you don't need to bash your uke.

[drop bear]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pkcu2sRnIlo&has_verified=1&layout=tablet&client=mv-google

This has recently frustrated me. Has anybody been through this?

You do a demo your instructor tells you exactly what to come at him with. He knows when you are going to throw and you are not really fighting back. Then he springs on you a hundred miles an hour with solid finishing shots and spazzy submissions.

It is not neccesary. The idea of a compliant demo is so people can see what is going on. I would have thought that people accept that it is not real life and not resisted so take a chill pill and just show the movements at a casual rate. It is not like the uke is going anywhere.

If you do want to show technique at a million miles an hour then do the drill resisted. Give the other guy a chance to make you look stupid by defending.

My two major problems with this. One it is just not cool. You are playing at two different levels one going easy and one going hard. You can't work like that. One pace is only reasonable.

And two. What does this do to the uke? He flinches covers and collapses. Which are not helpful responses. And certainly not something you want to train to be instinctive.

So when you do demos just be normal about it.

I have been guilty of doing this by the way. But have started to think it is a pretty silly way to show a technique.

 

[hussaf]

It's a demo. He's barely touching his partner. I would equate it to medium light sparring

 

[K-man]

I think I'm missing the point here. Are you referring to the Krav video or demonstrations in general? It's not long back in threads that there was a lot of criticism of demonstrations that were not realistic enough.
:asian:

 

[jezr74]

It didn't appear there was any surprises to me. If the guy didn't realize what was going on after the 50th scenario I'd be surprised. But I think I get your sentiment.

 

[drop bear]

I think I'm missing the point here. Are you referring to the Krav video or demonstrations in general? It's not long back in threads that there was a lot of criticism of demonstrations that were not realistic enough.
:asian:

Demos in general. Not resisted is my issue with realism. Not the pace at which a compliant drill is done.

 

[Tez3]

'Spazzy' again? So he jumped on him like a spastic ie a cripple, a disabled person? As I said before it's the same as saying the N word.
[h=3]Etymology[edit][/h]From spastic.
[h=3]Noun[/h]spaz (plural spazzes)

1. (slang, pejorative, offensive) A stupid person.
2. (slang, pejorative, offensive) A hyperactive person.
3. (slang, pejorative, offensive) An incompetent person.  [quotations ▼]
   • Tiger Woods, 2006 “I was so in control from tee to green, the best I’ve played for years… But as soon as I got on the green I was a spaz.”
4. (slang, pejorative, offensive) A tantrum, a fit.

[h=4]Usage notes[/h]In addition to being insulting to the target, the term itself is offensive to some due to associations with disability (especially cerebral palsy in the UK)

 

[drop bear]

It's a demo. He's barely touching his partner. I would equate it to medium light sparring

Sparring you can defend yourself. There are different dynamics in play.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hmm… To be blunt, I really don't think you're understanding much of what you're criticising here… I'll see if I can explain.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pkcu2sRnIlo&has_verified=1&layout=tablet&client=mv-google

Er… okay… honestly, I'm not sure what that clip has to do with anything you're saying… but we'll come back to it.

This has recently frustrated me. Has anybody been through this?

What has frustrated you? Been through what? The video (or whatever you see in it)? Or the idea of "bashing your uke" that you mention in the title? Reason I ask is that the two aren't really the same thing… in the clip, the "uke" (it's not a Japanese system, so that term isn't correct or accurate&#8230 isn't being "bashed"…

You do a demo your instructor tells you exactly what to come at him with. He knows when you are going to throw and you are not really fighting back. Then he springs on you a hundred miles an hour with solid finishing shots and spazzy submissions.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you meant to type "snazzy" submissions here… but, more to the point, yeah… that's kinda how a demo works… the "attacker" comes in with the prescribed attack (well… most of the time&#8230, and the "defender" responds. Of course, the context, and tactical expressions dictate (at least in part) what happens next on both sides… and yeah, it can involve "fighting back" in some form… but, in this instance, one of the basic tactical methods of Krav Maga being demonstrated is to completely overwhelm the opponent… to not give them the chance to continue to attack, or to really fight back at all… just to "duck and cover"…

You might note, of course, that absolutely none of the shots in the clip were landed "solidly"… nor were there really many forms of submissions, regardless of poorly chosen descriptives… I agree that the pace of the response should match that of the attack, but that's about it.

It is not neccesary. The idea of a compliant demo is so people can see what is going on.

