supplimenting Krav with groundwork training in MMA or BJJ

[NC southpaw]

Recently alot of our class expressed interest in supplimenting our Krav cirriculum with grappling or BJJ or a system more geared towards fighting on the ground. Being fairly new to this and recently developing an interest in UFC I was most impressed with how Royce Gracie (in his prime) disposed of opponents often wieghing 50-80 lbs more than him whether he was on top or bottom.
Just throwing this out for discussion. Would supplimenting your training in krav which is mostly striking and countering and trying to stay off the ground with a system that gives you competancy if a fight should wind up on the ground give you the best of both worlds or would the contradictory philosphies screw up one of the parts of Krav that I think makes it so beautiful- that most movements are instinctual and therefore fostering muscle memory becomes more natural. My gut tells me that the two systems would increase ones ability to deal with situations but curious if anyone felt that its best to stick with one or the other.

[whatever]

NC,

First of all, ground fighting is intergated part of KM.

[armitage]

I'd be interested to hear peoples opinions on this, as I can no longer regularly train in KM due to my current location...I did attend an MMA class last night and it was very good - although I had to refrain from some of my now \"natural\" instincts to go for the groin strikes etc, it was still a great workout and I learnt some new techniques. Hopefully it won't be detrimental to my KM as I previously learnt KM for 2 years, so the techniques from that shouldn't go away.

[NC southpaw]

I am aware that Krav has ground work...we have done all the mounts, bucking , etc...but the basic philosophy is stay off the ground where grapplers actually want to be there so they can end the fight on the ground by submission... I think you will agree that Krav wants you to avoid the ground if you can and get your ass up if you are there......and is more striking based.....so my question wasnt I need to do ground work since Krav doesnt have any....just whether a system that stresses ground fighting more would be , in the opinion of those that trained in both, a compliment to the Krav cirruculum or a confusing amalgam of conflicting systems. Seems like it would give some additional advantages. I think Krav is a beautiful all encompassing system that covers just about all the bases and would never want to diminish its effectiveness

[G.V.]

Lefty, diverse training is always a good thing. Go for it.

[johnwhitman]

I'm all for it.
I'm biased toward KM, of course, and I believe that KM provides the tools you need for a typtical ground situation...HOWEVER, if you already know the basics, why not learn more? It's no different than getting more boxing or Muay Thai training. I'd use very little of the head fakes, feints, footwork, etc. that I learn in higher level standup fighting, but I like learning it anyway!

The only downside to this training, by the way, is confusion -- the more you learn, the more options you create in your head, and the slower you may react in a real situation. KM's philosophy is to avoid this by simplifying. This is why, for beginners and people who devote minimal time to training, I believe they should focus on one set of movements.

However, for someone who is training enough that they feel the need to supplement, go for it!!

[KravMDjeff]

John, do you really think that more options means more confusion for someone? I can see in the immediate beginning stages, but i've never experienced more options make things harder...it's always made things easier on me during sparring or grappling situations.

[Anonymous]

Hey, I seem to be agreeing with John here! :D

I've taken plenty of ground fighting classes at the NTC (those are pure BJJ classes, albeit without the gi). I do not find it confusing, on the contrary, it has really helped me improve my overall fighting skills. You are not punching, so you can go pretty hard otherwise. I go with huge guys sometimes and it gives me an idea of how unpleasant it really is to be squished by a 250 pound angry monster (Yes, it's even WORSE than it sounds!). It also makes me realize how hard if not impossible it would be for me to try to get a guy like that into an armlock, so lesson learned and in a real fight I would never even try.

It's also a good chance to work on your defensive ground skills, such as escaping from the mount, sweeping a guy in the guard etc, things that will help you get back up in a real situation. We don't usually do the KM ground exercises against a resisting opponent, so BJJ will give you a better idea of when you will be able to do which defense/sweep in order to get the monster off you.

KravMDjeff,

I think confusion only sets in when you have maybe four options for the exact same situation. So four ways to defend gun from the front, right in the middle of the chest. Now, you would have to decide which one to do and you may end up not being able to react at all.

In BJJ, you actually learn which attack/defense may be appropriate to do in which situation, depending on the weight distribution/position of your opponent's body. You may try an armlock, he defends, instead of continuing to try, you go for something else. So your counter depends on where the opening is, which may constantly be changing, so you are in effect adapting to a changing situation, not reacting in different ways to the same one.

[johnwhitman]

Research Hicks Law.
In essence, with each choice added, reaction time increases (this is a bad thing). Most significantly, the biggest increase in lag time is between one choice and two choices.

Jeff, the dilemma does not happen when you choose among tactics when deciding to act...performance decreases when you must REact.

This is apparent even at a high level in mma fights, boxing, etc. Under stress, fighters revert to the things they know best. Those guys spend an enormous amount of time training, and still they fall back on a few basic things.

None of this means the lag time cannot be overcome with training. It just means that for KM, a system that advocates a short learning curve and ability to function under stress, we focus on fewer techniques that cover more circumstances.

[Anonymous]

My main reason for taking ground fighting lessons to prepare for an actual self-defense situation would be all of the defensive moves, such as escapes and reversals. Most of them are similar to what we do in KM, however in this case, more options may not be a bad thing, especially if the opponent resists and one escape just isn't working.

Even offenisve moves can be simplified if you think of them as a few basic moves done from different positions, rather than dozens of individual ones. Simply speaking, you'll try to turn the opponent's limbs the way they don't naturally bend. There is a certain way to do this (armlock, shoulder lock) and the principles will basically be the same, whether done from the guard or mount or any other position. Same for chokes. Triangle choke for example. Hook one arm (or leg) around his head, trap his opposite arm, push it against his neck, then close the choke with your other arm (or leg). Same principle from different positions. This type of thinking can really help to simplify BJJ I have found.

[greenbeanie]

Interesting essay on \"Hicks Law.\"

http://www.hockscqc.com/articles/hickslaw.htm

[G.V.]

Originally Posted by \"greenbeanie\"

Interesting essay on \"Hicks Law.\"

http://www.hockscqc.com/articles/hickslaw.htm

Nice. Thanks. It would seem that hick's law makes less of an impact as one's training and experience grows.

[johnwhitman]

I've read the article.

While I'm not sure I agree with everything in it, in the end I believe the article supports our approach. Again, our entire assumption is that the average person (and this is especially true for military and LE personnel) does not have enough time to devote to training. Therefore, by limiting techniques, we avoid confusion and hesitation.

[KravMDjeff]

John, thanks for the clarification. I had heard numerous people reference Hick's Law...I just didn't see how I experienced it in my own training.

But it makes more sense when applied directly to REaction, as opposed to initiating action, which is what I think I was drawing my thoughts from.

[Ryan]

\"Recently alot of our class expressed interest in supplimenting our Krav cirriculum with grappling or BJJ or a system more geared towards fighting on the ground. Being fairly new to this and recently developing an interest in UFC I was most impressed with how Royce Gracie (in his prime) disposed of opponents often wieghing 50-80 lbs more than him whether he was on top or bottom.\"

Well, it's been quite some time since I posted here, but since ncsouthpaw apparently attends my school...

If by \"supplementing\" you mean going to the MMA class, go for it. We have what I consider to be the best there is teaching that class. However, remember what the goals of your training are. Are you looking to fight on the ground/mats, or are you looking to be able to control variables on the ground, in a self defense situation, in order to get back to your feet and escape? Also, how much training time do you have, and are you able to separate the two, if you actually have two goals?

Regarding Royce's early UFC days, while impressive on the surface, what you actually had was a guy who had been training in a certain way his entire life, in a sport designed to benefit his style, fighting guys with little or no experience in his style of fighting. All of that said, you still had consent, rules, preparation, controlled environment, etc. All of these things do not exist in a self defense/protection. If you have more questions, please stop me at the school, or e-mail me, and I'll be happy to elaborate, since I don't come here much anymore.

[Lazlo]

If you want study ground fighting(BJJ, submission fighting, what have you) then that is super. We emphasize that portion of Krav...for the purpose of dispatching our attacher *getting up* and getting reading to fight his/her buddy.
This is a guiding principle of Krav. I think people forget that \"the ground\" is not the dojo floor but the sidewalk that you step on your way to the dojo--CEMENT, concrete, and glass about. It isn't a fun place if you've ever been there for real(ok, I fell of my bike).

[Anonymous]

Interesting article. Not sure it really supports our approach, it seems to conclude that Hick's Law isn't very reliable.

The example he gave about the typewriter didn't make sense to me. When I'm typing, I'm not really choosing between 26 different keys, I hit the one that correctly enables me to spell the word I have to chosen to use in order to convey my thoughts.

For fighting/self-defense purposes, I think there is definitely a big difference between offense and defense. In the case of a boxer, he sees different openings, can study his opponent in advance, take advantage of mistakes he makes etc. He can prepare and react to his opponent movements. This is not the same as walking down the street and suddenly having someone stick a gun into your face.

The article doesn't talk about the fear factor, which might make you freeze up once you see the threat (such as the gun). You may have a hard enough time remembering one defense under such circumstances, let alone two or three or eight. Then there will be other thoughts running through your mind such as: \"Will I really be able to pull off this technique? Will my punch hurt him?\". If there are several choices, you might try to remember which defense you usually do best in training. But each one may have drawbacks and so you can't decide. You may end up not reacting at all, or very hesitantly and get shot as a result. One should consider that, in such a situation, every mistake you make could cost you your life, which is different than just sitting in a laboratory and have someone test your reaction time.

He also talks about differences between high punches and low punches and how the defense for the high punch did not address how to defend against the lower one. Well, technically, the low punch may be a different threat and so might require a slightly different response. Of course it would be virtually impossible to have the exact same defense for every imaginable threat. Even in KM, there are differences in technique, depending on the type of threat posed (for example gun from the front, back, side). So, already one might have to recognize the type of threat posed and remember the appropriate response. If, in addition, one then has three or four more possible responses to that threat, instead of just one, I do believe it would lead to even more confusion and possible failure in the exercise.

[NC southpaw]

Ryan.....once again more pearls of wisdom although my all time favorite will always be \"even Monkeys fall out of trees\" and some of the Gastoniaisms......
We were of course thinking about doing the MMA class at RHEK....and should push come to shove in a real life situation I would be looking to stay off the ground and if I should be there get off as soon as possible....
Really just curious if the systems compliment each other.....or would be confusing...
As luck would have it our last class at the JCC was outside....and Leanne, having learned a few drills that simulate reality and introduce reaction under stress had one student hide for a while while she instructed all the other students what she wished them to do ....the student hiding would then walk and be unaware of whether he would be attacked by everyone, no one or how he would be attacked.....in one attack one of the students jumped the student from behind the bushes...this particular student knew TKD as well as KM.....they were on the ground so long the pay per view people were calling hoping to televise it...seemed like a good 5 minutes before the student got up with a shirt that looked like it was the before picture in a Tide commercial.....and this student was trained to get his ass up.....dont get me wrong...he was holding his own in the fight....there were leaves and pine needles and bushes flying all around and they wound up in a drainage ditch....but it was eye opening in that it seemed like a fight might last a while on the ground despite your desire to regain your feet...
I will always be partial to Krav Maga....but for example was curious about taking a boxing class even though the stances are different.....for me the ground work was probably my weakest part of Krav as its alot of ab work and I will never be gracing the cover of Mens Health anytime soon...the discussion was kind of what I was hoping for..very lively discussion...just like some of the TKD students in Krav get confused blocking punches coz its different there is some potential for overload....but under the right circumstances it would be a nice additon to an arsenal .....

[NC southpaw]

Point well taken about not wanting to be spending time on concrete or asphalt.....one clunk of your head and your training goes out the window along with your consciousness

[Anonymous]

That JCC drill sounds like something I was suggesting some time ago to do in the garage, the \"KM hide and seek\". Good drill, although ground fighting would suck in the garage, but then again, that's reality.... :wink:

[NC southpaw]

Point well taken about not wanting to be spending time on concrete or asphalt.....one clunk of your head and your training goes out the window along with your consciousness

[CLFMak]

I've heard jujitsu guys talk about using the ground in the real world as a weapon when you don't have one- its a big immovable hard object that sometimes has edges and corners and won't break like your hand. An aikido guy said to me that the philosophy is to hit the guy with the biggest weapon you can find- the earth. I think it can be better utilized while not groundfighting, and it seems like an attempt to prove an art is best in all situations- a sort of roud hole/square peg thing.

[G.V.]

I like the idea of using the ground and/or walls of a building as an abrupt resting point of my opponent's head. Do we learn the body mechanics of this in krav?

[Anonymous]

Not sure that we do, although this would certainly be an effective thing to do. If you are strong enough, you could even pick up your opponent and slam him head first into the ground (as in the machine gun takedown). That oughta shut him up for a while... 8)

[G.V.]

Depends how heavy my opponent is.

What I'm thinking of though is tripping or going for some type of takedown while specifically applying leverage on the head with the intent of smacking it into something hard and unforgiving.

[dkst]

We have been practicing take downs in my class. When done right your oppenent is going to be slammed on the ground. Now if he doesn't know how to fall I would say 90% of the time his head is going to hit the ground hard. The hardest part of the take downs is not hitting your head on the ground if you ask me. Most of the take downs put us in the side postion, but one does put us right on top. I don't like this one, I would rather be in the side position, it seems easier to get up from.

[G.V.]

Maybe not as high as 90%, but yes, good point.

I'm way looking forward to training in takedowns. So far, we're only at bucking & rolling and using the can-opener trick to get out of someone's guard, along with some basic arm trapping.

[dkst]

90% is probably too much, just making a point. I wonder why you haven't been doing any take downs, if I remember correctly you started about the sametime as I did. How ever, we have two fight classes, the one on Saturday's is all about ground work and getting up. I've lucked out we have a bunch of level 4 and 5's but not enough for seperate classes. I'm level 3 but train with 4 and 5's so I'm sure I'm learning stuff that might not be shown if it was just level 3.

We have been doing a lot of things that aren't standard, my teacher wants us to know how to handle some stuff incase we run into it on the street. He shows ground work, but says there is an out to every move and that is what we work on. Ask your teacher to show you how to get out of the gilliteen (spelling?) Want to talk about landing on your head.

[G.V.]

I'm in level 2, still. Last time we did ground stuff, Bert did show us how to get out of a guillotine as well as out of a kimora. But you know, seeing it done and doing it once or twice...it's not nearly enough.

[dkst]

That **** is fun, I missed the kimora escape Monday, I'm hoping we go over that tonight. We do 45 minutes of level 3, 4 and 5 and for the past month he keeps us after class and works on knife fighting, talk about a blast. We had some one held up by a gun so we have stayed away from gun defense until they are mentally sound enough to face a gun in there face again. It has been a blessing, lots of ground, knife and two on one drills, back to the street stuff.

We had that complaint, don't see enough of one thing long enough to learn it. We were told to work on it outside of class or come early/late and work on it. That is why it takes longer to test as the levels go up, more stuff to learn.

[G.V.]

Your school sounds like a blast, dk. :)

[Anonymous]

We don't usually work on takedowns in regular KM class. Once in a while we'll do throws, but simple takedowns are usually only done in that one MMA class.

[Precarious]

NC Southpaw,

I was going to refrain from posting but I guess a few things need to be clarified.

When you say the person on the ground in your drill was trained to get up from the ground, what excatly do you mean. I'm pretty sure that group has had minmal ground work experience. Seeing something a couple of times, to me, does not mean your trained, it mean your training.

When you say this took five minutes, let's get a little closer to reality, I'm quite sure it didn't last that long before the defender got himself up and created distance from his attacker. It looked like forever because it's the first time you've seen someone have to work to get out of something.

At any time did you see the defender strike the attacker? we allow our \"attakers\" to go all out but then completely forget that we don't let our defenders punch, kick, headbutt, bite, etc. These are simulations, and only that. yes, they add stress, prepare us to fight hard and persevere no matter what but we don't usually allow students to annihilate their attackers. It is very easy to \"screw your partners\" in training. Sometimes it's a great lesson and other times it just means you're not a good training partner.

As for training MMA, you've got to understand the difference between self defense and sport if you decide to take that road. There is alot to be gained from becoming more comfortable on the ground.....just don't get so comfortable that you forget about you attackers buddy waiting to to put a boot to your head while you're playing around with armbars and leglocks.

[NC southpaw]

OK....let me elaborate....I am aware the person being attacked cant unload or strike as can the attacker. So its an obvious disadvantage which usually helps in training. I didnt time the encounter so maybe five minutes was a way of saying it was damn long....maybe three , maybe four..who knows...the point was the person being attacked was trying (and they are pretty proficient ) at getting up and while doing so had to live for a while in the world of a ground fighter- so it seemed that being more comfortable in that world would be a good thing. The person getting attacked not only was trained in Krav, but in Tae Kwan Do, another system that tends to work from standing position and strike as opposed to grappling. We do quite a bit of work in Krav getting our asses up from the ground. We train that alot, so it wasnt just a question of seeing something a few times. The class has been going since september so while we arent novices, we arent black belts either.
I realize it doesnt to anyone any good to arm bar an opponent on the ground and try to get him to tap when his two friends are coming to use their timberlands to turn your head into a pinata. Everything is context driven. So we are in agreement there. But my point is that it might help to know an armbar or getting out of one or some of the BJJ types of moves if a fight winds up on the ground and you find yourself having to fight there until you can create space. If you get armbarred or leg locked your krav training will not be as effective if you are fighting only with one hand while nursing a fracture on the other. Im not saying that there is anything lacking in Krav- it seems like a complete system, just that knowing some grappling as well would compliment the training.
I was posing this really as a question when I started the post....if anyone is trained in both....did they find that it added to their effectiveness...did it cloud muscle memory etc...again a number of students in our class expressed interest in ground fighting...its not because we are turned off to Krav...rather the opposite..the class to a person thinks of our decision to take Krav as a life altering event.......we want to be in a position to live in a grapplers world and turn the tables and not have the fight be on thier terms but on ours.... I dont know if that makes sense to you....I think basically we are in agreement.....I want it to compliment my Krav work not replace it....

[Kadima]

the armbar is in the original KM curriculum

[ViCious]

Personally... i'm surprized there isn't \"shrimping\" in KM.

For those who don't know shrimping is means of movement on the horizontal plane. It COMPLETELY suppliments \"bucking.\"

It gets you out of being held down via side control, knee on belly... and is an awesome mount escape.

I think bucking should be your primary defense against a mounted attack, but if the person on top sticks their leg out... your NOT going to buck them over, but you could easily shrimp.

Bucking and shrimping are the two most basic movements (in grappling) that you use from white to black belt.

it's also not that hard to learn.

just my opinion.

btw, jujigatme (sp?) is still in KM.... just at like blue belt.

[Kadima]

If you know its history you know that KM also has strong roots in Judo as can be seen in the self defense techs.

[Anonymous]

Bucking is hard to do against a much bigger opponent. Shrimping will work better. I think we do work on it sometimes, but we usually do the moves without resistance in the regular class.

[Emil]

there's shrimping(knee to elbow escape) as well as a number of submissions(triangle, americana, ankle lock) and ground escapes. many things are not part of the regular cirriculum. most krav techniques usually fit in to the whole picture, for example bucking not only fits in with someone punching from top, but also for gun attack while someone is in the mount. kind of like some knife defenses build on inside defenses.how often is one attacked with submissions in a self defense scenario? even if one gets taken down by a grappler, i think they will sit on top and throw punches, not try to do a submission. one of the systems primary emphasis is simplicity and ease of learning as well as building on itself. one can train more groundwork, more boxing footwork, but to do that, isn't better to go to a grappling place or a boxing place, which is what many folks do when they want to expand on a particular skill set.krav is a foundation and a coherent system with moves that relate to each other, vs many different options for a single threat. a system that tries to be all things to all people ends up like those tmas with thousands of moves. but then it's not krav, it's hwarang do or something.

[Lazlo]

I thinking bucking is effective regardless of size. Bucking is to be done over and over and when the mounted attacker, yeah sounds weird, goes for a punch or an elbow they will get off balance unless his sole goal is to stay in place rather than throw some commitment behind a technique. If you do get punched in the nose a few times, then your motivation to buck may diminish, and you'll end up like a covering up and dead. Buck, roll, ground, pound. Well, that's the theory, and it sure works in class.