Is Krav Maga as effective as it his hyped up to be?

First of all I personally believe it is a very effective self defense system, HOWEVER during a submission grappling tournment I met an assistant instructor who trained 12 years in Krav Maga. He also trained in Isreal for 6 of those years. And he also crosstrained in Kenpo and Submission grappling. He said Krav Maga is awesome when it comes to multiple attackers and knive defense against UNTRAINED attackers, BUT it LACKS the well rounded skill in a one-on-one no weapon fight against another semi-trained fighter! He gave me two examples that he witnessed. Example 1 he said he saw a Kenpo fighter knock out a Krav Maga instructor after only 1 minute of fighting during a full contact no rules fight in a parking lot. The second example he gave me was when a MMA fighter challenged a Krav Maga instuctor to a no holds barred anything goes match on the street NOT in a ring! Apparently the MMA guy took the Krav Maga instructor down and punched the instructor out cold!





Your opinions?

Is Krav Maga as effective as it his hyped up to be?
I have trained Krav Maga for about 3 years now, I have studied for 6 months at the Wingate Institute in Israel and done multiple seminars.





I have taken it at a variety of places, and I would say that is an accurate depiction.





First off, a Kravist who trained exclusively Krav would be great to a certain point. That point being going against a skilled fighter who trains every aspect of fighting, including ground work. As Krav Maga's ground work is more oriented towards getting up off the ground and getting away, it is less oriented towards a drawn out fight against a skilled unarmed opponent.





It relies on the quick instinctive reactions against an somewhat unsuspecting opponent. It has realistic self defense moves, when trained properly (against fully resisting opponents).





I would assume that against a solid fighter, unless the Kravist also trains for fighting, he is somewhat ill prepared to take on skilled opponents. He is trained for an rapid, all out, instinctive motion, that allows him to get away. Not dominate.





Against a MMA fighter I don't expect him to fare well when they are both squared off with each other, and the opponent has space and opportunity, range. Krav Maga does great for up close, quick to the point attacking. Not so much for standing across from someone and coming at them. It is more of a reactive system, then a fighting one.





Multiple attacker scenarios when trained properly aren't with you beating ***, they are you bullrushing through one guy and hauling ***. Krav as it is taught in Israel has that understanding. Krav as it is taught by Imi Lichtenfield teaches knife defense under the assumption that you are already stabbed, and you enemy is on top of you and you are preventing further stabbing.





All the quick fancy disarms and stuff are great, but worthless without training it against alive resisting opponents. Meaning, gearing up, using an air soft or similar pistol, and going full out. With the person attempting to shoot you once you begin your disarm, and attempting to keep the weapon.





Krav Maga is great for what it is, when trained properly it is a realistic system, that is good for dealing with a situation you may encounter on the street. When trained regularly, and sparred hard and regularly, you can become very competent.





However it is nothing compared to MMA, a system designed specifically for unnarmed combat, in which the practioners spar in this realm as a major focus. It is it's sole intention is unnarmed combat.





Anyone who says they train for multiple attacker scenarios needs to examine how they train for it. Do you have geared up multiple attackers seriously trying to beat you down? Guys who are trying to hit you and go full bore at you? Or do you have guys coming in a prearranged attack, soft contact, with you mimicking hitting vital spots and moving on?





It is very hard to realistically train multiple attacker scenarios. Even harder because real ones you never see coming. You get clocked in the back by a buddy when you are tied up with another guy. People who attack in packs don't do it in a prearranged, easily defended fashion. And real fights don't end in the one, to five seconds you think that you can end them in.





No one system or style is perfect, blending as many of them as possible, sparring them as intensely and as close to real as you can get, only helps increase your odds for success. There is still a large portion of luck. Especially when it comes to striking, anyone can get caught with a knock out punch. Professional boxers only have 1 think to worry about, and they still get knocked out. Great fighters still get knocked out by scrubs.





So a Krav instructor getting KTFO'd by ANYONE doesn't necessary surprise me, because anyone can get KTFO'd off a wild shot.





No rules in a street really isn't that different then in the ring honestly. Nut shots don't stop determined attackers, it only pisses them off. Eye gouges are worthless if you are getting punched in the face, or being controlled, kicking out somoene's knee isn't as easy as you think it is, throat punches are pretty difficult especially to land cleanly.. If your entire reliance in a street fight is those few moves, and that to you is the key to your art's street effectiveness, you will be sorely suprised if you ever get tested in reality.





Not to mention you have no practical knowledge.





A Kravist may spar, may work on all sorts of things, but having no practical knowledge of about 50% of his art, makes him pretty limited. Unlike other arts, Krav's ideology isn't that throat strikes, eye rakes and the like are fight enders, but merely distractions. That you are generally going for the throat or the face, but if you miss it is all good, it is just part of the attack.