No, that's one potential idea/aim of a compliant demo… it might just as easily be to impress others with a display of athleticism, strength, precision, speed, aggression, or anything else… or to highlight tactical and technical methods of a system or teacher… or to entertain… see if you can figure out what the clip's purpose is…

I would have thought that people accept that it is not real life and not resisted so take a chill pill and just show the movements at a casual rate. It is not like the uke is going anywhere.

Why would they do that if the purpose is to showcase aggressive, overwhelming responses? This is kinda what I was getting at when I said you don't seem to be understanding what you're critiquing…

If you do want to show technique at a million miles an hour then do the drill resisted. Give the other guy a chance to make you look stupid by defending.

Uh… no. Resistant drills are one thing, prescribed responses are another. And yes, if you want to ensure you can respond properly with the prescribed responses, you need to do them at proper, full combative speed. To suggest that you should only do them "chill" is really rather, well… I'm trying to find the word… stupid.

Thing is, why on earth would you, when demonstrating the system you train in, want to be made to look stupid? When training, testing etc, sure… but in a demo? That's so far out of whack with the reality that I hardly know where to start… besides which, let's say it's me doing the demo, if I'm working with someone, and they suddenly start coming back with something "out of the script", then I'm going to respond off-script as well… which firstly defeats the entire purpose of what I was trying to demonstrate, and secondly, is not going to be a pleasant experience for anyone.

My two major problems with this. One it is just not cool. You are playing at two different levels one going easy and one going hard. You can't work like that. One pace is only reasonable.

That both sides should be operating at the same pace, I agree… I've ranted against what I refer to as a Ferrari versus a Go-kart demonstrations (and training practices) myself a number of times, and my guys get pulled up pretty quickly if they are seen training like that… but I'm not sure where you're getting this idea from… it's actually not seen in the clip itself (there is a related issue, but not that one), and it's not by definition present in paced demo's. Which just brings us back to exactly what you're saying you're frustrated by…

And two. What does this do to the uke? He flinches covers and collapses. Which are not helpful responses. And certainly not something you want to train to be instinctive.

Yeah, you're missing the point here pretty badly as well…

Yes, the attacker (not an "uke"… mind you, if you want to look at the term itself, all it means is "receiver"… so yeah, their job is really to "receive" the technique… which is what's happening) flinches and covers… but why do you think that's not helpful? It's actually very helpful… it's a more realistic response, and entirely appropriate to the overwhelming tactic of Krav Maga, than in many other arts demos… where an attacker comes in with a single attack, then stands as a statue while the defender performs a range of kicks and strikes all over their body.

As far as it not being something you want to train to be instinctive, again, you're really missing the structure and methodology of this training device. Unlike a sporting system, where both sides are trying to employ the same methodology (i.e. it's a matched engagement), this is an attempt to simulate a realistic situation… which is not matched… both sides are employing differing methodologies and tactics… with the idea that the Krav practitioner (the defender) is the one training the technique. The defender (receiver) is there, not to train how to be an attacker, but to provide feedback for the defenders techniques… as a result, covering and flinching is realistic, and is a form of positive feedback provided to the defender, showing that the technique is doing what it's meant to be doing. Which is helpful, if you didn't catch it.

So when you do demos just be normal about it.

That is normal (in the video). But, for fun, how do you define "normal" in this sense? Cause a sporting, resistant, fighting back ideal would be quite abnormal, you know…

I have been guilty of doing this by the way. But have started to think it is a pretty silly way to show a technique.

As I'm still a little unsure of what you're thinking you've been guilty of, or what you think is a "silly way to show a technique", I don't really have a response for this… so I'll simply ask for some clarification.

Are you seeing the issues you are attempting to identify in the clip you linked? The way you've described them, I don't (besides which, if you have an issue with the way things are shown there, you'd really hate my classes&#8230. I do see a range of issues that I have with the clip, but nothing really close to what you seem to be talking about.

For the record, my issues are that the responses are almost entirely overkill and unnecessary, to the point of being overtly classed as assault in many cases… many of the attacks are "static" (someone holding up a hand, pointing at you, etc), or represent very little actual threat… and garner a response of multiple kicks, including to the head in a number of cases. I also had quite a few issues with the weapon defence (knife, impact, and firearm), with many of them being just shy of suicide to my eyes. The only times I saw something you seem to be discussing was the pacing issue, which was most apparent with some of the bat defences… the attack came in relatively slowly… but that I took as a safety concern with the attack.

 

[Hanzou]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pkcu2sRnIlo&has_verified=1&layout=tablet&client=mv-google

It's always impressive to watch a bigger guy beat the crap out of a smaller guy in a demonstration.....

 

[K-man]

Demos in general. Not resisted is my issue with realism. Not the pace at which a compliant drill is done.

