Don't fight the Systema

[Wraithy]

Normally I practice Taekwondo, however a friend of mine recently showed me Systema, and after just one lesson I found it amazingly different and infinitely more applicable.

After coming from Taekwondo's fast sparring and strong forms where maintaining distance is paramount, I found Systema's slow training and emphasis on closing in completely alien.

As I mentioned, Systema seemed far more applicable for me, unlike Taekwondo which begun by teaching you how to strike and block separately, it started by showing you how not to get hit, and to turn that same motion into a strike. It also emphasised the reality that on the street you would likely be attacked by multiple opponents rather than the mano a mano combat in Taekwondo.

So far I feel I will continue Taekwondo (Systema doesn't seem brilliant as a form of exercise), however for real world use alone I will definately learn more Systema.

Does anyone else have experience with Systema?
Or if you just want to talk about the differences between martial arts you've practised, please post here.

[Don Julio Anejo]

The big difference between martial arts as we know them (e.g. Karate, Judo, Taekwando, Muay Thai, etc) is that they're exactly that - art. They look flashy, they're good for exercise and for building confidence and if you're good you can easily beat an inexperienced opponent, but that's where they end.

And that's where all the different special forces hand to hand techniques begin. The whole point is to take out (kill/maim/restrain/knock out, depending on what you're trying to do) your opponent as fast as possible. A nice roundhouse kick to the head is probably a waste of your energy and takes too long to set up if you can get the same effect by hitting your opponents neck... etc.

For a movie example, compare Jason Bourne and Neo fighting styles. Chances are that Neo (if he was a regular person) would be completely screwed if someone grabbed his hands and started twisting them.

PS: systema was developed by the KGB when they found they don't want to use existing martial arts for precisely the reasons I described.

[TSGames]

PS: systema was developed by the KGB when they found they don't want to use existing martial arts for precisely the reasons I described.

Did not know that; that's pretty badass. The way it was described, Systema sounds quite similar to Krav Maga. If it is the case that they are similar, then I would definitely recommend it. Most American karate schools are nothing but black belt factories; it can be quite difficult to find a good school to teach practical use of Karate. In my experience, however, modern street fighting styles of military origin tend to be highly regulated in who can teach, what is taught, and even how it is taught, all more so than traditional karate. These tend to build excellent reflexes and endurance, while being extremely practical, if perhaps a bit deadly, for civilian use.

You may be right that they don't usually provide nearly as good of a workout as most karate schools will, but that's nothing that a gym membership can't fix. I highly recommend almost any modern originally militant style of street fighting; I don't know if any hand to hand combat exists that is more practical.

[Liffguard]

I'll be honest, I've been very unimpressed with systema, or at least what I've seen of it so far. I got the impression of a bunch of overweight middle-aged men engaging in compliant drills with little in the way of sparring or live training. Feel free to prove me wrong, but that's my experience with it so far.



And that's where all the different special forces hand to hand techniques begin. The whole point is to take out (kill/maim/restrain/knock out, depending on what you're trying to do) your opponent as fast as possible. A nice roundhouse kick to the head is probably a waste of your energy and takes too long to set up if you can get the same effect by hitting your opponents neck... etc.

I've got to respond to this as well. Military hand-to-hand training is typically quite poor. They use guns for a reason, and their focus is understandably on training to use those guns. Here's what happens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsTVdxCv97k) when a trained, athletic martial artist goes up against special forces hand-to-hand. Also, though I can't find the video right now, check out the episode of "Pros vs. Joes" where Randy Couture beats down and army combatives instructor.

Oh, and LOL on Muay Thai being an "art." That stuff is brutal and will beat most people down.

[Irenaeus]

What is your goal with the training? If you would like it you should check out your local Sambo-club as well, and see which gym you like best.

I'll be honest, I've been very unimpressed with systema, or at least what I've seen of it so far. I got the impression of a bunch of overweight middle-aged men engaging in compliant drills with little in the way of sparring or live training. Feel free to prove me wrong, but that's my experience with it so far.For me, that seems to be very dependent on the gym, and the course offered.


I've got to respond to this as well. Military hand-to-hand training is typically quite poor. They use guns for a reason, and their focus is understandably on training to use those guns. Here's what happens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsTVdxCv97k) when a trained, athletic martial artist goes up against special forces hand-to-hand. Also, though I can't find the video right now, check out the episode of "Pros vs. Joes" where Randy Couture beats down and army combatives instructor.I see your point. It is always irritating to ear poeple claim that Fedor Emelianenko is the best because of his training during his two years in the Russian army - as a firefighter in the Russian army.

Millitary hand-to-hand training will always be quite poor, because hand-to-hand is an incredibly insignificant part of modern combat. It will usually be a very effective crash course on the kind of hand-to-hand combat a soldier might be exposed to.

Especially in a controlled environment, a trained professonal combat athlete will always be better.

[endoperez]

The big difference between martial arts as we know them (e.g. Karate, Judo, Taekwando, Muay Thai, etc) is that they're exactly that - art. They look flashy, they're good for exercise and for building confidence and if you're good you can easily beat an inexperienced opponent, but that's where they end.