One on one no weapon, they are really at a disadvantage in any kind of truly unnarmed fight against a skilled opponent. I don't know the particulars of the people he witnessed, nor do I know of what fool would just go and challenge someone to a no holds barred street match, and what other idiot would then accept it. But safe to say, many people geared towards a certain way do well in that element. (Element of surprise, quick instinctive movements, getting away) vs. (One on one, opponent knows you are coming, and you have to beat him regardless, long haul strategic fight if necessary, ability to go to the ground, etc)





Any Krav Maga expert who openly accepted or challenged a guy in a fight isn't going to do well, because that is not what it was designed to do. It was designed to react to an attack from an opponent of limited skill who is unaware of your technique, and you are able to blind side him.








Vastly different then someone who trains for a heads up, one on one unnarmed fight. He doesn't worry about knives, weapons, etc. Whereas a Kravist does, and that is what they work towards.





It isn't a surprise it is just different ways of training, with different specialities. Who is better prepared for the street? That is up for debate. Does that make Krav not what it is hyped up to be? It is hyped up to be a realistic self defense system. A MMA fighter walking up and challenging you is not realistic self defense. A crack head with a shiv attempting to hold you up is.





As a practioner of both, (MMA and Krav) I can tell you each has it's flaws and it's weaknesses. MMA is great for what it is, and TRUE Krav is great for what it is. They are different animals though. You have to alter MMA to make it street worthy, you have to add in more control of your opponent, better control of his appendages, you have to be more aware of where every hand is.





Krav is already geared towards that, but would have to be modified for a one on one fight.





Krav isn't meant for that type of scenario, as it takes every advantage you have away. (Element of surprise and ferocity, along with simple technique)





Well that is my opinion, both are good in their own right. As a Kravist you would be a fool to just accept a challenge like that, as a MMA fighter you would be an idiot to issue one, especially when your "No Rules" opponent whips out a knife and pig sticks ya. Or sues your *** in court later.





Just my two cents...
Reply:I have found that it is more the martial artist than the art. In fact, I've witnessed untrained fighters who were tough and relentless beat people who studied various arts for years. There is no one "superior" martial art. Training and dedication in virtually any art can make one superior.
Reply:I am not a Krav Maga student. I have heard good things about it. My deal is Kenpo. Kenpo also teaches to defend against multiple, armed attackers. If as you say, that is similar to Krav Maga, then in your examples we'd need to know more about the training and experience levels of the fighters. But if you are searching for a system that focuses on self defense, I can suggest some elements to watch for. Look for efficiency and economy of movement, there should be no wasted or empty movements. Is the system adaptable to every practioner, or must one be a perfect athlete for it to be useful? Look at effectiveness of the techniques, do they rely on muscle mass or body position to overwhelm an opponent. Check the instructor's references and history. Ask to watch or even try out a class, in order to see if you are compatible with the system and the personality of the instructors. Hope that helps. I don't know where to direct you to read about Krav Maga, but check out the articles on shaolinkenpo.com.
Reply:Ay man, anything that'll teach you how to disarm an enemy with a gun as quickly and swiftly as possible without you getting shot. As far as I care, once the gun is out his hand, I'll use karate or boxing. I'd even slap him to death, it doesn't matter. The art is much more contemporary and is something that guarantees your life much more then any other Martial Arts when it comes to guns. Let's not forget how great the Israeli army is either.
Reply:Krav Maga is a very good martial art. It's self defense at the core. It helps with a variety of situations, and the fact that many organizations require instruction in it for defense is a good indicator that it is does it's job well.





However: There is no ultimate martial art. There's people within arts that are great, that suck, that do better or worse due to the situations, and people that don't take martial arts that are in the same boat. It's completely random.





Based on the rules you listed: I think they may have been tipped against the art itself. Rules can sometimes make or break a martial artist, and while Krav Maga sometimes has competitions: That's not what it's about. I think that's the big point here.





In the end however: It comes down to mere tenths of seconds as to who wins.





So in essence:


Krav Maga is great for self defense, but self-defense and competition aren't the same thing.





It's just a good art. Hype or no hype.


I've never taken it myself, but I've seen a few techniques from peers that have, I researched it more than once, and I know a good bit of what it's about. I know there's no evidence that it has a link to aikijujutsu (But I know many styles have a link to that: Sambo included), but I'm slightly reminded of it when I see the art. That combined with all the "Dirty" stuff you need to really get by too. :P


Let's hope Cnote replies: He's taken it.
Reply:it's like that what Churchill said, it's the size of the fight in the dog. the art is only as useful as the artist who interprets it. too many variable, size of fighter, strength of fighter, experience, zeal, mentality, and endurance. plus, sheer viciousness and the hunger to not be beat.
Reply:Hmmm !!!!





Again it's down to individual skill and not necessary the style as all styles are tools to be used.





And ultimately it depends on who's using them !!!!





Former jiu-jitsu coach and bouncer :)

flip flop crafts