders. Being hard to hit is just as important as being hard hitters! It seems to me that if we ar training from a self defense standpoint our drills should include significant time on defense and counters, not just pounding the piss out of people.

So are we a fighting system or are we a Self Defense system? Maybe we are both? Is this even possible? I don't know. There are some that think that Krav Maga may split into two different divisions? Fight and Self Defense. I do not believe that this will happen but it is a percepetion that is floating around.

KravmanianDevil · 05-11-2006, 01:14 PM

Quote:

So are we a fighting system or are we a Self Defense system? Maybe we are both? Is this even possible? I don't know. There are some that think that Krav Maga may split into two different divisions? Fight and Self Defense. I do not believe that this will happen but it is a percepetion that is floating around.\"

We are both. We defend then we fight. We have to be because an exit may not always be available to us. The only way to get to the exit is fight our way to it.

Anonymous · 05-11-2006, 02:30 PM

I definitely think fight and self-defense go together. Once you defend, you are now in a mini fight. It may only last a couple of seconds (as opposed to several rounds in the ring), but you may have to dodge punches, kicks, combinations during that time, possibly defending a takedown attempt (even if it is a clumsy one). You could end up on the ground... Lots of fighting situations.

I don't think it's necessary to split into two, but If we were to do so, I think it would make more sense to maybe split into a cardio and a fighting/self-defense division. That way, the cardio people could still do their thing, but the people, who are mostly coming for the self-defense/fighting aspect would have more room to do theirs.

Psyops · 05-11-2006, 03:44 PM

I agree w you GK. Cardio class should definitely be different from fight/self defense. However from a business standpoint the cardio keeps the \"gym goers\" coming in. It is a great marketing thing.

Do you think that we should spend more time on counter punching/kicking drills? I do. Especially if we are training from a self defense standpoint. Yes fighting is the real (Hoooahh) stuff we get to do. However there is a \"scientific \" component to the fight. I remeber that you mentioned something similar before GK. There is definitely a science to defense and counter. As I said before, being hard to hit is just as important as being a hard hitter.

Anonymous · 05-11-2006, 04:23 PM

I like the idea of working more on counterpunching and kicking. One of my favorite drills is where one person attacks and the other defends. You can go easy first, just throwing punches, then maybe add in kicks, later all of them together. First one at a time, then combinations. At some point, one could also add in a counter, have the defender defend the attack, then follow with a simultaneous or immediate counter, get back into fighting stance and defend the next attack.

That type of training can really help develop vision and recognition, also to see openings for counters. If we spent some good amount of time on these types of drills in fight class, I think it could be beneficial.

As for the cardio advertising, here is what I'm worrying about: Yes, you may get the gym crowd to join, but at the same time, you may be losing some of the very people, who most want to learn genuine self-defense. They may believe that KM is more of a workout and not \"real\" self-defense. As a result, they may decide to join another RBSD club and will be deprived of learning a great, effective self-defense system. So, you could end up pushing the very people away, who are by nature (or out of necessity) most interested in learning what you have to offer.

Psyops · 05-11-2006, 04:38 PM

GK,

You are right! However I think that the nature of the fight class itself will eliminate the gym types. You know what I mean? NTC has it figured out. They know that there are those who come to train and those who come to exercise. The upper level classes usually have the members who are interested in the real SD and Fight portion. There is something to be said for training people hard prior to the SD/Fight portion though. It is the best way to simulate the pace and speed of a fight. So I get that.

Anonymous · 05-11-2006, 05:09 PM

Yeah, but one problem is that the number of upper level classes has been greatly reduced over the years. For example, right now there is only one above blue and three more above green. However, there are plenty of cardio classes every day and there is only so much room...

And, in a way, why would you even go to a self-defense school solely to work out and get in shape? Shouldn't your main goal be self-defense, since teaching self-defense is the school's original purpose? I mean, I wouldn't dream of pouncing into Jenny Craig with a bunch of like-minded friends and expect them to teach me gun defenses. Where would that leave the people, who want to focus on losing weight?

Psyops · 05-12-2006, 11:08 AM

GK,

People like Krav because it is different. It is new, sexy, fresh and vibrant. This is very attractive to folks. Especially folks in L.A.! I mean come on man have you seen some of err..... \"talent\" walking around the NTC? This is a good business model! The hard core Krav Practitioners should voice those concerns to John. I am sure he will hear them and make the adjustments.

Anonymous · 05-12-2006, 02:39 PM

Sexy?? :? Hmmm....

I do see senior talent walking around, but few seem to be teaching classes these days. But anyway, maybe they are going to make some adjustments. There's still time to reinstate the Level 5 class on Wednesdays.... :D

Psyops · 05-17-2006, 03:31 PM

GK,

The \"talent\" I was talking about was the female persuasion. The hotties! From a business standpoint, the more talent you have in the place the more people will want to join!

Anonymous · 05-17-2006, 03:39 PM

I'm just not sure \"sexy\" was the thing Imi had in mind when he first developed the system... But hey, if we have to have that type of \"talent\" why limit ourselves to the ladies? Why not have Amir teach without a shirt? That'll give us the best of both worlds.... :wink:

Psyops · 05-17-2006, 03:43 PM

Whatever floats your boat!

My point is that the \"health club\" aspect is great for the business side. Traditionalists will undoubtedly not like it. However the business model is strong.

G.V. · 05-17-2006, 10:45 PM

Krav is the new taibo, in some circles.

Psyops · 05-18-2006, 12:27 PM

Tae - Bo?

Lol....

That is funny. Probably because the NTC is not a dingy little **** hole of a school with a bunch of sweaty guys rolling around on the ground in Gi's that smell like a bucket of ass!

There are actually good looking women in the place and for the most part most of the people are not \"wannabe UFC competitors\". Tae-Bo indeed!

G.V. · 05-18-2006, 01:35 PM

Tae Bo, taibo, same difference. Hey, I'm not knocking tae bo. People who take it for exercise do get a good workout. What I'm saying is that krav has reaped a reputation as something one could take to learn sd as well as get exercise. Some people take it primarily for the exercise. 's all I'm saying.

Anonymous · 05-18-2006, 02:01 PM

Who cares if the gi smells like a bucket of ass? The rapist probably won't smell much better.... :wink:

I don't care if there are good-looking women in the gym, as long as they are there to learn self-defense. If all they want to do is meet guys and the guys go there in hopes of picking up chicks and everyone wants to slim their waistline, then, at some point, they are ruining my fighting club. That would be a shame, since KM is a truly effective self-defense system and shouldn't be degraded into being just another cardio workout.

G.V. · 05-18-2006, 02:04 PM

I suppose those that take it primarily to slim their waistline get weeded out by level 2.

Anonymous · 05-18-2006, 02:17 PM

Not really. If there are enough of them, level 2 will adapt to their needs, then level 3, soon providing a good workout becomes more important than the self-defense and the more serious practitioners end up being in the minority. Hence, less and less advanced classes.

One problem with the fitness advertising is, we are only thinking about the people we are gaining, never about the people we are losing.

Psyops · 05-18-2006, 02:37 PM

Exactly,

Those who are doing this just for exercise usually fade away after level 2. The hard core group will stay. This is why most schools have more level 1 classes than higher level classes. This is a sign of growth. The business must continue to draw new students.

G.V. · 05-18-2006, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by \"Giantkiller\"

Not really. If there are enough of them, level 2 will adapt to their needs, then level 3, soon providing a good workout becomes more important than the self-defense and the more serious practitioners end up being in the minority. Hence, less and less advanced classes.

One problem with the fitness advertising is, we are only thinking about the people we are gaining, never about the people we are losing.

Is that what's happening at headquarters?

Emil · 05-18-2006, 03:29 PM

GK, here's my question to you. What do you like about NTC?