OK. I've been on the receiving end of Krav students twice in the last six weeks. First time was scenario training where I had a firearm. I was thumped by 35 students one after the other for about 45 minutes. I had some protective gear on but I still felt the power of their response. Then a couple of weeks ago, as I said recently, just regular training, some protective gear and attacking with a stick. I hit the deck 25 times in a similar fashion to what you saw in that video. I felt that I'd been hit by a truck both times. Every one of the students went is full steam and I was totally overwhelmed by their ferocity and the barrage of blows.

Could I have fought back? Possibly but in reality once you commit to an attack with a weapon your mindset is not on defending, it is attacking and when you get their response it is right in your face. I doubt I could have resisted much more than 25% of the responses.

Demos are different, but if they lack realism then that defeats the purpose. Even so, the response in the video shown was pretty much spot on to my mind.
:asian:

 

[elder999]

Sparring you can defend yourself. There are different dynamics in play.

Yeah, fer instance-let's take your original post, and see what?

This has recently frustrated me. Has anybody been through this?

You do a demo your instructor tells you exactly what to come at him with. He knows when you are going to throw and you are not really fighting back. Then he springs on you a hundred miles an hour with solid finishing shots and spazzy submissions.

You do a demo and the uke knows exactly what the instructor is going to defend himself with. He knows what how I'm going to respond, and he's not really going to fight back. Then he makes it all dramatic, by looking like I'm springing on him at a hundred miles an hour, making it appear that I'm using solid finishing shots and writhing in feigned spasms of pain at each of my submissions.



See what I did there?

Demonstrations

Not meant to instruct

But to entertain, feign pain

uke flies, and lands...


Let's continue....

It is not neccesary. The idea of a compliant demo is so people can see what is going on. I would have thought that people accept that it is not real life and not resisted so take a chill pill and just show the movements at a casual rate. It is not like the uke is going anywhere.

The idea of a compliant demo is so people can be entertained. I would have thought that people accept the idea that it is not real life and not resisted, so take a chill pill and just accept that the whole things an act.It's not like the uke is going to the hospital.

If you do want to show technique at a million miles an hour then do the drill resisted. Give the other guy a chance to make you look stupid by defending.

If you do want to show technique at a "million miles an hour," then doing the drill resisted might get the other guy hurt. Giving "the other guy a chance to make you look stupid" isn't particularly entertaining either.

My two major problems with this. One it is just not cool. You are playing at two different levels one going easy and one going hard. You can't work like that. One pace is only reasonable.

My two major problems with this? You are playing at what appear to be two different levels, but are actually one: prearranged and practiced. You can't work any other way-it's the only reasonable way-and it's entertaining.

And two. What does this do to the uke? He flinches covers and collapses. Which are not helpful responses. And certainly not something you want to train to be instinctive.

And two. What does the uke do? He flinches covers and collapses. Which are very entertaining responses, and demonstrations certainly aren't training.....

So when you do demos just be normal about it.

So when you see demos, recognize that it's just that: a demo.

Now, in class, it's altogether another story, most of the time-you're going to demonstrate at a variety of angles and speeds, almost all of which are equally unrealistic for their own reasons- a knife attacker isn't going to just stand there with his arm extended while explain things to everyone around me, move him around so people can see all angles, and then let me show the next part of the technique.......so unrealistic....:lfao:
riously, in my opinion, that's what a Youtube video is, 99% of the time-entertainment, or advertising. Both have to be somewhat sensational-of course, a lot of what you see on Youtube is fairly craptastick, and some is meant to be instructional....how much it actually is....well, that's another longstanding internet debate, isn't it? :lfao:

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Eh, I've seen situations like what you are complaining about, but I don't think this video is a good example. As elder999 notes, it's really a demo for advertising purposes. The strikes are mostly pulled and/or deliberately off-target while the "attacker" play-acts getting beat down. It's like a scripted movie fight scene.

There can be some validity in actually training this way occasionally. If you want your students to be psychologically prepared to continue pressing the attack when they have the advantage rather than backing off when their opponent looks in trouble, then it doesn't hurt to sometimes practice following through until the "attacker" is thoroughly defeated. Personally, I wouldn't do this sort of practice all the time. For one thing, it can build up a false sense of confidence that can be shattered when the student encounters an attacker who does not go down so easily and who stays in the fight. Also, as Chris mentioned, some of the follow-ups demonstrated probably cross the line of what is legally/ethically justified.

I have seen demonstrations where the instructor applies joint locks hard and fast and then continues grinding them on while his uke grimaces in pain and taps as fast as he can. Some of those probably involve uke play-acting the same way the attackers were in this video. With others, I suspect the instructor is just being an ******* and inflicting unnecessary pain and risking unnecessary injury. I don't have a lot of patience for that,

 

[drop bear]

Eh, I've seen situations like what you are complaining about, but I don't think this video is a good example. As elder999 notes, it's really a demo for advertising purposes. The strikes are mostly pulled and/or deliberately off-target while the "attacker" play-acts getting beat down. It's like a scripted movie fight scene.

There can be some validity in actually training this way occasionally. If you want your students to be psychologically prepared to continue pressing the attack when they have the advantage rather than backing off when their opponent looks in trouble, then it doesn't hurt to sometimes practice following through until the "attacker" is thoroughly defeated. Personally, I wouldn't do this sort of practice all the time. For one thing, it can build up a false sense of confidence that can be shattered when the student encounters an attacker who does not go down so easily and who stays in the fight. Also, as Chris mentioned, some of the follow-ups demonstrated probably cross the line of what is legally/ethically justified.

I have seen demonstrations where the instructor applies joint locks hard and fast and then continues grinding them on while his uke grimaces in pain and taps as fast as he can. Some of those probably involve uke play-acting the same way the attackers were in this video. With others, I suspect the instructor is just being an ******* and inflicting unnecessary pain and risking unnecessary injury. I don't have a lot of patience for that,

The video as an example.

I don't know how beneficial training multiple finishing moves really is though. You train to avoid and counter that is the meat of what you are learning. The rest is just show.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

The video as an example.

I don't know how beneficial training multiple finishing moves really is though. You train to avoid and counter that is the meat of what you are learning. The rest is just show.

Some folks (like myself) don't start out with much in the way of "killer instinct" and may have the natural tendency to back off when they see an opponent look hurt. This could be a serious mistake in a self-defense situation. Maybe you only got the initial advantage because the bad guy wasn't expecting a strong counterattack and if you allow him to recover you may not get the advantage again.

As I said, I don't think most people need to train that way most of the time. It's just an occasional option for those who need it. I guess it does make an entertaining demo for those who are into such things, though.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I don't have a problem with the contact in this video. I was raised on that stuff. However, I think one should avoid constantly dropping your arms to your side in the heat of battle. Where do you find these vids?

 

[drop bear]

Some folks (like myself) don't start out with much in the way of "killer instinct" and may have the natural tendency to back off when they see an opponent look hurt. This could be a serious mistake in a self-defense situation. Maybe you only got the initial advantage because the bad guy wasn't expecting a strong counterattack and if you allow him to recover you may not get the advantage again.

As I said, I don't think most people need to train that way most of the time. It's just an occasional option for those who need it. I guess it does make an entertaining demo for those who are into such things, though.

Arent you training to back off when you get hit though? Rather than defend and counter.

 

[hussaf]

Sparring you can defend yourself. There are different dynamics in play.

regarding contact. He barely touched the guy and that guy was clearly acting for the video. They are trying to make a sensational video to get views on YouTube. These faux street demos aren't really something I care for, but I don't begrudge them their desire to make their school look "deadly street."

 

[drop bear]

I don't have a problem with the contact in this video. I was raised on that stuff. However, I think one should avoid constantly dropping your arms to your side in the heat of battle. Where do you find these vids?

I have some boring night shifts.

Yeah I was raised on that stuff as well. The issue I have is a recent thing. Especially the sub's. You defiantly don't need to crank a sub in a demo.

 

[K-man]

Arent you training to back off when you get hit though? Rather than defend and counter.

More in the context of the demo you are just covering up and trying not to get pummelled. A little bit of psychology comes into play here. In the ring you have 'consensual' violence. Each is trying to attack the other within a given rule set. On the street your assailant has already picked you as his victim. Normally, he will only attack someone if he believes he had a distinct advantage and is 100% certain of success, in his own mind. So when he attacks, he is not expecting much resistance, if any. Krav is a full on explosion of violence in response to an attack and unless you are expecting it, I would suggest most people would be more inclined to be defending themselves and not countering.
:asian:

 

[geezer]

It's always impressive to watch a bigger guy beat the crap out of a smaller guy in a demonstration.....

Nobody seemed to pick up on this comment. Well maybe it's a little off topic, but it's something that bugs me too. Like all those demos by Joseph Simonet and Addy Hernandez. Well I admit that Addy had a bit to do with why I watched them (it certainly wasn't Joseph's WC skills) but why not have Addy beat up on Joseph?

Here's a funny one: