If we consider the fact that all Israelis are serving in the army of their country for three years and then they become reservists and that army is active, then it will be probably a course that will quickly teach someone something. Is a technological advanced army of course, they will normally not count that much on hand-to-hand defense. Perhaps the course will continue to teach people that are interesting for more, but taken the above as facts, is probably something like that.
A common t-shirt that armies give to their soldiers, is saying if you run you die twice. So here is one difference. Not so easily running or escaping, perhaps an organized retreating if the situation is for an organized retreating. Some Krav Maga civilian courses at list, tend to think their clients mainly as ships escaping from wolves, rather than mainly as lions defending against wolves, or eagles tactics. (In real life that translates mainly to make the opponent/s not to want to attack rather than anything else)There is a big difference there and even if the instructor is fine, based on this concept and tactic (strike and then run away) some Krav Maga civilian versions at list, do not really pass martial skills to civilians, rather than behaving more like they teach ships to escape from wolves.
That is a serious difference.Another difference is that in armed combat someone is choosing the best tactics taken into consideration the freedom, the honor, and the preservation of him/her, the local population, and his/her country.The same applies to martial skills. It can be advancing, it can be retreating but is not an easily disorganized run away. That is a part of martial skills, as part of them is to be mentally and physical be able to take the best of each case, based on the above values (freedom, honor, and preservation) Some Krav Maga civilian courses at list, do not pass any real skills rather than mainly treat their clients as ships. So the difference is big.
A martial art, if among others also aims to be passing martial skills, is not taught mainly as ships escaping from wolves but mainly as lions defending from wolves or eagles tactics. That is what we can call, passing martial skills.
Edit: I will explain a bit more for the ones that are interested...If someone wants to pass martial skills he may tell something like that the attacker will probably leave if he sees a Lion, or not be able to attack well. He may teach intimidation, fearlessness in a way and effective skills. If he wants to pass ships escaping from wolves he may invoke fear and teach kick in the groin and then run away. While many will see the second as the appropriate choice, the first in real life translates better most of the times, since attackers do not attack easily to Lions and in addition healthy psychological Lions due to being more secure, may behave more sociable and nice, so they are less likely to get attacked due to that as well. They also don't go and think themselves as Lions:) I am just giving animal examples.:)
Edit 2: Yes that is true. I wrote that as well before. "In real life that translates mainly to make the opponent/s not to want to attack rather than anything else". An effective military ideally is the one that does not have to cause unnecessary casualties and has a very good background to cover its actions. An ineffective military is the one that creates a lot of unnecessary casualties and creates revengeful actions for ever. Killing someone or people is the worst possible action. Something similar is for general self-defense as well. An ineffective person may try to kill easily, an effective person may prevent the attack by just a look or behavior.
Edit 3: In all military systems there is the use of a military gun with out bullets and a bayonet, so there is a difference. Keep on mind everyone reading this, that killing is not an action to be taken lightly and discussed like is going for beers. Is by far and far and far, the worst possible action. Russia retook Crimea with out firing a shoot, just a few days ago, to realize how it can be. If killing was that light, wouldn't have done it differently?
My understanding is simply that the military version includes neck breaks and other techniques done intentionally for their possible lethality. The civilian version does not include killing techniques since that is not its main purpose. Civilians have a need for a self-defense system that is designed only to remove the threat or allow them to escape. It is never intended for the purpose of killing the attacker.
Note: as you mentioned I see more and more of these cardio fitness places popping up in Georgia under the name of Krav Maga. Most are nothing more than health gyms that use KM as a draw and then sell fitness contracts. These types of gyms are to often offering KM under someone that got his credentials from some weekend seminar.
...
To expand on this a little.... Military combatives are essentially a last-ditch thing... The idea being to kill or incapacitate your enemy when you have no means left to fight.
There are no (or at least very few) legal considerations in combat. You will not be sued by the enemy's survivors.
You are usually in a "combat" situation.
As well, the military uses unarmed combat training for reasons other than practicality. The actual use of unarmed combat on the contemporary battlefield is very rare.
So, it's used to instill confidence, the "warrior spirit", and of course to provide physical conditioning and "toughness".
So, it's to be expected that many of the techniques taught are not particularly applicable to civilian self-defense.
The civilian must needs worry about "appropriate levels of force". About the legal consequences of self-defense. About the "reasonableness" of his/her actions.
So, it's not surprising that civilian-oriented methods may differ somewhat from those of the military. It's not that one is "better" than the other.... It's a matter of what's appropriate for the particular situation.
Civilian Krav Maga: You go home to your family.
Military/Commando Krav Maga: They do not go home to their family.
For civilians it's a type of comicbook from Japan in the military they don't let you read that stuff during a war though.
I used to find military vipers cause of stupid and they right maybe I am make cartoons out of fighters you should know we all have to act hippy now.
I am geniunely curious as to how the general knowledge is here on the Y!A lately. So I am curious what do you consider is the difference between Krav Maga as taught to civilians and Krav Maga as it is taught to the military.
Keep in mind I am going off the assumption that the civilian flavor is taught by legit Krav instructor, with multiple years of experience, and not a cardio Krav fitness instructor who went to an instructors course.
So Krav Maga as taught to people by Eli Avikzar, Eyal Yanilov, Raphy Elgrissy, Haim Zut, Shmuel Kurzviel, Haim Hakani, Shlomo Avisira, Vicktor Bracha, Yaron Lichtenstein, Avner Hazan and Miki Asulin, and Darren Levine (or people closely related).
Vs. Krav Maga as taught to the Israeli Defense Force.
I ask, because I see this referenced in any question regarding Krav Maga, or in response to anyone posting an answer about Krav Maga.
What do you see are the differences out of curiousity?
Thanks!