Anonymous · 05-19-2006, 05:34 PM

Okay, good question.

We may have to divide the answer into two parts: What do I like about it now and what did I used to like about it.

What do I like about it now? Well, my favorite classes right now are the two groundfighting classes and Mitch Tavera's fight classes. Good news, but what's wrong with that picture? Yes, not a single Krav Maga class made the list, yet it's the Krav Maga National Training Center.

My favorite Krav Maga class for a while now had been Jarret's LV5, which was still an old school KM class. No music, hardly even a warm up, just one hour of concentrating on different techniques, some simpler ones (gun, knife etc), then different angles, even knife and stick fighting (KM style), multiple attacker training and so on. Lots and lots of repetitions. Unfortunately, Jarret left and the class went with him. Doesn't look like it's going to be replaced and if it will be, in what form I do not know.

Anyway, that's one of the problems, it's getting increasingly harder for advanced level students to train. I know everyone hates me for saying this, but all I'm really guilty of is loving the system and wanting to get good at it. I can't afford private classes or even the instructor's course. But, in my opinion, it should be possible for a regular student to become skilled at KM without the help of special classes.

We don't even have those special gun or knife seminars anymore that we used to have at least once a month.

Which brings me to the second part of the question, what did I USED to like about the NTC:

KM,KM,KM. Lots of it. All techniques being broken down, so that you could learn how to do them correctly. Learning something new or improving an existing skill virtually everytime you came in, no matter what class you took. Very distinct differences between the different levels. Big rooms to train in. Four times as many advanced classes. And then the fighting classes in addition to that. The most advanced teachers teaching classes together. Being able to constantly improve. Focus on the self-defense first and \"getting a good workout\" being only secondary to that.

I still have an eight-year-old schedule and comparing it to the current one, there is no doubt according to which I would rather train.

I do believe that this whole fitness advertising is mostly to blame for the current situation. I know it was well-intended, thinking it would get cardio people to join and then convert them into hardcore KM practitioners. Unfortunately, I think the opposite has been the case: We've brought them in, then adapted to their needs, effectively and gradually changing KM from a self-defense oriented system to a more workout-oriented system. As a result, we attract less people, who truly want to learn self-defense and fighting and more people, who want to stay in shape. Which has led to less and less people taking belt tests and less overall advanced students, which lead to the cancellation of advanced level classes and a greater focus on cardio during the ones that are still being taught, which then lead to advanced students leaving or prospective SD students deciding not to join under the wrong assumption KM is really a cardio system. And so the cycle starts over.

Isn't it strange that there were so many more advanced classes eight years ago, less than a year after the NTC opened? When all of the advanced students were people who had started training at the much smaller University gym? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't we have now, after nine years of operating such a large center, have several dozen, if not hundreds of advanced students? Shouldn't the number of advanced level classes, as well as people participating in belt tests, increase, not decrease?

Anonymous · 05-19-2006, 05:36 PM

CONT'D:

I think there was this fear that focusing too much on self-defense alone would not attract enough students. However, the SD-oriented training did attract many students, so many that the program was expanded from being held at a small day school, to being held at the larger University gym and then at the NTC. I think it's possible to grow while focusing on self-defense. There are plenty of people, who want to learn it, especially after 9/11.

Overall, I still think it's worth coming. Because of the aforementioned fighting classes and we do still work on KM of course, just not as intensely as before. I love the system and there is no other school that teaches it, so I'll make do with whatever amount is being taught there and try to practice on my own in addition to that (with my imaginary opponent). It's just not quite what it used to be. But maybe some day they'll reverse the trend.

Disclaimer: Sorry, but he asked! :wink:

johnwhitman · 05-19-2006, 06:12 PM

Disclaimer not accepted.

The fact is that most people don't stay in any system long enough to advance that far. We actually have greater retention than most schools/systems.

The simple fact is that in a given hour we can reserve a room for four level 5 people or thirty level 2 people. At a certain point, given enough pressure, we have to accommodate the majority.

A few will be made unhappy. An even smaller number will continue to gripe no matter what we do.

BTW, I am looking forward to seeing you in the advanced fighting class I'll be teaching!

Anonymous · 05-20-2006, 01:59 AM

To do what? :( Take my head off? :shock:

Note to self: Don't spar with John, no matter how nice he's offering..... :wink:

Thing is, it's not even so much about griping, but rather analyzing the facts. 1/3 of the classes above green, 1/4 of the classes above blue. I still got the schedule to prove it. Far less people taking belt tests. What happened? I'm surprised you don't seem to want to ask yourself that question. How is it possible that the small university seems to have produced more blue belts than the much larger NTC? Something must have occurred here. The question is, what is it? If not the cardio advertising then what? Isn't it worth to at least think about?

You state that you must accommodate the majority, but would you be willing to accommodate them in such a way as to alter the way the system is being taught? Then there is the issue of KMAA schools being the only schools allowed to teach KM in the US. With that, in my opinion, comes the responsibility of assuring that those people, who truly want to learn this system, have ample opportunity of doing so.

Anyway, I don't have the power to change anything here, all I can do is trying to shock somebody into action.

Good to hear that you'll be teaching an advanced level fight class. And, yes, that spot on Wednesdays is still open. There'd be plenty of people. And you could use me to demonstrate. Throws, stomps, stabs, chokes, how to defend against being strangled with barbed wire... Imagine all of the fun we could be having!! :D

johnwhitman · 05-20-2006, 09:31 AM

Once again you've managed to steer an entire thread toward your personal concerns.

You like to debate rationally, so I will give you this rational opportunity:

Marcus is manager of the Center now. Marcus is totally motivated by member concerns, even to the extent of adding a couple of 6am and 7am classes once enough members asked.

Get enough high level students who will consistently show, and have them make requests to Marcus, and he'll arrange a class.

Until then, quit griping about it on this forum.

Anonymous · 05-21-2006, 02:14 AM

But it's NOT just about my personal concerns. This issue concerns every KM student, who is seriously interested in learning this system. Just today I was talking to two guys, who told me that they were thinking about leaving and changing to a MMA school. They want to learn fighting and self-defense. One of them served in the Army. When I told them about the many weapons defenses KM has to offer I could see their eyes light up. But with less and less emphasis on them, they may decide to leave, thus being deprived of an opportunity to learn a system they would certainly excel in. And there are many others. I only wish they'd be more vocal.

Of course, there will always be more beginning than advanced students in any given system. It's just that ordinarily it will be the students least interested in that system who'll be leaving, not the other way around.

And it's not just about this one class either. I've already talked to Marcus, who said I should contact Michael, which I did, a few weeks have passed, who knows. Can try again. However, regardless of what happens with that one class there is a greater, underlying problem here that should be addressed.

You are right, I am very much interested in rational debate. However, having a rational debate isn't exactly easy when few of my rational concerns are being addressed and instead all I'm left with is a surly \"quit griping\".

Leaves you with the impression that none of the people in charge seem to care. That would be unfortunate.

On to happier topics then....

SunnySD · 05-21-2006, 11:53 AM

I almost feel like I'm hijacking this thread by getting back to the topic! :)

I like the focus on countering, and agree that it jibes with KMs defensive philosophy. It also emphasizes a point, that \"your strongest moment is your weakest moment.\" Example, someone winding up and throwing a \"haymaker\" can do a lot of damage if it lands, but is wide open to a defense.

I'm not familiar with NTCs advertising, but I think it's appropriate to promote the fitness aspect of KM. I would think that a fit person has a higher self esteem and is less likely to be victimized, so just being fit should itself be part of a defensive system.

Also, it's hard to run away effectively if you have a resting pulse of 90!

Welcome to the Official Israeli Self Defense System Krav Maga Worldwide Forums.

Welcome to the Official Israeli Self Defense System
Krav Maga Worldwide Forums.