Do you prefer to keep your hands within six or so inches from each other when in active stance, or do you like to hold them as wide as your opponent's shoulders are? I've studied under numerous teachers, and none of them agrees on the matter. Some say it's best to go shoulder-width because it makes it easier to defend against haymakers and hooks, which are typically your opponent's strongest punches, while others say it's best to go with narrow spacing to better protect the front, rather than the sides, of your face. I hold my hands neither as wide as his shoulders nor as narrow as six or so inches from each other. Instead, I hold them wide enough to cover the span of his chest, which means stopping where the shoulders begin. I feel more confident that I'd be able to defend against haymakers and hooks that way as well as defend against jabs and crosses. Doing so also expands the range of my site -- six or so inches makes it hard to use my peripheral vision, I find.
I would say that the best answer is just to do what works for you. Everyone's body is different, and all of us have varying levels of peripheral vision, reaction time, mobility and strength in certain ranges and not others, etc. So even with what works for your teacher may not exactly work for you, and vice versa. The short answer: just do you bro!
Great video and basics for the stance. I just wanted to know one thing: What if the opponent attempts to hit you in the groin or the crotch area? Do I need to be quick enough to dodge it (sidestepping, backing off, be in constant moving), or can I just deflect it with the hands (lowering hands similar to a boxing low stance, get in a bladed stance etc.). Which of these steps would you reccomend in this case? I was thinking of switching between a philly shell/low guard stance for defense/distance, and this krav maga/judo-like stance for attack/quick reaction to the moves of the opponents. Thank you.
Hey bro, that's a great question. I would say if they go for a groin shot, deflecting with the hands is a better option because that kind of stance doesn't lend itself too much to quick mobility. Bladed stances are a bit better for that. That's just my two cents tho!
@@ChuckJohnson I see. So the key to it would be adaptability and mobility. After all, nothing is easier to hit than a statue. I really do like the basis of this squared Krav Maga stance, but I also do appreciate the bladed stance, which, as I mentioned before, would be better only for defence and evasion (at least this is how I view it). Squared: Power, stability, steadiness, offensive readiness (both hands up, either fists or hands). Bladed: speed, reflexes, defensive readiness (one arm up, the other down, either fists or open hands). I have to say though, I feel much safer in a squared stance (not totally squared though, but something similar to the Krav Maga stance, the Judo one, or kickboxing stance), mainly because the bladed one requires better reflexes and a high level of skill. Being squared is simpler and you have (more or less) equal distribution of strength, defence provided by the hands and arms and movements. In my experience, I do prefer such a stance, but as one develops their skills, switching to a bladed stance may be a great alternative as well. The way I think it, the best would be just to hone your senses, understand your circumstances AND always be on guard and on the move. How you do it precisely does not really matter that much at the end of the day. Stances are not essential, especially in chaotic fights. Experts just need to know what they're doing or what they're thinking about. Mind before body, and then fast execution. Thank you for your reply!
Do you prefer to keep your hands within six or so inches from each other when in active stance, or do you like to hold them as wide as your opponent's shoulders are? I've studied under numerous teachers, and none of them agrees on the matter. Some say it's best to go shoulder-width because it makes it easier to defend against haymakers and hooks, which are typically your opponent's strongest punches, while others say it's best to go with narrow spacing to better protect the front, rather than the sides, of your face.
I hold my hands neither as wide as his shoulders nor as narrow as six or so inches from each other. Instead, I hold them wide enough to cover the span of his chest, which means stopping where the shoulders begin. I feel more confident that I'd be able to defend against haymakers and hooks that way as well as defend against jabs and crosses. Doing so also expands the range of my site -- six or so inches makes it hard to use my peripheral vision, I find.
I would say that the best answer is just to do what works for you. Everyone's body is different, and all of us have varying levels of peripheral vision, reaction time, mobility and strength in certain ranges and not others, etc. So even with what works for your teacher may not exactly work for you, and vice versa. The short answer: just do you bro!
Square is cool, but in the back of my mind im scared of gttn hit in the nuts
Yeah, that is definately a reasonable concern, lol.
Great video and basics for the stance. I just wanted to know one thing: What if the opponent attempts to hit you in the groin or the crotch area? Do I need to be quick enough to dodge it (sidestepping, backing off, be in constant moving), or can I just deflect it with the hands (lowering hands similar to a boxing low stance, get in a bladed stance etc.). Which of these steps would you reccomend in this case? I was thinking of switching between a philly shell/low guard stance for defense/distance, and this krav maga/judo-like stance for attack/quick reaction to the moves of the opponents. Thank you.
Hey bro, that's a great question. I would say if they go for a groin shot, deflecting with the hands is a better option because that kind of stance doesn't lend itself too much to quick mobility. Bladed stances are a bit better for that. That's just my two cents tho!
@@ChuckJohnson I see. So the key to it would be adaptability and mobility. After all, nothing is easier to hit than a statue. I really do like the basis of this squared Krav Maga stance, but I also do appreciate the bladed stance, which, as I mentioned before, would be better only for defence and evasion (at least this is how I view it).
Squared: Power, stability, steadiness, offensive readiness (both hands up, either fists or hands).
Bladed: speed, reflexes, defensive readiness (one arm up, the other down, either fists or open hands).
I have to say though, I feel much safer in a squared stance (not totally squared though, but something similar to the Krav Maga stance, the Judo one, or kickboxing stance), mainly because the bladed one requires better reflexes and a high level of skill. Being squared is simpler and you have (more or less) equal distribution of strength, defence provided by the hands and arms and movements. In my experience, I do prefer such a stance, but as one develops their skills, switching to a bladed stance may be a great alternative as well.
The way I think it, the best would be just to hone your senses, understand your circumstances AND always be on guard and on the move. How you do it precisely does not really matter that much at the end of the day. Stances are not essential, especially in chaotic fights. Experts just need to know what they're doing or what they're thinking about. Mind before body, and then fast execution.
Thank you for your reply!
@@abn1yt My pleasure my man! Glad you found it useful!
will there be more of krav mega videos
aloysius boykins Yes, He plans to do a video once a week. This is the second video of this series.
aloysius boykins Hey man! Yes indeed! 10 more on the way!
Thank you for having the honor to be able to point out your own mistakes!
Dronarus It's my pleasure bro. Just trying to keep it real👍🏾👍🏾
Cool new vids
cool
Damon Stewart Thanks man! Glad you liked it!
good Idea, but the Information is not full therefore its not the authentical Krav Maga, foundet by Imi Lichtenfeld
hi
wesllful Hi! Thanks for checking it out!