For most sporty martial arts there are teachers that also know how to use them on the street. As an example, a judoka or a wrestler will always have trained for the "getting close" the OP mentioned, and how to continue from there. Depending on who goes first, it might be easy to take down an experienced boxer or even experienced systema practitioner who doesn't have as much wrestling practice.

However, many martial arts teacher are lousy, regardless of the art. Since it's based in military teaching techniques, I'd imagine even badly taught systema will help a lot if you ever get into a life-threatening fight. You can learn the same things (aim for the groin/take them down fast/etc) from other martial arts, as long as you find a teacher willing to do so. I've been to a one-week Tai Chi course that had some brutal stuff in the applications.

Even if you train for fighting, without a skilled teacher or sparring partner you won't be ready for an actual fight even if you've trained for years. The exercise is good and it can be fun even if you can't fight off a mugger, as long as you know it before you get mugged.

Here's a wonderful video that shows an old style and a good teacher, and how they work together:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FK7w1j-zRCQ

I'm not a good martial artist, and I don't want or need to become a fighter, but I'd love to practice like that.

[reorith]

i met a dude that did taekwondo and after a few beers each we decided to see which was superior taekwondo, or krav maga. so we fought. i won. he hadn't anticipated a front kick to the groin. the moral of the story? just because you fight with a certain set of rules or whatever, you'll eventually encounter someone that will kick you in the nuts.

try to remember the basics of cqc and you should be fine.

[Grey Paladin]

i met a dude that did taekwondo and after a few beers each we decided to see which was superior taekwondo, or krav maga. so we fought. i won. he hadn't anticipated a front kick to the groin. the moral of the story? just because you fight with a certain set of rules or whatever, you'll eventually encounter someone that will kick you in the nuts.

try to remember the basics of cqc and you should be fine.

++;

Krav Maga (and I'd assume, other Military 'Martial Arts') is based on disabling/killing the opponent as quickly and efficiently as possible, no matter the method or the damage caused. Any system with a code of honor (Muay Thay not included) can't really compare.

[Irenaeus]

++;

Krav Maga (and I'd assume, other Military 'Martial Arts') is based on disabling/killing the opponent as quickly and efficiently as possible, no matter the method or the damage caused. Any system with a code of honor (Muay Thay not included) can't really compare.Not totally true. Codes of honor within a system can be dropped at a moments notice in a real fight. As long as the practitioner is aware of that, he is not at a significant disadvantage.

I really dislike the way some Krav Maga/ Systema/ Kaisi Fighting Systems instructors seem to teach their courses. The chances of ever getting into a physical struggle in which you really want to win at any risk to an opponents life is not that big. They really seem to want to send their students to jail.

P.S. reorith, the next time you want to prove a point, try to do it without kicking somebody in the groin. I'm quite sure you could have.

[Don Julio Anejo]

About the video. One things to remember - a professional fighter spars or practices fighting at least 3-4 hours a day for years or even decades. No active service soldier, seal or no seal does that. They simply have too many other things they need to learn.

Plus in the video they 1. had no walls (to slam people into)/objects (to use as improvised weapons), 2. wore boxing gloves and 3. had rules. In real life none of this would apply, and chances are the nave seal would have won. Even a little thing like boxing gloves takes away half the things you can do because your fingers are all together and because you can't use the blade of your hand (neck strike... that's usually enough to daze anyone for at least 5 seconds). And there's a whole bunch of pressure spots that WILL stop someone in their tracks. Unless they're that big scary German guy who stars in a lot of Jackie Chan/Jet Li movies.

For the record, I did Muay Thai for 3 years. I still think it's flashy. Maybe not as much as Taekwando, but the only usefulness of kicks is either against a much less experienced opponent or to keep your opponent at a distance (if he has a knife or something). If you're up against someone on your level, they won't do much. Those practicing martial arts will just dodge or parry them, making you more tired than them in the end while those practicing wrestling and the like won't give you much chance to use them. Kicks also need a lot of space.

[Grey Paladin]

When half of the techniques taught are based upon dirty, crippling tricks (Certain forms of Ninjutsu, Krav Maga, Systema) an opponent which did not practice them or how to defend against them as part of the daily routine is going to be at a disadvantage.

These systems were created for fighting for your life, handling muggers without hurting them is (by far) secondary.

The groin is one of the main areas of contact most styles agree upon, and many styles have countless techniques for hitting it.

[SurlySeraph]

Maybe not as much as Taekwando, but the only usefulness of kicks is either against a much less experienced opponent or to keep your opponent at a distance (if he has a knife or something). If you're up against someone on your level, they won't do much. Those practicing martial arts will just dodge or parry them, making you more tired than them in the end while those practicing wrestling and the like won't give you much chance to use them. Kicks also need a lot of space.

Depends on the kick and the state of your opponent. Spinning kicks are pretty much useless against anyone who's paying attention to what you're doing, but fast low kicks can be pretty effective even against a careful opponent. Have you ever taken a good kick to the knee? Hurts.

Also, I think this article (http://www.cracked.com/article_16595_6-great-martial-arts-killing-man-with-your-bare-hands.html), while rather gushing, will be of interest to most of you.

[Exeson]

Interestingly enough actually, Judo is a sport first and only a martial art second, which means it is actually not meant to be used in terms of on the street combat.

I have never really understood Taekwando or the thinking behind it, but my experience of martial arts is not very extensive.

[TSGames]

the moral of the story? just because you fight with a certain set of rules or whatever, you'll eventually encounter someone that will kick you in the nuts.

Funniest thing I've read in a while. I'm going to sig that.

[Haven]

It's not that hard to deflect a kick to the nuts. You just twist your leg, let it go to the thigh, and then they're off balance and you can sweep or push them over. But you did say the guy had had a few beers, so.

Anyway, I'm an advocate of escrima/kali. Shows you how to use knives, how to use your hands, how to defend against knives (which is a pretty critical skill), and how to be a badass, basically.

[ForzaFiori]

I'm no pro fighter, but I have trained for 10 years. Here's my take on the stuff

I have to disagree with the people saying that martial arts aren't meant to prepare you for fights. I've trained an empty hand and weapon style of okinowan karate (Gojoryu-karatedo and Kobudo) and first, they teach you how to fight standing, on the ground, how to do limb locks, how to escape them, take downs, and nearly every pressure point in the body. One of the first things my sensai told my class was that in a serious situation, all rules go out the door, and aim for the nuts. The only reason you don't do that in a training match is because you can seriously hurt someone. The Kobudo (weapons) also trains in the use of improvised weapons. Long and short staffs, paddles, hoes, etc. I've found my training come in VERY handy in several fights.

on the subject of kicks, it all depends on the kick. Just like a roundhouse punch is gonna get dodged while a straight jab might connect, a roundhouse kick will be laughed at, but a quick down kick to the knee will disable your opponent.

[Liffguard]

About the video. One things to remember - a professional fighter spars or practices fighting at least 3-4 hours a day for years or even decades. No active service soldier, seal or no seal does that. They simply have too many other things they need to learn.

Well yeah, that was kind of my point.


Plus in the video they 1. had no walls (to slam people into)/objects (to use as improvised weapons)

Yeah, but this works both ways. Since both fighters had an equal lack of access, I fail to see the point.


wore boxing gloves and...Even a little thing like boxing gloves takes away half the things you can do because your fingers are all together and because you can't use the blade of your hand (neck strike... that's usually enough to daze anyone for at least 5 seconds).

Those were 4oz MMA gloves, not boxing gloves. They're fingerless and only have padding on the back of the hand, so you can use your fingers and neck strike if you so wish. The reason you don't see such strikes is that they're a move with a low percentage of success.


had rules.

Yes, the UFC has rules. However, it is the closest safe simulation of a streetfight currently available. Unless you can show me statistics covering the results of streetfights between athletic martial artists and military personnel, it's also the best evidence we have. Anything else is just my-dad-can-beat-up-your-dad conjecture.


In real life none of this would apply, and chances are the nave seal would have won.

Can you prove it?


And there's a whole bunch of pressure spots that WILL stop someone in their tracks. Unless they're that big scary German guy who stars in a lot of Jackie Chan/Jet Li movies.

What do you mean by "pressure spots?" How do they stop people? Assuming these spots are quite small, how do you accurately strike them during the chaos and unpredictability of a fight, especially considering that targeting broad areas like the head or the ribs is a difficult task even for trained fighters?


For the record, I did Muay Thai for 3 years. I still think it's flashy. Maybe not as much as Taekwando, but the only usefulness of kicks is either against a much less experienced opponent or to keep your opponent at a distance (if he has a knife or something). If you're up against someone on your level, they won't do much. Those practicing martial arts will just dodge or parry them, making you more tired than them in the end while those practicing wrestling and the like won't give you much chance to use them. Kicks also need a lot of space.

Kicks, especially low kicks to the legs, can be useful in certain situations and have their place. However, Muay Thai has far more weapons than just kicks. I'd even say that Muay Thai clinch-fighting is one of the best skills to possess for extremely close-quarter fighting.


When half of the techniques taught are based upon dirty, crippling tricks (Certain forms of Ninjutsu, Krav Maga, Systema) an opponent which did not practice them or how to defend against them as part of the daily routine is going to be at a disadvantage.

I disagree. Individual techniques are relatively unimportant. What is more important is training methodology. Effective systems are based on heavy-contact sparring, live drills and physical fitness. Ineffective systems are based on forms, compliant drills and an overemphasis of knowing techniques rather than learning skills.

[Wraithy]

What do you mean by "pressure spots?" How do they stop people? Assuming these spots are quite small, how do you accurately strike them during the chaos and unpredictability of a fight, especially considering that targeting broad areas like the head or the ribs is a difficult task even for trained fighters?


Pressure spots include things like nerve clusters and generally weak areas in the body's natural defences, this could include the solar plexus, or many other areas which when struck can cause immense pain and/or numbing.

I've been on the other end of these attacks once or twice, and let me tell you, having your whole body spasm after having your arm pinched is embarrassing.

As for real world application, I don't really have the experience to say. However considering the ease with which I've seen my teachers perform these, I'm guessing it is achievable.

That isn't to say that using them is advisable, in a real fight you'd probably stick with the techniques you've learned the most (most martial arts I know have punches to the solar plexus as a basic).

Just don't think you can beat someone with pressure points alone, down that road lies only madness:smalltongue:

[Don Julio Anejo]

Sorry. Kicks I meant stuff like sidekicks, roundhouse kicks to the body/head and spinning kicks. If your opponent knows what he's doing, you'll just tire yourself out.

Obviously low kicks to knees/shins/insides of the thighs/nuts really hurt.

But IMO the best thing about Muay Thai is it's universality - I can pretty decently counter most fighting styles. Someone's trying to grapple me? Shin kicks, knees to the stomach, several pressure points on the neck, shoulders than arms (I made sure to learn to actually use them since I suck very much at grappling, that's why I mentioned them). Someone's a boxer? Hard to defend against low kicks and I'm not bad at blocking punches. Someone does karate/taekwando? After a few fights against these people at school I realized they can't defend against fast punches very well, especially if you're in close. Just make sure to block their kicks.

@Liffguard: fine, let's stop with my dad can beat up your dad (which probably isn't true anyway, my dad doesn't even get off the couch to go to work, he works on his laptop on the couch). But unless you can also say that the seal and the fighter spent about the same amount of time/effort on hand to hand (which is doubtful), it's not really a fair fight. It's like getting Joe Thornton/Sheldon Souray/Jarome Iginla/some other big name hockey player play in a national amateur league.

[TSGames]

Someone's trying to grapple me? Shin kicks, knees to the stomach, several pressure points on the neck, shoulders than arms (I made sure to learn to actually use them since I suck very much at grappling, that's why I mentioned them).

That's a much more... elegant solution. I was taught that if going against a grappler who tried to bring me down, that I should try to stick my index and middle finger a close to his nose as possible, and rip out his eye.

[ForzaFiori]

That's a much more... elegant solution. I was taught that if going against a grappler who tried to bring me down, that I should try to stick my index and middle finger a close to his nose as possible, and rip out his eye.

another... less messy solution is to grab the nose or chin, and push hard away from u. this causes the whole body to move that direction, getting them off u, opening them for plenty of attacks.

oh, and as for pressure points, they're really only useful in grapples. But there is one in every joint, usually in the crease (ie, the part that winds up sandwitched between skin when you bend the joint) with major ones in the elbows, knees, armpits, and the inside of the legs (not your nuts, but right up next to them, where they check for hernias), and on the sides of the neck, right behind the jugular, and then behind the ears in that fleshy part. There are also less effective ones on the top of the shoulder, in the wrists, and on the Achilles tendon. They take practice to get good at though, cause you need to know pretty specifically where to push. but once you get it, its really easy to find.

[SurlySeraph]

In wrestling we didn't formally learn about pressure points. We just learned "If you grab someone's elbow/hand between the thumb and index finger/tendon between the shoulder and neck hard enough, it really hurts."


Just don't think you can beat someone with pressure points alone, down that road lies only madness:smalltongue:

You are already dead. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=po77bJk1DdI) :smalltongue:

[Irenaeus]

That's a much more... elegant solution. I was taught that if going against a grappler who tried to bring me down, that I should try to stick my index and middle finger a close to his nose as possible, and rip out his eye.That's a pretty much useless technique. When will you ever be able to justify such a use of force in a court of law because sombody grabbed you? As I said, there are very few situations in life which you can justifiably completely ignore your opponents well-being. Also, if you don't make it, the opponent will probably have lost any reservations he mght have had about hurting you badly, and you would be on the ground.


But unless you can also say that the seal and the fighter spent about the same amount of time/effort on hand to hand (which is doubtful), it's not really a fair fight. It's like getting Joe Thornton/Sheldon Souray/Jarome Iginla/some other big name hockey player play in a national amateur league.That is kind of my point. Almost nobody in the military (even special forces-type people) spends even a fraction of the time a dedicated fighter spends on unarmed combat. Their training consists of highly-effective crash courses, but they are very likely to come up short in a one-against-one situation witboth opponents aware and unarmed. That is okay for the military guys, because such situations almost never happen. Having said that, I'm comfortable stopping the dad comparison.

I'd politely suggest that anybody who thinks they have some sort of functioning non-grappling based grappling defense that can be used in sparring should visit their local wrestling/Judo/jiu-jitsu/sambo gym, and practice defending a few takedowns. It is suprisingly difficult.

Muay Thai is a great striking art, but not so great as a grapplling defense. Grappling is great as grappling defense.

I'll leave the pressure points alone.

[Liffguard]

I think my biggest problem with Krav Maga and Systema is that when I think of them, I think of things like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNkU9zyHuWw) and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF17Wd4Fz4) i.e. compliant drills with a cooperative partner. I've genuinely never seen, in real life or on video, krav maga or systema successfully applied in a live sparring scenario. If such videos exist, I would genuinely be interested in seeing them.

[thubby]

I have never really understood Taekwando or the thinking behind it

"I'm going to hit you with the longest reaching, hardest hitting limb I have, good luck"

[Don Julio Anejo]

I'd politely suggest that anybody who thinks they have some sort of functioning non-grappling based grappling defense that can be used in sparring should visit their local wrestling/Judo/jiu-jitsu/sambo gym, and practice defending a few takedowns. It is suprisingly difficult.

Muay Thai is a great striking art, but not so great as a grapplling defense. Grappling is great as grappling defense.
Maybe. I haven't fought pure/mostly pure grapplers outside of drills during practice. The ony grappler type guy that I fought in real life was more like a wrestler. Most other people just stick to punches/kicks. If I ever did fight one, I would probably try to keep my distance and hope he doesn't protect the head too much... but if someone's on top of me (double meaning not intended), I'm screwed (double meaning not intended).


I think my biggest problem with Krav Maga and Systema is that when I think of them, I think of things like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNkU9zyHuWw) and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF17Wd4Fz4) i.e. compliant drills with a cooperative partner. I've genuinely never seen, in real life or on video, krav maga or systema successfully applied in a live sparring scenario. If such videos exist, I would genuinely be interested in seeing them.
I would assume the point of those videos is to demonstrate what is taught. For example, what to do if a guy grabs you from behind. Can't really judge a system through that. But doing drills over and over again does have a point - to get the required moves into your procedural memory (a type of subconscious long term memory that keeps automatic sequences of movement, like tying your shoelaces, driving a car, eating, etc). Then, when a guy really does grab and try to choke you, you don't waste your time thinking "hm, I think now I'll do this, this and this" and instead just go and beat the crap out of him.

PS: sorry for my really bad grammar and a bunch of spelling errors in my last post :frown:

[Irenaeus]

"I'm going to hit you with the longest reaching, hardest hitting limb I have, good luck"I thought it was "I'm going to make certain that I only have one leg to stand on as often as possible, and I cleverly combine this with not being able to grapple at all and not being trained to protect my face from punches".
Sorry if I misunderstood.:smallbiggrin:

I'm kidding a bit. Taekwondoo is an awesomely cool-looking combat sport, with some practical applications as well. It is just often practiced in a way which may make it less than optimally applicable to real-life situations. That is completely ok. I greatly prefer sports.


Maybe. I haven't fought pure/mostly pure grapplers outside of drills during practice. The ony grappler type guy that I fought in real life was more like a wrestler. Most other people just stick to punches/kicks. If I ever did fight one, I would probably try to keep my distance and hope he doesn't protect the head too much... but if someone's on top of me (double meaning not intended), I'm screwed (double meaning not intended).Trained wrestlers tend to be awsome when it comes to fast, agressive take downs. They don't practice submissions, but a fast double-leg executed on concrete don't really need a very strong follow up. Your plan doesn't seem very bad to me, but it doesn't compare to knowing some grappling yourself. Many striking sports which practice some grappling defense will often have the problem that you basically learn to defend clinches/takedowns against people who can't grapple very well. Few strikes causes knockouts or real stuns, but a large number of takedowns will take the opponent down, this means that a strike without some kind of trained evasion is unlikely to save you from going to the ground. This might not be a problem unless you plan to fight many trained grapplers, however. But it is good to have realistic expectations before something like that happens. Everything is of course dependent on situations and the individuals involved, but getting taken down is always a eh... female dog.


I would assume the point of those videos is to demonstrate what is taught. For example, what to do if a guy grabs you from behind. Can't really judge a system through that. But doing drills over and over again does have a point - to get the required moves into your procedural memory (a type of subconscious long term memory that keeps automatic sequences of movement, like tying your shoelaces, driving a car, eating, etc). Then, when a guy really does grab and try to choke you, you don't waste your time thinking "hm, I think now I'll do this, this and this" and instead just go and beat the crap out of him.Drills are very good. Full contact sparring is better, both are the best. Many martial artists tend to underate boxers because they practice a very limited repertoaire, but because they (like Muai Thai, for example) often go full contact, they will usually be very tough opponents, even if their repertoire may be limited. That said, a lot of stuff can't really be practiced by sparring.


PS: sorry for my really bad grammar and a bunch of spelling errors in my last post :frown:I didn't notice it, and I can't be bothered to go back and check. :smallsmile:


I think my biggest problem with Krav Maga and Systema is that when I think of them, I think of things like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNkU9zyHuWw) and this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF17Wd4Fz4) i.e. compliant drills with a cooperative partner. I've genuinely never seen, in real life or on video, krav maga or systema successfully applied in a live sparring scenario. If such videos exist, I would genuinely be interested in seeing them.Yeah. A lack of sparring is always problematic. I'd probably combine such courses with something else. Systema+Sambo seems like an obvious combination.

P.S. Do you follow MMA in general, or just the UFC?

[Liffguard]

Maybe. I would assume the point of those videos is to demonstrate what is taught. For example, what to do if a guy grabs you from behind. Can't really judge a system through that.

Even if they are demonstrations, they're not effective ones. At no point do they demonstrate how such moves could actually be applied in a live environment, since the opponent is compliant. He doesn't fight back, move around or resist at all. He just stands there and lets the demonstrator go through the combo. For a particularly bad example, look at the first video at the 0:24 mark. A telegraphed lunge, easily avoided, and then the attacker just waits there with his arm outstretched, completely still. This is an unrealistic scenario, and therefore any method of dealing with it is an unrealistic method.



But doing drills over and over again does have a point - to get the required moves into your procedural memory (a type of subconscious long term memory that keeps automatic sequences of movement, like tying your shoelaces, driving a car, eating, etc). Then, when a guy really does grab and try to choke you, you don't waste your time thinking "hm, I think now I'll do this, this and this" and instead just go and beat the crap out of him.

A good point, and I'd like to address it. Drills are certainly a vital part of training. However, there is a massive distinction between an effective "live" drill and an ineffective "dead" one. Any drill that relies on simply performing pre-set movements against a non-resistant partner is only a very minor part of training, and practically useless on its own. Because such a drill does not simulate reality, it is not realistic training. Effective drills must be performed against a resisting partner.

For example, let's look at a boxer who wants to work his jab. Does he make his opponent stand still in front of him so he can throw 100 jabs? Maybe for a minute or two to get a feel for the basic movement. But after that, his partner puts on a pair of focus mitts and the real work begins. The boxer has to move around, in and out and side to side. He has to work on his timing so as to strike when actually in range. He has to maintain his defense or his partner will smack him in the head. What it all boils down to is unpredictability. Once this drill is complete, he can try to apply the jab in full-contact sparring. This is true of any technique, whether it be a boxer's jab, a wrestler's double-leg takedown or a Jiujitsu fighter's armbar.

Matt Thornton explained it better (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imjmLWj5WCU) than I ever could.

[TSGames]

That's a pretty much useless technique. When will you ever be able to justify such a use of force in a court of law because sombody grabbed you? As I said, there are very few situations in life which you can justifiably completely ignore your opponents well-being. Also, if you don't make it, the opponent will probably have lost any reservations he mght have had about hurting you badly, and you would be on the ground.

I have no idea if my opponent has a concealed weapon, it is reasonable to assume, that since I would never start the fight if it was avoidable, that my opponent is the aggressor(assuming there's only one). Therefore, if my opponent rushes me to attempt to bring to the ground, the only logical conclusion is that he is either A)gonna beat the **** out of me on the ground, or B) stab me to death in a gapple. Neither are appealing prospects, and if escaping that only costs my opponent his eye, o well, he had it coming. I'll take my chances: with the law, I'm not a stab wound ridden corpse.

The fact of the matter that there are non-serious(non-threatening) fights, but these fights can all be easily talked out of, or easily won without deadly force(it's not like a drunk ******* as a bar is going to pose much of threat most of the time). Then there are fights that can't be talked out of: serious fights. If I am in one of these fights, the fight ends when my opponent can no longer fight, when I can no longer fight, or when one of us escapes. There are no other possible endings. To avoid unnecessary conflict, Krav Maga teaches its student to avoid combat whenever possible; I would do that if it were an option. However, once locked in an unavoidable combat, from which there is no likely escape, it's an us or them situation, and I know who's side I'm on in that fight.

Also, I've never seriously practiced Jujitsu or other grappling arts because they are impractical. Don't get me wrong: they are fun. However, the moment you find yourself fighting more than one person, or the moment a knife is added to the situation, you had better be Royce Gracie, or else you've already lost, and possibly dead. The grappling arts do very well in one on one, unarmed combat, but not so well in anything else.


[edit]
one more thing


A good point, and I'd like to address it. Drills are certainly a vital part of training. However, there is a massive distinction between an effective "live" drill and an ineffective "dead" one. Any drill that relies on simply performing pre-set movements against a non-resistant partner is only a very minor part of training, and practically useless on its own. Because such a drill does not simulate reality, it is not realistic training. Effective drills must be performed against a resisting partner.

The whole "non-resistant partner" thing. That's straight up B.S. maybe in the videos you provided(I didn't bother to look becuase its a waste of time; it proves nothing), but in my experience(italics because it's the only experience that I have to go off of), when training in Krav, the instructor told us to actively resist our partner. Sometimes we would be instructed to actively resist like a person without fighting experience might, and sometimes we were told to resist using technique, to simulate fighting a tougher opponent. You can find bad training in any form of self defense, but in all the Krav Maga schools that I have seen, I have yet to see any where it is the norm; I cannot say the same about traditional karate schools.

Actually, reading what came after the last part I quoted...


For example, let's look at a boxer who wants to work his jab. Does he make his opponent stand still in front of him so he can throw 100 jabs? Maybe for a minute or two to get a feel for the basic movement. But after that, his partner puts on a pair of focus mitts and the real work begins. The boxer has to move around, in and out and side to side. He has to work on his timing so as to strike when actually in range. He has to maintain his defense or his partner will smack him in the head. What it all boils down to is unpredictability. Once this drill is complete, he can try to apply the jab in full-contact sparring. This is true of any technique, whether it be a boxer's jab, a wrestler's double-leg takedown or a Jiujitsu fighter's armbar.

Please correct my if I'm wrong: but your complaint is that they are not sparring... in the videos you provided... which are not videos of Krav Maga sparring?

[Wraithy]

You are already dead. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=po77bJk1DdI) :smalltongue:

Oh no!

For example, let's look at a boxer who wants to work his jab. Does he make his opponent stand still in front of him so he can throw 100 jabs? Maybe for a minute or two to get a feel for the basic movement. But after that, his partner puts on a pair of focus mitts and the real work begins. The boxer has to move around, in and out and side to side. He has to work on his timing so as to strike when actually in range. He has to maintain his defense or his partner will smack him in the head. What it all boils down to is unpredictability. Once this drill is complete, he can try to apply the jab in full-contact sparring. This is true of any technique, whether it be a boxer's jab, a wrestler's double-leg takedown or a Jiujitsu fighter's armbar.

True, and probably one of the best reasons to learn chain punches. However one of the big problems with learning some styles is that doing the technique at full speed will seriously injure the person you practise on.

To overcome this problem these styles will often divide up training, having a slower session based on engraving complex techniques into muscle memory, and another session which works on improving movement and other speed factors like positioning yourself so you can actually use the techniques you've been learning.

[ForzaFiori]

Also, I've never seriously practiced Jujitsu or other grappling arts because they are impractical. Don't get me wrong: they are fun. However, the moment you find yourself fighting more than one person, or the moment a knife is added to the situation, you had better be Royce Gracie, or else you've already lost, and possibly dead. The grappling arts do very well in one on one, unarmed combat, but not so well in anything else.

no offense, but no duh. Grappling arts aren't designed to take on armed opponents. If you want to do that, lots of other styles teach you how. Its not that hard to get a knife out of someone's hand, unless their an excellent fighter, in which case your screwed either way probably. Fighting more than one person is the same. Unless their trained and train together, they'll probably get in each other's way more than yours.

[Liffguard]

Also, I've never seriously practiced Jujitsu or other grappling arts because they are impractical. Don't get me wrong: they are fun. However, the moment you find yourself fighting more than one person, or the moment a knife is added to the situation, you had better be Royce Gracie, or else you've already lost, and possibly dead. The grappling arts do very well in one on one, unarmed combat, but not so well in anything else.

I would strongly contest the claim that grappling systems are impractical. Wrestling is pretty much the oldest and most time-tested system of personal combat we have. The ability to control an opponent's balance, position and limbs is of vital importance in self-defence. Yes, you are certainly at a significant disadvantage against a weapon, but that's true of any person trained in any system.

As far as multiple attackers goes, grappling and wrestling are extremely important in these situations also. When facing multiple attackers there is a strong chance that you will end up on the floor, whether you want to or not. Grappling allows you to take control of the situation and get back on your feet. Although, again, being outnumbered is a significant disadvantage whatever your training.

In either case, bringing up weapons or multiple attackers doesn't counter the basic point of aliveness. Live training is vital, regardless of the situation you are training for.



I cannot say the same about traditional karate schools.

Well there's one thing we can agree on.


Please correct my if I'm wrong: but your complaint is that they are not sparring... in the videos you provided... which are not videos of Krav Maga sparring?

My complaint was that the contents of the video were typical of the Krav Maga I have experienced, both directly and from other videos. If your experiences are different then cool. As I said, I'm genuinely interested in seeing good examples.


one of the big problems with learning some styles is that doing the technique at full speed will seriously injure the person you practise on.

To overcome this problem these styles will often divide up training, having a slower session based on engraving complex techniques into muscle memory, and another session which works on improving movement and other speed factors like positioning yourself so you can actually use the techniques you've been learning.

I see your point, but I think this solution gets it backwards. In my opinion, if you can't train a technique at full speed and power in a training environment, then you can't train it properly. If you can't train a technique properly, then it is of limited utility, since you can't rely on pulling it off in a stressful combat situation. That doesn't mean the technique is useless per se, merely unreliable. Take an eye gouge for example. You can't fully train an eye gouge in a live environment, so it would be flawed to rely on this technique in combat. That doesn't mean you shouldn't use it if the opportunity presents itself, merely that you shouldn't rely on it as part of your repertoire.

By contrast, the method you seem to be suggesting simply assumes that the technique is reliable, and therefore should be practiced in some way even if that training method is ineffective. It seems that you apply your assumptions of utility to training, rather than determining them from training.

[TSGames]

I would strongly contest the claim that grappling systems are impractical. Wrestling is pretty much the oldest and most time-tested system of personal combat we have. The ability to control an opponent's balance, position and limbs is of vital importance in self-defence. Yes, you are certainly at a significant disadvantage against a weapon, but that's true of any person trained in any system.

As far as multiple attackers goes, grappling and wrestling are extremely important in these situations also. When facing multiple attackers there is a strong chance that you will end up on the floor, whether you want to or not. Grappling allows you to take control of the situation and get back on your feet. Although, again, being outnumbered is a significant disadvantage whatever your training.

If an opponent pulls a knife, takedowns are no longer viable; the grappler can no longer grapple without taking a stab wound, and probably bleeding to death; he is forced into stand up combat for at least a short period. For the stand up fighter, he has lost almost nothing when the knife is added to combat, disarming is simply a priority, but his attack methods are still mostly viable. The same holds true in a fight against multiple opponents. If you go to the ground with one, his buddies are just gonna kick you in the head. The stand up fighter has much better odds; only an amateur won't know how to create space between an opponent.
My only point is that the grappler is far worse off than a stand up fighter.

As for the second part, it sounds to me that the claim you are making is that it is important to know how to defend against takedowns and keep your balance. I will admit that training in a grappling art could help you do this, but the ultimate goal when fighting multiple opponents is to avoid the ground which seems to contradict the basic idea of grappling. If you go down to the ground against multiple opponents, you have lost the fight; you will be kicked into submission.



The first instructors I ever trained under, actively encouraged their pupils to participate in amateur fighting and MMA style events. While I haven't met many instructors as encouraging, I've met none that were bad. It seems we had opposite experiences in with Krav Maga.

[Khanderas]

Been a while since I did practice my Jujutsu.
However, in the argument grappling vs knife, I do not see that as a 'worst thing ever to do'. Sure a good solid kick in the groin is problebly the best way to solve this problem (assuming you cannot get away), seconded by a fist to the face.

However it seems you have a farily narrow view on what constitutes grappling. Much of it is the wrestling variety and for those unarmed is a must. But (atleast to me) grappling is also something as simple as blocking the knifearm and bending it so that the attacker cannot use his weapon. I can think of half a dozen ways right now that are hard to put down in text, but basically ends with 'drop the knife while in pain'.

Or being stabbed, depending on sucess, but that is true at any time a knife is involved, regardless of style. Grappling his knifehand means you got control of the knife, rather then wear him down and give him multiple chances (however low those chances may be, depending on skill on both your and his side) to connect with said knife.

[Liffguard]

If an opponent pulls a knife, takedowns are no longer viable; the grappler can no longer grapple without taking a stab wound, and probably bleeding to death; he is forced into stand up combat for at least a short period. For the stand up fighter, he has lost almost nothing when the knife is added to combat, disarming is simply a priority, but his attack methods are still mostly viable. The same holds true in a fight against multiple opponents. If you go to the ground with one, his buddies are just gonna kick you in the head. The stand up fighter has much better odds; only an amateur won't know how to create space between an opponent.
My only point is that the grappler is far worse off than a stand up fighter.


Except that a major component of grappling is controlling your opponent's limbs. Many knife experts teach that in a fight where there are two people and only one weapon, and escape is not possible, the number one priority of the unarmed fighter is to gain control of the weapon or at the very least take it away from the other fighter. You can't do this with striking, you can with grappling.


As for the second part, it sounds to me that the claim you are making is that it is important to know how to defend against takedowns and keep your balance. I will admit that training in a grappling art could help you do this, but the ultimate goal when fighting multiple opponents is to avoid the ground which seems to contradict the basic idea of grappling. If you go down to the ground against multiple opponents, you have lost the fight; you will be kicked into submission.

Grappling is far more than just taking the fight to the ground. I would argue that grappling begins as soon as you have sustained physical contact with your opponent. Brazilian Jiujitsu is obviously grappling, but so is Judo, Greco-Roman wrestling and the Muay Thai clinch.

Grappling is the ability to prevent yourself from being put on the ground. Grappling is the ability to obtain a good position and return to your feet in the event that you do end up on the ground. Grappling is the ability to put your opponent on the ground whilst you yourself remain on your feet. If you can't see how vital these skills are to defense against multiple attackers then you and I are on fundamentally different pages.

I'm not trying to argue that grappling is "better" than striking, merely that it is a vital component of self-defence. An effective, well-rounded fighter must be able to grapple and strike.

[Avilan the Grey]

Except that a major component of grappling is controlling your opponent's limbs. Many knife experts teach that in a fight where there are two people and only one weapon, and escape is not possible, the number one priority of the unarmed fighter is to gain control of the weapon or at the very least take it away from the other fighter. You can't do this with striking, you can with grappling.

(Snip)

I'm not trying to argue that grappling is "better" than striking, merely that it is a vital component of self-defence. An effective, well-rounded fighter must be able to grapple and strike.

I am in no way an expert on any of this but as far as I know the whole point if you are a "grappler" and is faced man to man with a guy with a knife is to wait for his attack. You don't go in and try to grab him (you don't need to if he's just standing there with a knife anyway), you act when he is the most vulnerable, which is at the moment he strikes at you (arm stretched out, off balance).
And the last paragraph is a "duh" as far as I am concerned. If we are talking about a person that is mainly preparing for actual real-life situations, you need grappling as well as striking.

[RandomNPC]

ok to whoever said the best defence from a grapple is to know how to grapple, it's not. Lighting yourself on fire is the best defence against a grapple.

If you want to go and learn to fight and you don't have time constraints (like an impending bully who threatens you with something like 'ill get you friday') i sugest some weapons training, maybe a few weeks with staves, just enough to get you familiar and used to swinging at people. then move to a shorter one hander, then to strikes and grapples. this gets you ready for the distances and getting less and less distance makes you more dangerous if there happens to be a stick you pick up or something in a real fight.

basically if you're used to fighting in punching range you're not going to swing a makeshift club untill they dedicate getting in close and aren't out at your max range ready to dodge.

[Wraithy]

Funnily enough, during my first Systema lesson the teacher talked about how while knife training he makes people use real knives, to ensure that people are as careful in training as they would be in a real fight. Which is certainly more than can be said for Taekwondo's clunky wooden training knives.

@V: Well there goes my argument (and practically every other one in this thread:smalltongue:)

[thubby]

Funnily enough, during my first Systema lesson the teacher talked about how while knife training he makes people use real knives, to ensure that people are as careful in training as they would be in a real fight. Which is certainly more than can be said for Taekwondo's clunky wooden training knives.

because every teacher is the same. :smallannoyed: