- This topic has 87 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ryan,
Sorry, but I really do not understand your question. We use full grip in several cases, but when threat comes from side – behind arm – or from the back, when disarm we use the \”thumbless\” as you call. Altough it is not thumbless, the tumb helps gives great support, plus helps to keep the gun in the right direction, while full grip is not controlled to much. Anyway, beleive me I try to answer, but talking about a technique is not the same as showing it. Ask John to send you Eyal’s mail, it is very much detailed, probably it will answer you question.
I have Eyal’s mail–he wasn’t very discreet with it.
The point is, if you say the \”thumbless\” grip is used because it is best for small guns, I don’t see how you justify only using it in certain situations. If it’s a \”problem\” using the thumb for gun to the back, I don’t see why it’s not a problem for the other threats.
I did feel a little bit stronger using the thumbless grip when doing the disarm. However, if the barrel was shorter and I had to hold on to the top portion of the gun, I don’t think I could hold it with a thumbless grip, but maybe that’s because I have small hands. With the thumb on the other side it feels more secure.
I tried the two grips again, this time hitting the muzzle against a heavy bag, to see whether or not I would lose the gun using that thumbless grip. I found that as long as I had all four fingers plus thumb around the barrel (in a thumbless grip), my grip was pretty strong and, even as I hit the bag, I didn’t feel as though I would drop the gun. However, as I was grabbing the gun further up (assuming the barrel was shorter) and thus had only two or three fingers around the barrel and the rest kind of on top of the gun, I could hardly hold on to it as I was striking the bag.
So, I really don’t understand why this technique is supposed to be especially effective for smaller guns. I found the opposite to be true – A smaller gun is easier to hold with a thumbed grip than a thumbless one.
It is the actual disarming process that is more difficult with a shorter barrel. If you have to wrap your fingers around the barrel of a snub nosed revolver that is pretty hard since there basically is no barrel…
Then you have to grab the top portion of the gun since you have to grab around the hand area and you can’t wrap fingers around the whole hand.
I don’t think I have ever seen so much debate over such a minor detail in a technique 🙄I do feel that the disarm itself feels a bit stronger with the thumbless grip, I just feel it is hard to hold on to the gun without the thumb on the other side giving support, especially if you are only grabbing the top portion of the gun.
Yep, a lot of debate, but why not? 8)
Okay, here’s another question for you or kmman:
The KMAA has recently changed the positioning of the gun during the gun from the front exercise. Instead of pinning the gun against the attacker’s hip, the gun is now pushed more across the body, or against his abdomen. Has the IKMF made a similar change or do they still do it the old way? What do you guys think about it?
GK
– There hasn’t been a change that I am aware of. The way it should be taught is that the gun is positioned in front of the defender’s back hip to put as much of the defender’s body out of the line of fire as possible. We use reference points on the attacker’s body so beginners have an easy guide to go by. In the end it doesn’t even have to touch the attacker’s body as long as there is weight on the gun for control.Ville
– I agree completely. This is much ado about nothing. Krav allows for variations in the technique based on personal prefrences, body types, etc. as long as they don’t violate any principles. This grip change is minor. I like it with the thumb because I feel I get more leverage, on small guns this does present a problem; just use the other grip.
Are you ever coming back out to LA? It was fun trainging with you.As I remember, we used to aim to pin the gun against the attacker’s right hip (top portion of his right leg, if he is holding the gun in the right hand). Look at our gun videos. That’s where the gun is always placed. Of course, in the heat of battle, it might end up somewhere else, but we always tried to place it by the hip. Reason given was that it would be harder for the assailant to point the gun back at you if he tried to spin while it was placed in that position. Now we are basically saying you should aim to place the gun on the attacker’s abdomen or all the way across his body, because that way the line of fire will be further away from you. To place the gun by the hip, as we used to, is now considered \”wrong\”. Although certain teachers still seem to prefer the old position.
So, which way do you have more control? Of course, lots of things can happen in the heat of battle, but what position should you aim for? The hip or the abdomen/chest area? Or doesn’t it matter? And what is the IKMF’s official position on that technique? Just interested. I think it’s a good thing to be able to discuss the different techniques with the various organisations.
Correct me if I’m wrong but it wasn’t that attacker’s hip we were concerned about but our own. The gun is to be pinned (with weight, no matter what) across from your own hip.
GK –
I haven’t seen the videos in a long time but I am willing to bet that the gun is in front of the defender’s back hip each time.
The way I was taught gun (from John, Darren, Wade, Michael, Sam, etc.) was that what was important was that it was to be in front of the defender’s back hip to keep as much of your body away from the muzzle as possible. Where that is on the attacker’s body now depends on how you moved when you burst in. If you burst wide, then it goes to the attacker’s hip. If you burst straight in, then it goes to their adbomen or their opposite hip.
Come by and ask me at the center, it takes 30sec to show what I mean.Giant,
I am familiar with the change in the technique. (Threat from the front.) We do not punch\” the gun across or on the body as experimented it is many times imp\”ossible when attacker way stronger, or even just holding the gun very strong. It is not my duty to have any crituqe on the USA modification. I have tried, did not find usefull.
One remarks about slipping the hand when gun threat come from back. So called \”thumbless or IKMF\” disarm is actually gives more support from thumb, and makes the disarm easier to make, but most important, most secure. If you do this way you are can not make any mistake but pointing the any direction you do not want. And that is it. Again, if somebody has any question about it, get Eyals mail, or experiment…
About the sliding grip. The whole technique is so fast, strong and huge impact on the attacker, I just doubt in the meantime you can maintain any sliding move – I mean secure – on the attackers arm. Any sliding could cause rather the losing the arm than having better grip. When wrist is in hold for shorter people harder to reach the attacker by elbow. Some could say if wrist is not controlled, attacker can still move the barrel casing some injury. First of all the main thing is – after the turning part, where seems we do agree – give an enormous elbow attack, and lets face it after that the attacker either moving back or down ad back, so the main concern is rather grab the gun before he is going to the floor or as he goes down, not loosing the arm with the gun. Also another difference, while I saw in the US instructors giving circular elbow, we rather moving the elbow more deeper with the body help with almost not circular. Why? Because the whole burst in could cause a bit moving back of the attacker, as you give the elbow circular the natural relfex of the attacker many times moving the head back, causing you can miss the suprise attack chance easily. And from here your position is getting worst, unless you can manage a fast knee or reverse elbow, hammer.
\”give an enormous elbow attack, and lets face it after that the attacker either moving back or down ad back,\”
No lets not face it. There are no guarantees that your opponent will be affected at all by your elbow. Maybe you miss, maybe he has another hand in front, maybe you do not hit well, maybe you hit and he is one tough SOB.
If you assume that is the case and build technique on that assumption you are doing a disservice to yourself and your students.Ville,
You are right, I tried to give scennarios… I gave both option. Good elbow strike, opponent down or falling back, or missing the target, cause more fight meaning almost anything, I have mentioned reverse elbow, hammer fist or knee to the groin. Worst case is you missed the whole hand…
So I agree…
Hi Brent!
I know what you are saying about the gun being in front of the defenders back hip and I don’t believe that part of the technique has changed.
However, as I have said, we used to push the gun toward (not necessarily against, but at least close to) the attacker’s right hip. Now it’s against the abdomen or all the way across his chest. There is definitely a difference in the way it’s being taught.
A student several years ago, who would pin the gun against the abdomen in training would have been told not to do that, but to push the gun lower, against the attacker’s right hip. Now, if the same student pinned the gun against the hip he’d be told to push it against the abdomen or all the way across instead. So it’s somewhat of a reversal. I know other students have noticed it.
I’m not saying one way is better than the other, I’ve just noticed the change and so, while we were on the subject of changes in gun defense technique, I was wondering what our good friends (? 😉 ) at the IKMF thought about it.
One thing I’ve noticed about the \”new\” way is that it might be a bit harder to put your weight down on the gun, especially if the attacker is taller, since his abdomen/chest is higher than his lower hip, so you would have to push the gun forward more than down. But I guess one would have to try it a bit more to see what works best.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
