# Knife Myths



## MJS (Nov 16, 2011)

While reading a recent issue of BB magazine, I came across an article written by Mark Jacobs.  He was talking about some of the knife fighting 'masters' and how many of them have never used a knife in combat.  He goes on to say that there is alot of inaccurate information out there, when it comes to knife defense and what a knife can/can't do.

So, he consulted with a NY based martial artist, who's trained many years in several systems that specialize in bladed weaponry.  He's also an experienced medical professional who has studied knife attacks

***At this point I'll say that no mention of this 'experts' name is mentioned, other than Mark calling him "The Expert" so I can't confirm or deny any of this mystery mans background.  So, that being said, take what he said, with a grain of salt.***

I'll go ahead and post a few small tidbits to the 4 'myths' that the "expert" talks about.

Myth #1: Its easy to kill a person quickly and easily with a blade.  The "Expert" states: Wrong. There are few places that you can put a knife that'll drop them instantly.  Someone under drugs could keep fighting despite the wounds.  Someone stabbed in the heart could still go on or 30secs.  

Myth #2: The areas a MAist is taught to target with a knife will work with any knife.  The 'expert' states: Not always.  The size of the blade will come into play when determining what types of injuries happen.  The defanging of the snake, thats often found in the FMAs tend to be done with a large blade or sword, so alot of what you see probably wont have the effect thats usually claimed.

Myth #3: A MAist could block a slash with the outside of the forearm because a cut to the inside of the arm could be deadly.  Expet says: Technically thats true, but with a small blade, you're less likely to suffer a fatal wound on the inside of the arm.  Even if you did, you'll have enough time to make it to the hospital before losing consciousness. 

Myth #4: A sharp knife will cut through clothing as though its not even there.  Expert says: Nope.  A heavy winter coat offers a degree of protection  that few realize.  But that still doesnt mean that you should neglect being cautious just because you may be wearing heavy clothing.  


I figured I'd put this here, instead of the FMA or knife sections, because I wanted to hear from everyone, rather than just a blade specific art.  So, what are your thoughts?  Do you feel that this "Expert" knows what he's talking about?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 16, 2011)

MJS said:


> While reading a recent issue of BB magazine, I came across an article written by Mark Jacobs.  He was talking about some of the knife fighting 'masters' and how many of them have never used a knife in combat.  He goes on to say that there is alot of inaccurate information out there, when it comes to knife defense and what a knife can/can't do.
> 
> So, he consulted with a NY based martial artist, who's trained many years in several systems that specialize in bladed weaponry.  He's also an experienced medical professional who has studied knife attacks
> 
> ***At this point I'll say that no mention of this 'experts' name is mentioned, other than Mark calling him "The Expert" so I can't confirm or deny any of this mystery mans background.  So, that being said, take what he said, with a grain of salt.***



I've seen a few wounds inflicted with various sharp objects in 30-some years in EMS and the ER...



MJS said:


> I'll go ahead and post a few small tidbits to the 4 'myths' that the "expert" talks about.
> 
> Myth #1: Its easy to kill a person quickly and easily with a blade.  The "Expert" states: Wrong. There are few places that you can put a knife that'll drop them instantly.  Someone under drugs could keep fighting despite the wounds.  Someone stabbed in the heart could still go on or 30secs.



This is true. Even severing the carotid or femoral artery is not instant death. Quick, but not instant. And really not all that easy to do. I've seen more than one person with knife or bullet holes in the heart who kept on fighting. In fact, the only truely "instant" death from a blade I can think of would be one which severed the spinal cord. 



MJS said:


> Myth #2: The areas a MAist is taught to target with a knife will work with any knife.  The 'expert' states: Not always.  The size of the blade will come into play when determining what types of injuries happen.  The defanging of the snake, thats often found in the FMAs tend to be done with a large blade or sword, so alot of what you see probably wont have the effect thats usually claimed.



Yes and no. The size of the blade certainly matters, but given the compressability of human tissues, a small blade can and will penetrate deeper than you might expect. And the small puncture wound is also more likely to be missed during a hurried initial exam, especially when there's a big bloody (but shallow) slash somewhere else.



MJS said:


> Myth #3: A MAist could block a slash with the outside of the forearm because a cut to the inside of the arm could be deadly.  Expet says: Technically thats true, but with a small blade, you're less likely to suffer a fatal wound on the inside of the arm.  Even if you did, you'll have enough time to make it to the hospital before losing consciousness.



Agreed. Frankly, I can only think of one arm lac in the last decade (other than amputations,which I don't think are at issue here) that was truely life threatening. It severed the brachial artery, and would not have been nearly as bad, if the foolish drunken people involved had called 911 instead of driving him in with a towel wrapped around his arm. However, the ulnar surface of the arm is certainly going to provide the least chance of a blade hitting something major.



MJS said:


> Myth #4: A sharp knife will cut through clothing as though its not even there.  Expert says: Nope.  A heavy winter coat offers a degree of protection  that few realize.  But that still doesnt mean that you should neglect being cautious just because you may be wearing heavy clothing.



Piffle. The idea that all clothing is the same is patently ludicrous. Your pretty silk shirt is obviously not going to provide as much protection as a leather coat, or multiple layers of heavy fabric. Nor does it account for the very different injuries from a thrust, a slash or a cut. Nobody with an intelligence above room temp should need an expert to tell them that.


----------



## Cyriacus (Nov 16, 2011)

Knives arent any more Lethal than a Brick, which isnt any more Lethal than the Hand that Throws it.
Its Where, and How, and with What.
I mean, Accost Me with a ****ing Claymore Sword and I will not try and take You on. Make Me a Black Belt in everything known to Man and Ill still Hesitate to try and Fight a Guy with a Claymore using Unarmed Combat.
A Guy with a Short to Medium Length Fixed or Non-Fixed Blade Knife or Tanto, and then Ill judge it based on the Situation. Make it a Long Knife, and Im more likely to, due to the exact Length of a Long Knife making it easier to Infight.
This isnt fully fleshed out in Details and Ifs and Buts, but im not writing a bloody Knife Fighting Booklet here.

What Im saying, is that Hes mostly Correct.
Assuming someone didnt get all fearful, and the Knife Fighter wasnt Speed-Stabbing.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 16, 2011)

MJS said:


> While reading a recent issue of BB magazine, I came across an article written by Mark Jacobs.  He was talking about some of the knife fighting 'masters' and how many of them have never used a knife in combat.  He goes on to say that there is alot of inaccurate information out there, when it comes to knife defense and what a knife can/can't do.
> 
> So, he consulted with a NY based martial artist, who's trained many years in several systems that specialize in bladed weaponry.  He's also an experienced medical professional who has studied knife attacks
> 
> ...



Hey Mike,

Overall, it's not too bad, really. The guy does know what he's talking about, but he is making a fair few generalisations (hardly surprising) for my tastes. But to take them in order:

1: Yep, very true. One of my first go-to guys for knife is Michael Janich, and one of the things that Michael did early on was to test the Fairbairn "Timetable of Death" (the approximate time it takes for specific injuries to cause death, or other immobilisations, such as bleeding out to unconsciousness). And the first thing he found was that Fairbairn had basically guessed at all of it, and it was rather inaccurate in a large number of cases. People had more time than Fairbairn had thought. As a result, Michael Janich turned his knife work to "fight stopping" actions, taking the ability for limbs to mechanically work, which is an approach that is unaffected by the drugs the opponent is on, the adrenaline, etc, and is also not necessarily a lethal response.

A few days ago I was discussing this with another instructor (in some traditional Japanese arts, such as Iaido), and we were both making the point that it is not easy to "just drop someone" with a cut or stab.... although in some cases, that is exactly what happens. The basic lesson was to not expect to immediately drop someone if you have a knife, but to also realise that if they have one, there is the chance that they could (potentially) do that to you, so to not underestimate the knife's power.

2: This is the first generalisation... which martial art, and which targets? As I said, my knife work is highly based on Michael Janich's work, so my targets tend to be the tendons, flexors, muscles etc on the limbs in order to disable them, and in those cases, a short blade or a long blade is pretty fine. Then again, in the more "traditional" side of things, a longer blade is required for some of the entry methods and so forth. So that really depends on the methods in question.

3: Ha, that one I'd just call the "lesser of two evils". The main thing is to avoid the blade, and part of that for us includes moving inside the functional range of the blade, and putting a "barrier" of your arms between your body and the knife. Ideally, I teach to have the backs of your forearms facing the attackers arm, but that is not always possible/optimal, so if you have the inner arms presented, okay. Just be careful.... I know of other instructors in other systems who teach to always go in with the inner forearm first, as it's the exact same physical action as a number of other things whether a knife is involved or not, so there is no need to adjust. Additionally, it can lead to a quicker seize for control over the weapon, so it does have a place... just try to not touch the metal sharp bit!

4: Now this one is a big generalisation. A heavy winter coat can provide a fair amount of protection, as can leather jackets and the like (the thicker the better that way), but it's not guaranteed. Denim, for instance, some think provides a fair amount of protection, but again, if you find some of Michael Janichs material, he demonstrates pretty quickly the way a knife can go through demin (as in jeans) pretty easily as well. So some clothing can offer some protection, others just won't do much. My preferred use of clothing to protect against a knife would be to wrap a jacket or something similar around my hand/forearm, making it as thick as I could, and go in with that, using the wrapped arm to knock the knife/knife hand, intercept incoming slashes, etc.

With the beginning, talking about many "knife masters" who have never used a blade in combat, a number look specifically to the Filipino systems as there is a heavy blade culture there, and many of the systems are based in the combat that is frequent in that part of the world. That, to most, lends the system credibility in it's approach to knife combat, as the methods taught have theoretically been used "for real". However, most don't take into account the cultural aspects, the preference for particular blades, particular attacks, particular rituals, particular legal realities, and so on. So while the methods may have indeed seen use, they may have seen use in a fairly different environment than the one you're practicing for. Which is an interesting thing to consider when such claims are being used as to why a particular system is "better" than another... the question is always, "better for what"?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Nov 16, 2011)

Cyriacus said:


> Knives arent any more Lethal than a Brick, which isnt any more Lethal than the Hand that Throws it.
> Its Where, and How, and with What.
> I mean, Accost Me with a ****ing Claymore Sword and I will not try and take You on. Make Me a Black Belt in everything known to Man and Ill still Hesitate to try and Fight a Guy with a Claymore using Unarmed Combat.
> A Guy with a Short to Medium Length Fixed or Non-Fixed Blade Knife or Tanto, and then Ill judge it based on the Situation. Make it a Long Knife, and Im more likely to, due to the exact Length of a Long Knife making it easier to Infight.
> ...



Actually, you might well be better off fighting the sword wielder. The true claymore is a long, heavy two handed sword. It's use to describe a Scottish broadsword is common, but not entirely accurate. What the weapons have in common is that they are large, relatively heavy, and intended to be used against an opponent wearing armor. Their attacks are not particularly fast. Move in close, and a 7 foot weapon is not terribly useful.

Unless you meant a claymore mine, in which case I'll need to re-write this reply.


----------



## Cyriacus (Nov 16, 2011)

Dirty Dog said:


> Actually, you might well be better off fighting the sword wielder. The true claymore is a long, heavy two handed sword. It's use to describe a Scottish broadsword is common, but not entirely accurate. What the weapons have in common is that they are large, relatively heavy, and intended to be used against an opponent wearing armor. Their attacks are not particularly fast. Move in close, and a 7 foot weapon is not terribly useful.
> 
> Unless you meant a claymore mine, in which case I'll need to re-write this reply.



Yeah, but its a ****ing CLAYMORE. Its a 7 Foot Long Blade that could literally cut You in Half. Id rather not try to Attack it Head On.
I mean, lets think of someone Swinging Right to Left, then back Left to Right, adjusting the Arc as needed. Swinging Straight Up if You end up in Range, and Raising Up to Swing Down if You go past it as it passes You.
Yeah, Logically You can overcome it.

Now get someone a Genuine Claymore and try to tell Yourself that the first time.
Then try the same thing in a SD Scenario 

In fact, I can find a True Story about a Commando in WW2 who went into Combat with a Claymore and a Bagpipe (Im being quite Serious, mind).
And Successfully... Won... On a couple of Occassions.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 16, 2011)

Actually, I'm with Dirty Dog on this. The Claymore you're at least going to see first.... the knife? Not so likely. Additionally, evasion against a longer, more cumbersome weapon is easier than against a small, highly agile one. I was taking a few of the more senior guys through some approaches against spears on Tuesday night... and it involved you using a short sword, not a long one. Getting past the spear was not too difficult, but once past, the spearman had no use of his weapon.

That said, the intimidation of something like a Claymore definitely has an impact on how you proceed!


----------



## frank raud (Nov 16, 2011)

Knife training probably has the highest amount of instructors with no real world experience, only theory, and simulated practice.  As very few people want to take a live blade and test a theory, so it shall remain.


----------



## Flying Crane (Nov 16, 2011)

MJS said:


> While reading a recent issue of BB magazine, I came across an article written by Mark Jacobs. He was talking about some of the knife fighting 'masters' and how many of them have never used a knife in combat.





frank raud said:


> Knife training probably has the highest amount of instructors with no real world experience, only theory, and simulated practice. As very few people want to take a live blade and test a theory, so it shall remain.



You beat me to it.  Really, how many people out there have extensive hands-on experience with this, at least in American society?  It's just not that common, and to expect an extensive amount of experience would mean the guy is a downright felon who ought to be in prison for life.

The nature of society in modern America is such that the vast majority of those teaching any weapon are going to have little or no real-life experience with it.  They are teaching from theory.

Now someone coming from some war torn region of Africa, for example, might have more of that experience.  And I'd bet they have a very small number of techniques, which are all very simple and straight forward.  Nothing fancy or complicated.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 16, 2011)

Except, as I mentioned earlier (ha, I beat both of you to it!) that experience will be coloured by the cultural environment, so the experience won't necessarily be terribly close to what you would go up against in a knife defence/usage context in another culture. For instance, the war-torn African approach would more likely tend towards larger blades, getting closer to a machete, the attacking tactics would be intentionally lethal, large, swinging attacks, most likely coming down on a diagonal, and just chopping down on anything presented (arms, legs, sticks in the way etc). Not really anything like a mugging with a knife, a grab-and-shank attack, being held and the knife pressed against you, or anything else more likely in a modern Western urban or city environment. The knife used in the Western version will typically be far smaller as well, ambush attacks more of a common approach (many people who have been stabbed just think they've been punched, as they don't see the knife, which is a far cry from having your fingers cut off by a machete swinging at you... you tend to notice things like that!).

So the person may have some experience in bladed weapon combat, but is it really relevant experience?


----------



## Carol (Nov 16, 2011)

Myth #1 I agree....for reasons already stated.



> Myth #2: The areas a MAist is taught to target with a knife will work with any knife.  The 'expert' states: Not always.  The size of the blade will come into play when determining what types of injuries happen.  The defanging of the snake, thats often found in the FMAs tend to be done with a large blade or sword, so alot of what you see probably wont have the effect thats usually claimed.



Strongly agree.  Target reas will work with any ANY knife?  A kerambit is a knife, so is a push dagger, a small folder, and a large Ka-Bar.  These can all employ different targeting and different methods of action



> Myth #3: A MAist could block a slash with the outside of the forearm because a cut to the inside of the arm could be deadly.  Expet says: Technically thats true, but with a small blade, you're less likely to suffer a fatal wound on the inside of the arm.  Even if you did, you'll have enough time to make it to the hospital before losing consciousness.



I honestly don't know.  Both sides have nerves and connected tissue that, if severed, may not kill you by itself...but would render the defender's arm unusable and possibly open them up for a lethal attack.



> Myth #4: A sharp knife will cut through clothing as though its not even there.  Expert says: Nope.  A heavy winter coat offers a degree of protection  that few realize.  But that still doesnt mean that you should neglect being cautious just because you may be wearing heavy clothing.



Definitely a myth, and one that should be taken in to account if carrying a blade for defensive purposes.  If the environment is such where one is wearing a winter coat, chances are the bad guy is too.   If once carries for defensive purposes, what do the local laws say?   Is it possible for a law-abiding person carry an edge that can be effective in such a situation?   Someone in Boston with its statutory 2.5" blade length is going to have much more restrictions and far fewer possibilities than someone from NH who can carry just about anything.,


----------



## Carol (Nov 16, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> Except, as I mentioned earlier (ha, I beat both of you to it!) that experience will be coloured by the cultural environment, so the experience won't necessarily be terribly close to what you would go up against in a knife defence/usage context in another culture. For instance, the war-torn African approach would more likely tend towards larger blades, getting closer to a machete, the attacking tactics would be intentionally lethal, large, swinging attacks, most likely coming down on a diagonal, and just chopping down on anything presented (arms, legs, sticks in the way etc). Not really anything like a mugging with a knife, a grab-and-shank attack, being held and the knife pressed against you, or anything else more likely in a modern Western urban or city environment. The knife used in the Western version will typically be far smaller as well, ambush attacks more of a common approach (many people who have been stabbed just think they've been punched, as they don't see the knife, which is a far cry from having your fingers cut off by a machete swinging at you... you tend to notice things like that!).
> 
> So the person may have some experience in bladed weapon combat, but is it really relevant experience?



Depends on where in the West.  Things like machete attacks are becoming increasingly common here.  Machetes are relatively cheap, and widely available...many home and garden shops have them.   They are the weapon of choice for a notorious organized gang who needs no further publicity.

NH/VT/ME are the U.S. states are consistently the states with the three lowest crime rates in the country.  Yet in my state alone, it is easy to find accounts of machete attacks. 

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/392100-196/police-see-disturbing-trend-in-use-of.html

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/916307-196/nashua-teen-charged-in-machete-robbery.html
http://www.aolnews.com/2010/11/09/nh-teen-gets-life-for-machete-murder-in-home-invasion/
http://www.wmur.com/news/23303120/detail.html
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ne...hester_nh_man_facing_machete_assault_charges/
http://www.officer.com/news/10264065/nh-suspect-arrested-found-by-his-severed-finger


----------



## MJS (Nov 16, 2011)

MJS said:


> While reading a recent issue of BB magazine, I came across an article written by Mark Jacobs.  He was talking about some of the knife fighting 'masters' and how many of them have never used a knife in combat.  He goes on to say that there is alot of inaccurate information out there, when it comes to knife defense and what a knife can/can't do.
> 
> So, he consulted with a NY based martial artist, who's trained many years in several systems that specialize in bladed weaponry.  He's also an experienced medical professional who has studied knife attacks
> 
> ...



To answer my own questions:

1) Much like any weapon, even empty hands, I'm not going to rely on this as some magic tool, that'll stop the person instantly, however, I wouldn't completely disregard it either.  Of course, like Carol said, machete attacks are not uncommon.  You're lible to get your arm lopped off or damn near close to it, if you get hit with something like that.  Furthermore, inmates dont have access to real fancy tools to fashion weapons out of.  A toothbrush, hard pieces of plastic, you name it, can all be fashioned into a tool to stab.  Amazing how quick someone can die from repeatedly being stabbed.

2) The idea with the defanging, IMO, is an accumulation of injuries, ie: attack the incoming weapon arm, and continue to attack other areas after that.  I dont feel that it was ever designed to be a fight ender.

3) Well as Chris said, of course the objective is to not get cut, yet we all know, or should know, that it may happen.  So, that said, use your head, and do what you can to prevent serious damage.

4) Well, unless you're living in a state where its cold every day of the year, you're not going to be wearing heavy clothing.  However, I'm sure we all have or most of us have all seen footage of people cutting a meat wrapped in heavy clothing.  Sorry, I'm not going to bank on my winter coat preventing serious injury.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 16, 2011)

I'm not an expert on knives or knife defense.  I know this much; a knife used in a stabbing motion can penetrate police-style body armor.  An ice-pick is even better for that.  And a lot of what stops someone who has been stabbed has to do with their own mindset.  Most people, sane and sober, when shot or stabbed, will stop what they are doing immediately because of what has just happened to them.  There are also people who have died of non-fatal wounds because that's what they believe happens when they are shot or stabbed.  People who have been shot or stabbed before, or who have little interest in self-preservation, will often shrug off even wounds which should be or ultimately are fatal and continue to fight.  And lastly, if you are involved in a fight with a person armed with a knife, you are going to get cut.  That's about the extent of my knowledge on the subject.


----------



## jks9199 (Nov 16, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> Actually, I'm with Dirty Dog on this. The Claymore you're at least going to see first.... the knife? Not so likely. Additionally, evasion against a longer, more cumbersome weapon is easier than against a small, highly agile one. I was taking a few of the more senior guys through some approaches against spears on Tuesday night... and it involved you using a short sword, not a long one. Getting past the spear was not too difficult, but once past, the spearman had no use of his weapon.
> 
> That said, the intimidation of something like a Claymore definitely has an impact on how you proceed!



From what I've seen, what I've read, and what people who know knife attacks better than I do say -- there are two primary sorts of knife attacks.  The ones where the blade is brandished, and everyone can see it...  and the ones where the first clue someone's been stabbed is when someone else notices that they're bleeding or dead.

In the first -- you've got a chance to deal with it.  The general comments above are pretty reasonable.  Keep things simple and direct.  (Personally -- a gun is a great response to a brandished knife when possible.)  Notice that I don't care if they really intend to stab or not.  It's immaterial to me; I'm going to assume they intend to kill me.  One of the biggest hurdles from interviews of victims I've done is simply accepting that they really are being threatened with a knife...  

In the second?  Not much you can do, other than react to the fact that you've been attacked.  Don't roll over & die, fight and keep fighting.  You don't know that the knife is there until you've been attacked with it; you're on the backside of time there, whether the weapon is a knife or club or fist.


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 16, 2011)

Dirty Dog said:


> I've seen a few wounds inflicted with various sharp objects in 30-some years in EMS and the ER...
> 
> Yes and no. The size of the blade certainly matters, but given the compressability of human tissues, a small blade can and will penetrate deeper than you might expect. And the small puncture wound is also more likely to be missed during a hurried initial exam, especially when there's a big bloody (but shallow) slash somewhere else.



Fact in prison stabbed enough times with a shank made from a tooth brush as an example, will cause death from bleeding out. That is why you hear stories in prison some inmate was stabbed (puncture wounds) 20-200 times, depending on the stabber.


----------



## Indagator (Nov 16, 2011)

frank raud said:


> Knife training probably has the highest amount of instructors with no real world experience, only theory, and simulated practice. As very few people want to take a live blade and test a theory, so it shall remain.



What you can do, although first I must say DO THIS ONLY UNDER VERY, VERY CONTROLLED CIRCUMSTANCES and DO THIS WITH A KNOWLEDGABLE INSTRUCTOR &c.

Is that if you are like me, and are a total freak about maintaining shaving-sharp edges on your broadheads, knives, bladed whatevers and so forth then you will probably be aware that it is possible to produce an edge on a blade that is dulled enough so it would need a lot of force or pressure to create a serious cut, but still has enough of an edge to give a bit of a bite if contacted, and maybe split a little bit of skin.
Personally I put an edge on that is kind of like a wedge, whereas I'll use less of a shouldered edge for a razor-sharpness. I'll put the edge on with a stone, but won't steel it or strop it.

Now to get an idea of what I mean, we're talking about an edge that if you grip the whole blade in your hand and squeeze like giving a firm handshake you will get a little bit of a slice much like a papercut - anything sharper than that is simply too dangerous imho.

From there, this blade can be used in slow, controlled scenario training where you will not receive any seroius injuries but after each scenario you can look at the wee scratch, if you got one, and understand how a fully live blade would have wounded you.

Be careful if you decide to try this, and I cannot say this enough - make sure it is not sharp enough to do you a real mischief.


----------



## frank raud (Nov 16, 2011)

Indagator said:


> What you can do, although first I must say DO THIS ONLY UNDER VERY, VERY CONTROLLED CIRCUMSTANCES and DO THIS WITH A KNOWLEDGABLE INSTRUCTOR &c.
> 
> Is that if you are like me, and are a total freak about maintaining shaving-sharp edges on your broadheads, knives, bladed whatevers and so forth then you will probably be aware that it is possible to produce an edge on a blade that is dulled enough so it would need a lot of force or pressure to create a serious cut, but still has enough of an edge to give a bit of a bite if contacted, and maybe split a little bit of skin.
> Personally I put an edge on that is kind of like a wedge, whereas I'll use less of a shouldered edge for a razor-sharpness. I'll put the edge on with a stone, but won't steel it or strop it.
> ...


 Or you can use a Shock knife, get the feedback you need without running the risk of being cut. But it is still a simulation, whether using an artifical weapon(the Shock knife) or working through a technique at slow speed. It is not real world experience, not the visceral feel of live tissue experiment. Knife training is the coitus interuptus of martial arts training, you can never get the real feel of the ending.


----------



## David43515 (Nov 16, 2011)

Yeah, I`d have to say that using real knives with anykind of edge in your force on force training is a no-go. Even in empty hand drills and sparring, people slip and someone gets clobbered from time to time.

Use a shock knife, use a rubber knife with chalked edges, use magic markers, all these things will show you where you goofed up. And if you absolutely must use real knives (not live blades, just an altered knife) then take the edge and the point off with a file or grinder, and then put a few layers of tape over the old edge. Training partners for realistic knife work are in short supply anyway. If you start having accidents where people are getting even _minor_ cuts on a regular basis pretty soon you`ll be doing all your training alone.


----------



## Indagator (Nov 16, 2011)

David43515 said:


> Yeah, I`d have to say that using real knives with anykind of edge in your force on force training is a no-go. Even in empty hand drills and sparring, people slip and someone gets clobbered from time to time.
> ...If you start having accidents where people are getting even _minor_ cuts on a regular basis pretty soon you`ll be doing all your training alone.



Yeah, I may not have been clear about what I meant there lol. I wouldn't use it for sparring or anything done with serious force - heck even something with no edge, but with a pointy end, can cause some nasty skewerings if landed on awkwardly.
I wouldn't say the blade I'm talking about has what I would call an edge to it really, and when training (slow, scenario training) what it does is gives a "bite" sort of feeling but rarely breaks the skin. And when it does, it's not the sort of thing I mind. I'd never make anybody else train that way unless they felt the same about it as I do of course.
However I am actually considering removing my post there, because I'm not sure I'm describing things right, plus I know what I am doing whereas people might copy it that don't.

Maybe I'll just stick to saying that how you want the profile to be on your blade is like a big fat wedge, it shouldn't be able to cut when you apply decent pressure but there should be a "bite" feeling to it - and if pressed solidly and evenly into, say, the back of the arm it will leave a line-type indent that will go away in a little while kind of like if a string had bee tied tightly there.

In general, I'd say just don't try this unless you know what you're doing, don't be an idiot with it, and remember that if anybody copies me and trains with a knife like this that even though you've taken the edge off of it if you don't respect the weapon you could be hurt.


----------



## Indagator (Nov 16, 2011)

frank raud said:


> Or you can use a Shock knife, get the feedback you need without running the risk of being cut. But it is still a simulation, whether using an artifical weapon(the Shock knife) or working through a technique at slow speed. It is not real world experience, not the visceral feel of live tissue experiment. Knife training is the coitus interuptus of martial arts training, you can never get the real feel of the ending.



Pretty much lol.


----------



## Buka (Nov 16, 2011)

I'm loving this thread.

As to the original post about the myths, I'll go along with them. Keeping in mind, of course, that there are exceptions to every rule. As for those with real world experience, it's a larger culture than you would think. There are a lot of knife guys out there. They do a lot of contract work in dangerous parts of the world, they teach Special Forces men and for hire contractors working with/for many of our governments. When they're not abroad, they're home, teaching groups of people, some civilian, some protective services, everything blade. 

The people who teach these things, sooner or later, make it to the old world Philippines and train with some real old school, old world, Masters. A lot of them having been doing so for many years. There is a lot of training. Clothing, every kind imaginable, is used at some point, as are slaughter houses, as are makeshift weapons, as are things used to defend against a blade. These people deal in real live war in hot spots across the globe.  
Knife culture is deep. They don't leave anything to theory. They can't.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 16, 2011)

Carol said:


> Depends on where in the West.  Things like machete attacks are becoming increasingly common here.  Machetes are relatively cheap, and widely available...many home and garden shops have them.   They are the weapon of choice for a notorious organized gang who needs no further publicity.
> 
> NH/VT/ME are the U.S. states are consistently the states with the three lowest crime rates in the country.  Yet in my state alone, it is easy to find accounts of machete attacks.
> 
> ...



Yep, which is why you should recognise both where the culture you're learning from is coming from (contextually), as well as the culture you are intending/needing to use the methods in. If there is a prevailance of machete attacks in your area, learning from a system that comes from a culture dealing with machete or similar attacks makes sense. For example, in Melbourne machete attacks are very rare, but in Sydney they are on the increase, particularly in a number of the gangs there.



jks9199 said:


> From what I've seen, what I've read, and what people who know knife attacks better than I do say -- there are two primary sorts of knife attacks.  The ones where the blade is brandished, and everyone can see it...  and the ones where the first clue someone's been stabbed is when someone else notices that they're bleeding or dead.
> 
> In the first -- you've got a chance to deal with it.  The general comments above are pretty reasonable.  Keep things simple and direct.  (Personally -- a gun is a great response to a brandished knife when possible.)  Notice that I don't care if they really intend to stab or not.  It's immaterial to me; I'm going to assume they intend to kill me.  One of the biggest hurdles from interviews of victims I've done is simply accepting that they really are being threatened with a knife...
> 
> In the second?  Not much you can do, other than react to the fact that you've been attacked.  Don't roll over & die, fight and keep fighting.  You don't know that the knife is there until you've been attacked with it; you're on the backside of time there, whether the weapon is a knife or club or fist.



Yep, that's about the long and the short of it!


----------



## Indagator (Nov 17, 2011)

Buka said:


> I'm loving this thread.
> 
> As to the original post about the myths, I'll go along with them. Keeping in mind, of course, that there are exceptions to every rule. As for those with real world experience, it's a larger culture than you would think. There are a lot of knife guys out there. They do a lot of contract work in dangerous parts of the world, they teach Special Forces men and for hire contractors working with/for many of our governments. When they're not abroad, they're home, teaching groups of people, some civilian, some protective services, everything blade.
> 
> ...



I have  a friend who works for a private military contractor outfit that is pretty much like that.


Not a good guy to drink with though lol.


----------



## Buka (Nov 17, 2011)

Indagator said:


> I have  a friend who works for a private military contractor outfit that is pretty much like that.
> 
> 
> Not a good guy to drink with though lol.



I'll bet he's making a nice pay day, too.

As for machete, a lot of the knife guys teach "Combat Machete" - which when I first heard that term I thought "Now, there's a really ugly term if I ever heard one."  As was explained to me, they started that because machetes are used to clear paths in overgrown areas around the world. They had to adapt knife fighting principles to the longer weapon. There was instant feedback and development because a lot of the people involved were in battle. Some died, some didn't. Ugly world we live in.


----------



## MJS (Nov 17, 2011)

So, here's a question.  Both Chris and Frank mentioned things that caught my eye...Chris spoke of Mike Janich and Frank spoke of real world experience.  So my question...What is Mikes background?  Yeah, I know the guy is heavy into the blade, but what makes his stuff stand out more than say some of the FMA stuff out there?  I do like Franks mention of the shock knife.  Damn thing is not cheap, and while you're still not going to get the real world feel of actually cutting/slashing/stabbing someone or getting cut/slashed/stabbed yourself, the 'shock' factor alone will probably serve as more of a reality check than a rubber knife.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 17, 2011)

Allow me to answer my part with some links....

Michael Janich's background: http://www.martialbladeconcepts.com/about.htm

One of my favourite books from Michael, co-authored with his former partner, the late Christopher Grosz. Mr Grosz was a police officer, as well as a student and training partner of Michael's: http://www.staysafemedia.com/product.php?proid=9


----------



## MJS (Nov 17, 2011)

Hey Chris,

Thanks for the links.  So, I may be missing it, but I'm still not seeing what seperates Mikes RW experience with the blade vs. someone else, who has trained in a FMA blade oriented art, under a Filipino teacher, who most likely, has had some RW experience with the blade.  For the record, no, I'm not doubting Mikes background, training, etc, just looking to see what seperates him from the others.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 17, 2011)

I don't know that that's really the distinction, honestly. For me it's more about the approach taken, and the mindset behind the system itself. For instance, the Filipino systems have masters and teachers who have real world experience in bladed combat... but is that the same type of blade use, knife assault, etc that is found in a modern Western setting? Sometimes, but not often, really. Michael's concern from the get-go was to get past anything that he couldn't test and verify himself, rather than taking someone's word for it, which began with himself and Mr Grosz looking at the "Timetable of Death", and taking it to pieces. From there, the Filipino drills were adapted, modified, or dropped, depending on the way they worked, and the applicability as Michael saw it. There was a lot of research done into the way knife assaults happen in the US, rather than in the Philipines, from both Michael and Mr Grosz. So the distinction is in the focus relating to the environment, if that makes sense. And that's what puts him up in my listing.


----------



## geezer (Nov 17, 2011)

Cyriacus said:


> In fact, I can find a True Story about a Commando in WW2 who went into Combat with a Claymore and a Bagpipe (Im being quite Serious, mind)... And Successfully... Won... On a couple of Occassions.



I have no doubt. But after having to endure an auditory assault with the bagpipes, his foes would likely throw themselves onto his claymore to end their suffering.

Now to get back on topic, I train and teach eskrima (Latosa, Torres DTE, and PCE systems) and have had some exposure to a number of well known instructors. I share the concern that a lot of what we practice is too far removed from real world experience to be reliable. Few people in our modern world have repeatedly confronted and survived bladed combat. I'm not one of those, nor would I care to be. In fact the few individuals I've encountered who have such experiences did not choose that life and looking back, _wish that they had not_ . Food for thought.


----------



## Indagator (Nov 17, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> I don't know that that's really the distinction, honestly. For me it's more about the approach taken, and the mindset behind the system itself. For instance, the Filipino systems have masters and teachers who have real world experience in bladed combat... but is that the same type of blade use, knife assault, etc that is found in a modern Western setting? Sometimes, but not often, really. Michael's concern from the get-go was to get past anything that he couldn't test and verify himself, rather than taking someone's word for it, which began with himself and Mr Grosz looking at the "Timetable of Death", and taking it to pieces. From there, the Filipino drills were adapted, modified, or dropped, depending on the way they worked, and the applicability as Michael saw it. There was a lot of research done into the way knife assaults happen in the US, rather than in the Philipines, from both Michael and Mr Grosz. So the distinction is in the focus relating to the environment, if that makes sense. And that's what puts him up in my listing.



So Michael Janich's approach would be more applicable in a general setting as opposed to some other approaches which are focusing on specifics that may or may not be present in situations outside of what they are focused on?


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 17, 2011)

What I'm basically saying is that every single art in existence is designed for a specific environment/set of circumstances. So choosing something as it is designed around an environment, or set of circumstances that are much closer to what you are likely to encounter may be a better option, depending on what you're after. If you want to learn to kick high, and defend against high kicks, don't do Judo. If you want to learn unarmed self defence, don't do Iaido. If you are looking for a knife system for the here and now, designed to take the common assaults found in the modern Western environment, looking at the smaller blades (such as folders), and designed to end a conflict as soon as possible, then going to a system that is designed around more of a "dueling" situation, with longer blades, different attacking methods, and long drills is not going to be the best option necessarily.


----------



## Cyriacus (Nov 17, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> What I'm basically saying is that every single art in existence is designed for a specific environment/set of circumstances. So choosing something as it is designed around an environment, or set of circumstances that are much closer to what you are likely to encounter may be a better option, depending on what you're after. If you want to learn to kick high, and defend against high kicks, don't do Judo. If you want to learn unarmed self defence, don't do Iaido. If you are looking for a knife system for the here and now, designed to take the common assaults found in the modern Western environment, looking at the smaller blades (such as folders), and designed to end a conflict as soon as possible, then going to a system that is designed around more of a "dueling" situation, with longer blades, different attacking methods, and long drills is not going to be the best option necessarily.


Additionally, some Arts Emphasise Speed > Power, or Power > Speed, or Technique > Speed, or Technique > Power, and the same chain for Fitness, and Power > Technique, and so forth.

Theres alot of Choice involved in what You Learn.
It should as You said, start with What it is You want to Learn, exactly.
Then if its possible in Your Available Area, How You want to Learn it.


----------



## frank raud (Nov 18, 2011)

Buka said:


> I'll bet he's making a nice pay day, too.
> 
> As for machete, a lot of the knife guys teach "Combat Machete" - which when I first heard that term I thought "Now, there's a really ugly term if I ever heard one." As was explained to me, they started that because machetes are used to clear paths in overgrown areas around the world. They had to adapt knife fighting principles to the longer weapon. There was instant feedback and development because a lot of the people involved were in battle. Some died, some didn't. Ugly world we live in.



Why would you need to adapt knife fighting principles to the use of a machete?


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 18, 2011)

It depends on the knife system. The way we study knife, for instance, is very different to the use of a machete (in a combative sense), with completely different angles of attack, mechanics, defensive usage, targets, and more. I can think of a range of other systems where changing to a machete would require very little alteration, though.


----------



## Carol (Nov 18, 2011)

frank raud said:


> Why would you need to adapt knife fighting principles to the use of a machete?



Design and application of the blade for one.  Some knives were designed to be more of a thrusting weapon, such as a KaBar.  Others were designed to be more of a slashing weapon, such as a kerambit.  A machete in a classic sense is neither, as it was designed to be swung, many don't have a hilt to them.  These differences all affect application and usage.

Another factor is fighting range. A longer blade designed to be swung has the benefit of a ranged weapon application, but has the disadvantage of being less useful at close or clinch range.    Conversely a folding blade that one might have in their jeans pocket would be too small to be used as a ranged weapon but can be more useful in close range.


----------



## frank raud (Nov 18, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> It depends on the knife system. The way we study knife, for instance, is very different to the use of a machete (in a combative sense), with completely different angles of attack, mechanics, defensive usage, targets, and more. I can think of a range of other systems where changing to a machete would require very little alteration, though.



Bingo. But why make the tool fit the system when the tool already has a viable system? If you can use a machete to clear brush, you already know how to use it effectively.  My buddies from Trinidad called a machete a cutlass, it is not a big knife, it is a small sword.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 18, 2011)

If you have a knife system, but not a machete system. Who says that the modern, urban or city dwelling martial arts practitioner uses a machete to clear jungle brush? To be honest, when we go through machete work, I have to explain how a machete is used, which is different to a short sword (in a Japanese sense), and different to a knife (the way we use one, which is based on short folder-style weapons).

So basically, it comes down to potentially not having a viable system for the machete.


----------



## frank raud (Nov 18, 2011)

Carol said:


> Design and application of the blade for one. Some knives were designed to be more of a thrusting weapon, such as a KaBar. Others were designed to be more of a slashing weapon, such as a kerambit. A machete in a classic sense is neither, as it was designed to be swung, many don't have a hilt to them. These differences all affect application and usage.
> 
> Another factor is fighting range. A longer blade designed to be swung has the benefit of a ranged weapon application, but has the disadvantage of being less useful at close or clinch range. Conversely a folding blade that one might have in their jeans pocket would be too small to be used as a ranged weapon but can be more useful in close range.



I completely agree with you, Carol. So the question remains, why take a viable weapon, and try to use it in a fashion that it is not designed for? If you have a machete in hand, you should be able to establish range. If the machete is still in the scabbard and you are jumped/ambushed, it is not the appropriate weapon choice for the situation. Its a short sword, not a kabar or a kerambit. If someone tries to apply kerambit applications to a machete, it wont work well. You dont use a machete in reverse grip, edge in or edge out, the blade is too long for the mechanics to work. While you can stab with some machetes, it is not what they are designed for. Machetes hack, a number 1 or 2 angle is what they are most efficiently used for.


----------



## frank raud (Nov 18, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> If you have a knife system, but not a machete system. Who says that the modern, urban or city dwelling martial arts practitioner uses a machete to clear jungle brush? To be honest, when we go through machete work, I have to explain how a machete is used, which is different to a short sword (in a Japanese sense), and different to a knife (the way we use one, which is based on short folder-style weapons).
> 
> So basically, it comes down to potentially not having a viable system for the machete.


 So, if someone is not familiar with a machete, you explain how it is used, and the differences between its use and that of a knife or sword. As I understand this, you recognize and point out they are different weapons, with different use and applications. When you teach the machete, do you teach using your knife system(which you say is different), or your sword style, or do you show it as a hacking instrument, not meant for fine detailed work? Ie, the way a machete is generally used?


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 18, 2011)

Six of one, honestly. Our most common use of a machete is as an attacking weapon in modern self defence scenarios. And in that regard, it's primary use for us is as a "hacking" weapon, used in a downward diagonal attack to the arms, torso, and legs. That already gives a different target than a short knife attack (the legs), so that is taken into account. 

When it comes to a usage of machete as a weapon itself, though, the mechanics necessarily vary from shorter knives and more evenly balanced short swords (kodachi), but our basic tactics are still present throughout. It's based more on the knife work, although there is certainly some kodachi ideas (distancing, for one) present. So it's almost halfway between the two.


----------



## MJS (Nov 18, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> What I'm basically saying is that every single art in existence is designed for a specific environment/set of circumstances. So choosing something as it is designed around an environment, or set of circumstances that are much closer to what you are likely to encounter may be a better option, depending on what you're after. If you want to learn to kick high, and defend against high kicks, don't do Judo. If you want to learn unarmed self defence, don't do Iaido. If you are looking for a knife system for the here and now, designed to take the common assaults found in the modern Western environment, looking at the smaller blades (such as folders), and designed to end a conflict as soon as possible, then going to a system that is designed around more of a "dueling" situation, with longer blades, different attacking methods, and long drills is not going to be the best option necessarily.



Points taken Chris, but to play devils advocate for a moment....wouldn't you say the ability to adapt the techs to fit current times, is an option?  I mean, BJJ for example, is primarily a ground based art, yet, with some modifications, you can apply some locks and chokes while standing.  I mean, if what you said stands 100%, then the art you choose is only as good providing you're dealing with someone from the same art.  Ex: I train primarily with Kenpo guys, so I'm pretty familiar with how they're going to kick, when working kick defense.  Does that mean, that if I'm facing a Shotokan guy, my kick defense will be useless?  Or will I just have to adapt for their way of kicking?  

As I've said before, one of my Arnis teachers has worked in Corrections, so I enjoy working balde stuff with him, as he's been privy to alot of video footage and methods of attacks, as well as the various modified weapons the inmates use.  More than half the time I train knife, I use a small pocketknife trainer rather than the typical larger trainer than we often see used today.  Amazing what you can/can't do, when you're using that smaller blade.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 18, 2011)

Ha, okay. 

No, what it means is that you should be aware of the context of the art so that you can adapt it to meet the needs you encounter. It involves knowing both the background of the art, where and why it developed, what it's context and environment is, as well as knowing the same things about your potential needs for the system. If you don't get that there is a difference, and you just use the methods as taught in a different environment/context, they will likely prove to be less effective than you would have thought. 

Hmm, I think there was a thread recently about something like that...


----------



## Buka (Nov 18, 2011)

frank raud said:


> Why would you need to adapt knife fighting principles to the use of a machete?



Length of blade in close changes a few things, primarilly (to me, anyway) the enemy's defensive ability to jam/check/block, it changes footwork while closing, and some (like me) don't angle backwards as well with the longer machete blade.


----------



## Indagator (Nov 18, 2011)

frank raud said:


> I completely agree with you, Carol. So the question remains, why take a viable weapon, and try to use it in a fashion that it is not designed for?



one thing we utilise where i train, when we go through defense against machete attacks, is if i manage to get the machete off of the attacker (which is sometimes how it goes, long story short) i'm then looking at striking with the back of the blade to avoid cutting or seriously wounding him. also using the back of the blade as leverage in joint manipulation sometimes to restrain the attacker.
that being said if all goes well as i'm disarming him then i theoretically shouldn't be likely to need to strike him with the machete as i ought to already have him under my control - perfect world and all that lol.

the attacker themselves is most likely to hack n slash though - or even sometimes just wave it around.


----------



## Indagator (Nov 18, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> Ha, okay.
> 
> No, what it means is that you should be aware of the context of the art so that you can adapt it to meet the needs you encounter. It involves knowing both the background of the art, where and why it developed, what it's context and environment is, as well as knowing the same things about your potential needs for the system. If you don't get that there is a difference, and you just use the methods as taught in a different environment/context, they will likely prove to be less effective than you would have thought.
> 
> Hmm, I think there was a thread recently about something like that...



Henka


----------



## frank raud (Nov 18, 2011)

Indagator said:


> one thing we utilise where i train, when we go through defense against machete attacks, is if i manage to get the machete off of the attacker (which is sometimes how it goes, long story short) i'm then looking at striking with the back of the blade to avoid cutting or seriously wounding him. also using the back of the blade as leverage in joint manipulation sometimes to restrain the attacker.
> that being said if all goes well as i'm disarming him then i theoretically shouldn't be likely to need to strike him with the machete as i ought to already have him under my control - perfect world and all that lol.
> 
> the attacker themselves is most likely to hack n slash though - or even sometimes just wave it around.


Are you using the back of the blade as a safety factor for your partner, or is that the actual intention of the technique?


----------



## Indagator (Nov 18, 2011)

i'd call it the application of the technique rather than the intent of the technique, but yes.


----------



## MJS (Nov 19, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> Ha, okay.
> 
> No, what it means is that you should be aware of the context of the art so that you can adapt it to meet the needs you encounter. It involves knowing both the background of the art, where and why it developed, what it's context and environment is, as well as knowing the same things about your potential needs for the system. If you don't get that there is a difference, and you just use the methods as taught in a different environment/context, they will likely prove to be less effective than you would have thought.
> 
> Hmm, I think there was a thread recently about something like that...



Well, thats pretty much what I was saying.  I said current times, but yes, if you're in an area, in the current, present time, the techs. wil or could be adapted to whatever it is you're facing.


----------



## thegatekeeper (Dec 27, 2011)

MJS said:


> Myth #1: Its easy to kill a person quickly and easily with a blade.  The "Expert" states: Wrong. There are few places that you can put a knife that'll drop them instantly.  Someone under drugs could keep fighting despite the wounds.  Someone stabbed in the heart could still go on or 30secs.



30 seconds after a stab to the heart? Damn that would require ball of steel!

Cant picture why anyone would stab someone in the heart thou.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 27, 2011)

thegatekeeper said:


> 30 seconds after a stab to the heart? Damn that would require ball of steel!
> 
> Cant picture why anyone would stab someone in the heart thou.



Not really. Just a little luck. I treated a guy once who was stabbed 5-6 times (it's been a while...). He was awake but confused (he'd also been hit with a baseball bat) and struggling with the paramedics through the entire transport. As they rolled through the ER doors, he collapsed, pulseless. We cracked his chest immediately, stapled the 4-5cm hole in his left ventricle closed and got pulses back. 

The heart is wrapped up in a bag called the pericardium. This bag has two layers. Because these two layers slide around, when a weapon is removed, they sometimes cause the punctures in the layers to misalign. This allows the wound to tamponade, which effectively stops the bleeding. Of course, the tamponade itself squeezes the heart, and eventually can prevent it from pumping effectively. But it can, at least for a short time, keep someone from dying from a wound you might reasonably expect to be immediately fatal. In this case, it was probably about 10 minutes from the time he was stabbed, to the time that the tamponade popped and most of his blood spilled into his chest cavity. Long enough to get him to the ER.
Without the tamponade, he would likely have been dead in a matter of seconds.


----------



## jasonbrinn (Dec 29, 2011)

I have had the fortunate pleasure of training under Tuhon Bill McGrath who teaches Pekiti-Tirsia.  He was gracious enough to let me learn some knife-vs-hand combatives which revolutionized not only my training but my understanding of the reality of weapons combatives across the board.  The story about how I came into training with him is of particular note here.  I had been training in Karate for 14-15 years and found myself in a "stupid place" cut to the bone on my forearm.  After this event I realized my lack of responses to such attacks and called a "well known Filipino guru of gurus" who personally told me that if it was combative knife fighting I wanted to learn then the Pekiti-Tirsia system was the place to do it.

From what I know and have personally seen, these guys train with live blades from time to time and most have had "real life" experience.  Even without knowing anything about their experiences I can safe that the concepts I was taught work(.)

As for the points mentioned by the OP I mostly agree with - the only cause I have against comments like these is that with basic physiology aside people react differently to the same situations.  I have met people who not only survived but fought back from situations that most people who have fallen to.  There are stories of people with minor issues being killed, while others walk around with butcher knifes sticking out of their skulls.

To me, if you are going to train you should understand the biology and the effects while working the fundamentals of skeletal attacks/defenses in order to be 100% safe.


Lastly, back to Pekiti-Tirsia and Tuhon Bill McGrath, all I can say is that after 30+ years of training I have found no other system that dealt as mightily with bladed combat as this one and to them both I and my family (students icluded) are deeply indebted.


----------



## Carol (Dec 29, 2011)

jasonbrinn said:


> I have had the fortunate pleasure of training under Tuhon Bill McGrath who teaches Pekiti-Tirsia.  He was gracious enough to let me learn some knife-vs-hand combatives which revolutionized not only my training but my understanding of the reality of weapons combatives across the board.  The story about how I came into training with him is of particular note here.  I had been training in Karate for 14-15 years and found myself in a "stupid place" cut to the bone on my forearm.  After this event I realized my lack of responses to such attacks and called a "well known Filipino guru of gurus" who personally told me that if it was combative knife fighting I wanted to learn then the Pekiti-Tirsia system was the place to do it.
> 
> From what I know and have personally seen, these guys train with live blades from time to time and most have had "real life" experience.  Even without knowing anything about their experiences I can safe that the concepts I was taught work(.)
> 
> ...



Tuhon McGrath is a good guy.  How long did you train under him?


----------



## jasonbrinn (Jan 2, 2012)

I really only had a few seminars.  I had a run in with a knife and was referred to him from another teacher.  Based on who the recommendation was from Tuhon McGrath was gracious enough to let me into some advanced seminars dealing specifically with the knife and knife scenarios.  Needless to say it was like drinking from a fire hydrant and I gleamed very little, however, a little leaven you know!

_*the seminars were held in South Carolina in the back of a chiropractor's office, I think he was the assistant instructor._


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2012)

And this is why I'm always saying that if you want to really get into the nitty-gritty of an art, you absolutely have to go to someone who specializes in whatever it is that you're looking at.  I've heard good things about Tuhon Bill McGrath, and while I've never trained with him, I have worked with a guy who does, in addition to attending a few seminars with Tuhon Gaje.


----------



## kbarrett (Jan 7, 2012)

Knife self-defense isn't the same as knife prearranged  hyungs (kata) which in turn is the same as knife fighting (sparring), they each have their place and must practice them all.

Ken


----------



## Indagator (Jan 7, 2012)

I have to admit most of the "real world knowledge" I bring to my knife techs comes from bowhunting and/or hunting situations. For example I definitely wouldn't personally go trying to stab in and around ribcages, as I have gotten knives stuck in deer and goats that way before. It's actually one of the primary reasons a pig-sticker is designed the way it is as opposed to your green river or bowie knives that most men carry out for gutting and field dressing.
One thing that did give a whole lot of credibility to my instructor was one evening when we trained with the dummy knife and he cut in (excuse the pun!) with a little bit of kuden about throat-cuts and how it can cause a bit of a spray that you need to be aware of, lest it get in your eyes and screw your vision up. 
Well, I've had that happen with quite a few animals, particularly bowhunting as the critter dies from loss of consciousness/blood loss caused by the broadhead as opposed to a rifle or carbine which tends to cause percussive damage and (sometimes) massive trauma.
So in bowhunting an ethical hunter (such as yours truly) will often make a shot, and then pursue the animal as it flees and get on it to cut it's throat. Often the pulse is still going at this point, and even with a weakened pulse from bleeding out I've had little jet-sprays for a half-second or so.

Other truths I have learned from this that are relevant, I have seen a deer go down in under 30 seconds with a single lung shot, and another run for 50 yards with a double-lung heart shot.
I've seen (a lot with my broadheads beacuse I am OC about how sharp I get them before using them) animals shot through the lungs get slightly startled, then carry on grazing and drop dead.

So what have I learned? There are too many variables to count on certain things as being failsafe drop-shots or kill-shots. In combat, as in hunting, I believe one must do what they can but never count on it being finished until it's over - and one must remain constantly ready until it is over, ready to finish things quickly.

Don't know if any of this helps, but it came to mind...


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 22, 2013)

Don't remember the last time I was attacked with a Claymore sword.


----------



## Blindside (Jan 22, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Don't remember the last time I was attacked with a Claymore sword.



'Cause that seems pertinent to the thread....


----------



## MJS (Jan 22, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Don't remember the last time I was attacked with a Claymore sword.



Umm....ya lost me on that one.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 22, 2013)

Blindside said:


> 'Cause that seems pertinent to the thread....



Sorry should have replied with a quote. See posts #3,5,6 and 7.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 23, 2013)

RTKDCMB said:


> Don't remember the last time I was attacked with a Claymore sword.



Then you're just not hanging out with the right people...


----------



## Mark Jacobs (Jan 29, 2013)

Sorry to revive an old thread but just came across this posting by accident and thought to jump in since I wrote the story under discussion.

First of all, I appreciate MJS just reading my column in Black Belt, its nice to know someone actually does. But it can always be problematical to an author when things he writes are paraphrased or taken as excerpts rather than the whole work so I just thought Id clarify a few points.

As to my not identifying my source, I admit this is less than ideal. But I also point out in the original story that the so-called expert is a professional in the medical industry and it would probably not help his standing there to be seen giving out advice on knife fighting so the only way he would agree to be interviewed was if I did not use his name. I can only say he is very knowledgeable in both bladed martial arts and the medical field and because of this duel expertise, he takes more than a passing interest in the medical side of knife wounds. As a journalist, Ill also say that any time a writer uses an anonymous source, you can only judge its merit on the past history of the writer. If their past work has proven factual and reliable, you can give the claims of their anonymous sources more credence. Dont know how reliable Ive proven over the years but I do tend to double check most information I get and have conducted extensive interviews with multiple medical experts in the course of writing a book on martial arts. Though that was a book on unarmed combat, I couldnt help straying into asking a few of them about weaponry and most of what my expert on this story told me jibed with what others had said, as well as with my own knowledge from training with bladed weapons over the years. While I definitely do not consider myself an expert with knives, I have trained off and on with weapons for many years including a number of occasions with Bill McGrath, who was mentioned above, and quite a bit with various other senior instructors of pekiti tirsia as well as instructors in other Filipino and non-Filipino knife techniques. Also acquainted with Michael Janich from a video project we worked on together some years back and having interviewed him for other blade-related stories and, as someone else mentioned, hes a good guy.

To address the specific myths from the story (I believe I only use that word once, in passing):

1. About killing people quickly and easily with a blade, the exact quote that I originally wrote (and the editors do sometimes make changes to the final version which I have no control over) was: ...according to The Expert, There are very few places you can put a knife in someone where they will drop instantly.
     Though pain or shock may make many people immediately stop fighting when cut by a knife, The Expert points out to me that people under the influence of drugs, in a psychotic state, or just very strong and determined, may be able to keep fighting for some time despite suffering lethal wounds from a knife.

Several people have already commented on the veracity of this and I was simply pointing out that, while you might be able to deliver a lethal wound with a knife, that will not always mean a quick kill.

2. About targets, the size of the blade and defanging the snake: I never actually use the term defanging the snake though some of what I address is related to that concept. Also, here I was primarily talking about the use of smaller blades (four inches or less) and cutting with the edge rather than stabbing. However, simple math should tell you that stabs with a short blade can be less effective. If you have a folding knife less than three inches (all thats legal where I live) the maximum you can penetrate is a little less than three inches in depth. When you consider that you cant count on driving the knife up to its hilt, you may have to go through several layers of clothing, and you might even be fighting someone with a lot of fat or muscle on their body, such a blade may, effectively, only penetrate 2 inches or less. Though still potentially very dangerous, obviously this is less than ideal.

3. About the consequences of cuts to the inside of the arm, the exact original quote was: Such techniques are sometimes taught as a means of disarming an attacker by cutting their weapon arm. But again, these sort of techniques frequently appear as if theyre meant to be done with a very large blade. Its questionable how much damage can be done to an attackers arm merely by cutting and slashing at it with a smaller knife.

Again, was talking specifically about cutting with the edge and using a small blade. I was not saying its impossible to do damage this way, just that its probably less likely than what is generally taught in many Filipino schools if youre using a small blade, especially if your opponent is wearing some heavy clothing. I also did address the type of damage that can be caused there, which would include severing the tendons on the inside of the wrist, which Im told control your ability to close the hand and is thus obviously important to holding a weapon.

4. About a knife cutting through clothing, the original quote was: Such cuts, and even thrusts to vital targets, are also often greatly mitigated by an opponents clothing, particularly something like a heavy winter coat. This is not to say if youre the one facing a knife you should take a cavalier approach to defending yourself since, again, any serious knife wound can eventually prove fatal.

Yes, heavy clothing is no assurance against being injured by even a small knife but it would also seem obvious that it can often mitigate the results of a knife attack, something that does not get talked about often enough in many schools that teach such things.

Though I may have generalized what I said in the story (which is hard not to do when they only give you 1000 words for a column) I tried not to make anything I said completely definitive since there are always a million variables that go into combat. And this was written for a general martial arts reading audience, many of whom likely have little or no experience with bladed weapons. Further, I was not looking to encourage anyone to knife fight or trying to provide them with information on how best to stab people. Simply trying to point out some fallacies in some of the information out there.

As for the experience of knife fighting masters again Ill point out most people teaching this stuff have never used or defended against a knife for real and many of them were taught by people with a similar lack of real experience. And even one or two real world confrontations is not really enough to make hard, empirical judgements on what works. Though someone in the lineage of these styles may have had a lot of real world experience, unless you are doing it for real yourself, or at least witnessing it being done for real, I find that such knowledge tends to very quickly stray from the practical into the realm of the wholly theoretical.

Finally, for anyone interested, Ive got a column on the aforementioned Bill McGrath that should be coming out in Black Belt in the next month or two and another column featuring Bills former teacher, Leo Gaje, which should appear in the next 3-6 months (never know exactly when with their production schedule).


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 29, 2013)

Mark Jacobs said:


> 2. About targets, the size of the blade and defanging the snake: I never actually use the term &#8220;defanging the snake&#8221; though some of what I address is related to that concept. Also, here I was primarily talking about the use of smaller blades (four inches or less) and cutting with the edge rather than stabbing. However, simple math should tell you that stabs with a short blade can be less effective. If you have a folding knife less than three inches (all that&#8217;s legal where I live) the maximum you can penetrate is a little less than three inches in depth. When you consider that you can&#8217;t count on driving the knife up to its hilt, you may have to go through several layers of clothing, and you might even be fighting someone with a lot of fat or muscle on their body, such a blade may, effectively, only penetrate 2 inches or less. Though still potentially very dangerous, obviously this is less than ideal.



Welcome to MT.
I'm in agreement with most of what you just posted, but this one thing I disagree with, in a minor way.
If you limit your statement to cuts, then yes, the blade will penetrate to a maximum of slightly less than its length (and usually significantly less than its length). However, when used as a stabbing weapon, blades will penetrate well beyond their length. The human body is quite smooshy, and will compress when stabbed. I've seen many stab wounds over the years that were as much as twice the length of the blade and occassionally even more. The specific target of the knife will have the greatest impact on this,m obviously. A stab wound to the chest will not penetrate as far beyond the length of the blade as one to the abdomen.


----------



## chinto (Jan 29, 2013)

OK folks, here is my 2 cents worth. I am an X EMT, and I have Friends in the Prison industry... First of all, with a blade, there are good and better targets, NO BAD TARGETS! ( ask any Prison Guard about edged weapons, or better yet their medical staff!!)  next, people with blades tend to make sure your dead if homicide was the object of the exercise!  next, at least in the western world so called Knife Fights are NOT duels! they are Ambushes! and usually the first thing the one being ambushed by a knife knows about that knife being involved they have been cut or stabbed!.. All that said, yes heavy clothing can give some protection. yes you can survive being cut, and even stabbed depending one where. ( but ask any prison nurse about how many die with knife wounds in prisons, and people with blades tend to cut and stab a lot of times!! NOT JUST ONCE!)  So the answer is folks, a blade is present, brake contact and run if you can, if not get very serious about KILLING that attacker fast!  It is with OUT QUESTION a DEADLY FORCE encounter!!! 

Oh and on the above, the Romans did a real careful research project  way way back, and they found that 2 inches of blade in the body can kill very efficiently. stab hard with a 2 inch blade and you may get as much as 3 or even 4 inches penitration depending on where you stabbed!  Steel does damage every where it cuts or stabs! Good Targets and BETTER TARGETS are all that exist for that blade.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 29, 2013)

Mark Jacobs said:


> 4. About a knife cutting through clothing, the original quote was: Such cuts, and even thrusts to vital targets, are also often greatly mitigated by an opponents clothing, particularly something like a heavy winter coat. This is not to say if youre the one facing a knife you should take a cavalier approach to defending yourself since, again, any serious knife wound can eventually prove fatal.
> 
> Yes, heavy clothing is no assurance against being injured by even a small knife but it would also seem obvious that it can often mitigate the results of a knife attack, something that does not get talked about often enough in many schools that teach such things.



Id like to add that a heavy winter coat doesnt cover your eyes, and may not cover your neck.


----------



## MJS (Feb 4, 2013)

Mark Jacobs said:


> Sorry to revive an old thread but just came across this posting by accident and thought to jump in since I wrote the story under discussion.
> 
> First of all, I appreciate MJS just reading my column in Black Belt, its nice to know someone actually does. But it can always be problematical to an author when things he writes are paraphrased or taken as excerpts rather than the whole work so I just thought Id clarify a few points.



Welcome to MT Mark.   I've been a subscriber of BB for a while, so when I saw this article, I thought it was discussion worthy.  Furthermore, as a student of the FMAs, I enjoy blade articles.   As for the rest...I couldn't find an exact link to the article, and forum policy states that snippits of articles may be posted, not entire articles, thus my taking from the article and condensing here.  I apologize if things were lost by doing that. 



> As to my not identifying my source, I admit this is less than ideal. But I also point out in the original story that the so-called expert is a professional in the medical industry and it would probably not help his standing there to be seen giving out advice on knife fighting so the only way he would agree to be interviewed was if I did not use his name. I can only say he is very knowledgeable in both bladed martial arts and the medical field and because of this duel expertise, he takes more than a passing interest in the medical side of knife wounds. As a journalist, Ill also say that any time a writer uses an anonymous source, you can only judge its merit on the past history of the writer. If their past work has proven factual and reliable, you can give the claims of their anonymous sources more credence. Dont know how reliable Ive proven over the years but I do tend to double check most information I get and have conducted extensive interviews with multiple medical experts in the course of writing a book on martial arts. Though that was a book on unarmed combat, I couldnt help straying into asking a few of them about weaponry and most of what my expert on this story told me jibed with what others had said, as well as with my own knowledge from training with bladed weapons over the years. While I definitely do not consider myself an expert with knives, I have trained off and on with weapons for many years including a number of occasions with Bill McGrath, who was mentioned above, and quite a bit with various other senior instructors of pekiti tirsia as well as instructors in other Filipino and non-Filipino knife techniques. Also acquainted with Michael Janich from a video project we worked on together some years back and having interviewed him for other blade-related stories and, as someone else mentioned, hes a good guy.



Points taken. I"ll have to take your word on this, as I don't know the person in question.  



> To address the specific myths from the story (I believe I only use that word once, in passing):
> 
> 1. About killing people quickly and easily with a blade, the exact quote that I originally wrote (and the editors do sometimes make changes to the final version which I have no control over) was: ...according to The Expert, There are very few places you can put a knife in someone where they will drop instantly.
> Though pain or shock may make many people immediately stop fighting when cut by a knife, The Expert points out to me that people under the influence of drugs, in a psychotic state, or just very strong and determined, may be able to keep fighting for some time despite suffering lethal wounds from a knife.
> ...



Agreed.  



> 2. About targets, the size of the blade and defanging the snake: I never actually use the term defanging the snake though some of what I address is related to that concept. Also, here I was primarily talking about the use of smaller blades (four inches or less) and cutting with the edge rather than stabbing. However, simple math should tell you that stabs with a short blade can be less effective. If you have a folding knife less than three inches (all thats legal where I live) the maximum you can penetrate is a little less than three inches in depth. When you consider that you cant count on driving the knife up to its hilt, you may have to go through several layers of clothing, and you might even be fighting someone with a lot of fat or muscle on their body, such a blade may, effectively, only penetrate 2 inches or less. Though still potentially very dangerous, obviously this is less than ideal.



Points taken, however, if we look at the average prison shank, we'll usually see smaller tools, rather than anything large.  Their goal is to have an effective killing weapon, but small enough to easily conceal.  



> 3. About the consequences of cuts to the inside of the arm, the exact original quote was: Such techniques are sometimes taught as a means of disarming an attacker by cutting their weapon arm. But again, these sort of techniques frequently appear as if theyre meant to be done with a very large blade. Its questionable how much damage can be done to an attackers arm merely by cutting and slashing at it with a smaller knife.



I can agree with that, and I'd also say this pertains to disarms as well.  Look at the typical knife training blade and we'll see a larger weapon, rather than the smaller pocket knife size trainers that're out there.  I have changed over to the smaller trainers, as once you do this, you'll see how difficult some things can be.  I feel that it also depends on how the cut is applied.  Personally, I tend to not fall into the 1 shot, 1 kill crowd, so sure, I may not get the same results as if I was using a butcher knife, but those small cuts here and there, do add up, and do buy time to allow the person to follow up with other things.  



> Again, was talking specifically about cutting with the edge and using a small blade. I was not saying its impossible to do damage this way, just that its probably less likely than what is generally taught in many Filipino schools if youre using a small blade, especially if your opponent is wearing some heavy clothing. I also did address the type of damage that can be caused there, which would include severing the tendons on the inside of the wrist, which Im told control your ability to close the hand and is thus obviously important to holding a weapon.



Yup.



> 4. About a knife cutting through clothing, the original quote was: Such cuts, and even thrusts to vital targets, are also often greatly mitigated by an opponents clothing, particularly something like a heavy winter coat. This is not to say if youre the one facing a knife you should take a cavalier approach to defending yourself since, again, any serious knife wound can eventually prove fatal.



True.  Of course, in that case, I'd imagine the person would just go for targets that're less protected.  




> Though I may have generalized what I said in the story (which is hard not to do when they only give you 1000 words for a column) I tried not to make anything I said completely definitive since there are always a million variables that go into combat. And this was written for a general martial arts reading audience, many of whom likely have little or no experience with bladed weapons. Further, I was not looking to encourage anyone to knife fight or trying to provide them with information on how best to stab people. Simply trying to point out some fallacies in some of the information out there.
> 
> As for the experience of knife fighting masters again Ill point out most people teaching this stuff have never used or defended against a knife for real and many of them were taught by people with a similar lack of real experience. And even one or two real world confrontations is not really enough to make hard, empirical judgements on what works. Though someone in the lineage of these styles may have had a lot of real world experience, unless you are doing it for real yourself, or at least witnessing it being done for real, I find that such knowledge tends to very quickly stray from the practical into the realm of the wholly theoretical.
> 
> Finally, for anyone interested, Ive got a column on the aforementioned Bill McGrath that should be coming out in Black Belt in the next month or two and another column featuring Bills former teacher, Leo Gaje, which should appear in the next 3-6 months (never know exactly when with their production schedule).



Good points, and I'd say that what you said really applies to any aspect of fighting.  Until we're literally under the gun, so to speak, the best we can do is learn quality, effective techniques, and train as realistic as possible.  Yes, I know we can't replicate things 100%, but with the right mindset and training, we can get pretty close.

Again, welcome to the forum, and I look forward to more of your contribution. 

Mike


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 4, 2013)

Dirty Dog...smooshy?

Interesting discussion though. I do know that often editors change and cut articles to suit themselves so it's good to have it from the horse's mouth as it were.


----------



## Carol (Feb 5, 2013)

No he's not...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Mark Jacobs (Feb 6, 2013)

MJS said:


> Welcome to MT Mark.   I've been a subscriber of BB for a while,



So youre the one!




MJS said:


> so when I saw this article, I thought it was discussion worthy.  Furthermore, as a student of the FMAs, I enjoy blade articles.   As for the rest...I couldn't find an exact link to the article, and forum policy states that snippits of articles may be posted, not entire articles, thus my taking from the article and condensing here.  I apologize if things were lost by doing that.



No problem with reposting snippets of what I write and most of your questions and comments were perfectly valid. And, to be honest, I dont know if I even have a copy of that issue of the magazine so Im not sure what the final version said. I was referencing it off what I had on my computer so what appeared in Black Belt may well be a little different from what I wrote. As Tez3 says below, if there are doubts, its good to get confirmation from the author.




MJS said:


> I can agree with that, and I'd also say this pertains to disarms as well.  Look at the typical knife training blade and we'll see a larger weapon, rather than the smaller pocket knife size trainers that're out there.  I have changed over to the smaller trainers, as once you do this, you'll see how difficult some things can be.  I feel that it also depends on how the cut is applied.  Personally, I tend to not fall into the 1 shot, 1 kill crowd, so sure, I may not get the same results as if I was using a butcher knife, but those small cuts here and there, do add up, and do buy time to allow the person to follow up with other things.



A couple of other things we could toss out there are the differences between using a knife against an unarmed opponent (which is usually very inadvisable for legal reasons but I bring it up simply as part of a technical discussion) and using a knife against someone else who is wielding a knife. In the former case, using the knife to inflict less lethal cuts is certainly viable, if for no other reason than to make the opponent back off so you can flee. But against another armed opponent whos truly determined to do you severe harm, particularly if fleeing is not a readily available option, it would be more likely youd want to simply end the fight as quickly as possible, which would mean a quick kill. Though one of the main points of my story was that these quick kills are not always that easy to effect, especially with a small knife, they are possible, as is disabling somebody with a single thrust, such as a jab to the eye. Of course, this is the ideal and in a real knife vs. knife fight (which, to be honest, almost never happens in modern western society) you cant necessarily count on it.

The way I always look at it is from the dual perspective of a person wielding a knife in self-defense and a person defending against a knife. If you are facing a knife, your mind set should be this is a tremendously deadly weapon youre up against and any little cut can be fatal to you (not saying you shouldnt expect to get cut, just that you have to treat it that seriously and carefully). On the other hand, if youre the one wielding the knife in self-defense, you should look at it as if it is a tool which can aid you and give you a small advantage in a battle but NOT as if it is something which will insure a quick victory or provide you that huge an advantage.




MJS said:


> Good points, and I'd say that what you said really applies to any aspect of fighting.  Until we're literally under the gun, so to speak, the best we can do is learn quality, effective techniques, and train as realistic as possible.  Yes, I know we can't replicate things 100%, but with the right mindset and training, we can get pretty close.



Agreed, though the one key difference between knife fighting and fighting with empty hands is that there are people around who have been in literally dozens, if not hundreds, of real life confrontations involving empty hand combat and we can draw on their experiences. I know of no one currently around who can make similar claims about bladed combat (Im talking about fighting against a blade, either unarmed or with a blade of your own, not in simply murdering an unarmed person with your blade). In addition, even though its sporting combat, we can watch or participate in MMA or other competitions and see if a punch, choke or block actually works the way it is supposed to by going full out, with minimal protection, against an opponent whos resisting full out. Obviously, you just cant do this in any sort of realistic way with a knife. So, no matter how hard someone trains in knife techniques, it will always contain a greater theoretical element than unarmed combat and be subject to a lot more question about what really works.




MJS said:


> Again, welcome to the forum, and I look forward to more of your contribution.



Thanks again for reading and for the welcomes from you and Dirty Dog.


----------



## MJS (Feb 19, 2013)

Mark Jacobs said:


> So youre the one!



LOL...guilty as charged! Sorry for the delay in replying to this.  






> No problem with reposting snippets of what I write and most of your questions and comments were perfectly valid. And, to be honest, I dont know if I even have a copy of that issue of the magazine so Im not sure what the final version said. I was referencing it off what I had on my computer so what appeared in Black Belt may well be a little different from what I wrote. As Tez3 says below, if there are doubts, its good to get confirmation from the author.



No problem. 






> A couple of other things we could toss out there are the differences between using a knife against an unarmed opponent (which is usually very inadvisable for legal reasons but I bring it up simply as part of a technical discussion) and using a knife against someone else who is wielding a knife. In the former case, using the knife to inflict less lethal cuts is certainly viable, if for no other reason than to make the opponent back off so you can flee. But against another armed opponent whos truly determined to do you severe harm, particularly if fleeing is not a readily available option, it would be more likely youd want to simply end the fight as quickly as possible, which would mean a quick kill. Though one of the main points of my story was that these quick kills are not always that easy to effect, especially with a small knife, they are possible, as is disabling somebody with a single thrust, such as a jab to the eye. Of course, this is the ideal and in a real knife vs. knife fight (which, to be honest, almost never happens in modern western society) you cant necessarily count on it.
> 
> The way I always look at it is from the dual perspective of a person wielding a knife in self-defense and a person defending against a knife. If you are facing a knife, your mind set should be this is a tremendously deadly weapon youre up against and any little cut can be fatal to you (not saying you shouldnt expect to get cut, just that you have to treat it that seriously and carefully). On the other hand, if youre the one wielding the knife in self-defense, you should look at it as if it is a tool which can aid you and give you a small advantage in a battle but NOT as if it is something which will insure a quick victory or provide you that huge an advantage.



Agreed.  We've had many good debates on this forum, regarding the use of a weapon vs. unarmed attacker.  Of course it's probably going to look bad, especially to a potential untrained witness watching from across the street.  on the flip side, I could justify the use of a weapon vs. unarmed attacker in certain situations.  A smaller person vs a larger attacker, ie: smaller female/large male attacker.  Male is in the process of trying to cause severe harm and/or death, yeah, I could justify the female using a knife, gun, or pencil...whatever they can get their hands on, to aid in their defense.  

Knife vs. knife....personally, while I would agree the knife is a good tool, if I had the option of grabbing something else, perhaps something to create distance, I'd rather do that, than work in the close quarters with a blade.  I'm not ruling that out, just that I'd put that as a plan B, so to speak.  






> Agreed, though the one key difference between knife fighting and fighting with empty hands is that there are people around who have been in literally dozens, if not hundreds, of real life confrontations involving empty hand combat and we can draw on their experiences. I know of no one currently around who can make similar claims about bladed combat (Im talking about fighting against a blade, either unarmed or with a blade of your own, not in simply murdering an unarmed person with your blade). In addition, even though its sporting combat, we can watch or participate in MMA or other competitions and see if a punch, choke or block actually works the way it is supposed to by going full out, with minimal protection, against an opponent whos resisting full out. Obviously, you just cant do this in any sort of realistic way with a knife. So, no matter how hard someone trains in knife techniques, it will always contain a greater theoretical element than unarmed combat and be subject to a lot more question about what really works.



A guy like Marc Macyoung who claims to have a very in depth knowledge of real life street fights, could possibly be one person.  Some of the old Filipino guys who live in the PI, I'd say could be another.  I'm sure there could possibly be some out there, ie: military, LEO, COs, folks who work in potentially violent situations daily.  






> Thanks again for reading and for the welcomes from you and Dirty Dog.



You're welcome and I look forward to reading future articles from you, as well as your forum contributions. 

Mike


----------



## lklawson (Feb 19, 2013)

<sigh> Here I am, late to the party, as always.  

In general, I'd have to mostly agree with what Mr. Jacobs has said.  I've written several screeds which cover much of the same ground such as "The 4 ways to stop an opponent by using a knife," and "Dying ain't dead."  There's a lot of evidence for dual-death, mutual kills, etc. never mind the cuts that would seem lethal (or stops) but may not be.  Another thing I've said before and will say again: The martial arts & RBSD community in general, and knife & weapons in particular, can take a lot of instruction from the firearms community on everything from stops, use of force, and stress & adrenaline dumps.

Here's a couple of articles looking at the subject from a Western Martial Arts & Fencing tradition:
The Dubious Quick Kill (Part I) by Maestro Frank Lurz
The Dubious Quick Kill (Part II) by Maestro Frank Lurz

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## chinto (Feb 19, 2013)

ok one other myth that seems to be thought to be true... Boys and girls Knife fights at least in the USA, are not duels! They are AMBUSHES!  Often if you are a law enforcement officer, or you are civilian or a prisoner in a penitentiary, its and ambush and the first thing you know about a blade being involved you have been *CUT OR STABBED!! *  So if you think you are going to know that the attacker has a blade, well I would say not provable.  that said assume that any attacker on the street is armed and wants to TAKE YOUR LIFE!!  So my advice is evade, talk your way out, run, or what have you if you can! if not then GO FOR BROKE and assume you are in a DEADLY FORCE SITUATION until PROVEN other wise!


----------



## lklawson (Feb 19, 2013)

chinto said:


> ok one other myth that seems to be thought to be true... Boys and girls Knife fights at least in the USA, are not duels!


Not usually, no.



> They are AMBUSHES!


Sometimes they are and sometimes they're not.  What they seldom are is a symmetrically armed confrontation.  One participant has a knife and the other usually doesn't.  Sometimes that other is unarmed.  Sometimes it turns out that other has a club, firearm, or some other weapon. 

I agree that few knife encounters are duels.

That said, I usually teach dueling and make no excuses for it.  It's more historic and I teach mostly historic application.  In Bartitsu, we sometimes explore other elements but it's still usually from an in period perspective.  Every so often we stray into Neo-Bartitsu but I don't really enjoy that as it's sort of like reinventing RBSD or JKD.  There are already fine systems for that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Cyriacus (Feb 19, 2013)

lklawson said:


> Not usually, no.
> 
> [/FONT][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]Sometimes they are and sometimes they're not.  What they seldom are is a symmetrically armed confrontation.  One participant has a knife and the other usually doesn't.  Sometimes that other is unarmed.  Sometimes it turns out that other has a club, firearm, or some other weapon.
> 
> ...


To be fair, even if its without the element of being an ambush, being rushed with a knife whilst unarmed usually doesnt end well for the defender.


----------



## chinto (Feb 20, 2013)

lklawson said:


> Not usually, no.
> 
> [/FONT][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]Sometimes they are and sometimes they're not.  What they seldom are is a symmetrically armed confrontation.  One participant has a knife and the other usually doesn't.  Sometimes that other is unarmed.  Sometimes it turns out that other has a club, firearm, or some other weapon.
> 
> ...



I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them! 
Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible.  that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.


----------



## lklawson (Feb 20, 2013)

chinto said:


> I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them!
> Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible.  that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.


There's an old saying in the knife fighting community, "Cutters don't show and show-ers don't cut."

But, like I said, I pretty much teach dueling in it's historic context.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## WingChunIan (Feb 21, 2013)

Flying Crane said:


> You beat me to it.  Really, how many people out there have extensive hands-on experience with this, at least in American society?  It's just not that common, and to expect an extensive amount of experience would mean the guy is a downright felon who ought to be in prison for life.
> 
> The nature of society in modern America is such that the vast majority of those teaching any weapon are going to have little or no real-life experience with it.  They are teaching from theory.
> 
> Now someone coming from some war torn region of Africa, for example, might have more of that experience.  And I'd bet they have a very small number of techniques, which are all very simple and straight forward.  Nothing fancy or complicated.


nope they just have lots of scars and normally fewer limbs.....


----------



## WingChunIan (Feb 21, 2013)

chinto said:


> I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them!
> Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible.  that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.


This is exactly why i don't teach knife defence. In Wing Chun we just defend the space in front of the body (some people like to call them gates) anything entering that space is dealt with in the same way whether its a grab, a punch or a hand holding a knife.


----------



## chinto (Feb 21, 2013)

WingChunIan said:


> This is exactly why i don't teach knife defence. In Wing Chun we just defend the space in front of the body (some people like to call them gates) anything entering that space is dealt with in the same way whether its a grab, a punch or a hand holding a knife.



yes there is a reason why Okinawan Karate teaches most blocks with a trap and control with it. you have to assume that a blade or other weapon may be involved.!!


----------



## Ediaan (Mar 14, 2013)

chinto said:


> I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them!
> Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible.  that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.



This rings true, here in South Africa, we have heard and witnessed individuals being stabbed and afterwards they did not see their attacker, before or after the stabbing took place.

Someone who whips out a blade and starts waving it around like in the movies, knows almost nothing about knife fighting.
Don't get me wrong, anyone with a knife is dangerous, but the most dangerous ones are the thugs who walk casually past you, stab you in the neck and walk on like nothing happened - and you will be none the wiser.

We learn knife fighting against other knife fighters, but true stabbers will not even let you see that they have a knife.


----------



## Cyriacus (Mar 14, 2013)

Ediaan said:


> We learn knife fighting against other knife fighters, but true stabbers will not even let you see that they have a knife.



Aye.
That relates to more than just stabbing - Thats the difference between a fight and an attack. Knives just make it a whole lot faster for the assaulter


----------



## Ediaan (Mar 15, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Aye.
> That relates to more than just stabbing - Thats the difference between a fight and an attack. Knives just make it a whole lot faster for the assaulter


And much more dangerous, in true knife combat one person goes to morgue and the other one to hospital. I've read somewhere that statistics show that in about 90% of all knife fights both fighters usually succumb from their injuries.

It's such a devastating weapon and should really only be used as a last resort.


----------



## Mark Jacobs (Mar 29, 2013)

I see this thread, which started out as a discussion of an article I wrote two or three years ago, is still going strong. Too bad I cant get royalties out of this.

Just to address some of the points people have brought up since the last time I responded: First, I dont believe theres really a lot of hard empirical evidence about knife fighting - at least from people with direct experience fighting against knives - out there, anywhere. Which was sort of the point of my original article - that I went to a medical expert who did at least have direct experience in what a knife does to people as opposed to the theoretical experience of martial artists.

Second, someone previously mentioned Marc MacYoung and while I have never discussed this topic directly with him, I do seem to recall reading his insights on the subject. I believe he said he has been attacked a few times by knives but only once was he ever able to draw his own knife (a sheath knife I think) which is not encouraging to people who think they can whip out their own blade and turn a knife attack into a duel. From talking with people who have a lot of experience over in the Phillippines, the whole dueling thing, at least among FMA masters, seems highly overrated. I dont know of anyone whos ever actually witnessed any of these masters in a duel. And even one or two experiences with something like that is not enough to make hard empirical judgments on what works and doesnt work. For that you need dozens of trial experiments which just doesnt happen nowadays with blade vs. blade combat (even in the Phillippines or Africa, there are often enough guns around that you can still just get one and shoot the guy if you want to kill him bad enough, rather than engage in a duel). And anyone whos fought empty handed against a knife dozens of times... well, theyve probably been killed already.

When I interviewed Leo Gaje recently, who is probably as hardcore as you can get in regards to knife fighting, I asked him about the stories of him riding a subway train in NY in the 1970s with money hanging out of his pocket hoping to get mugged so he could practice his techniques. He said it was true but then said no one ever actually tried to mug him so even there, he didnt get a chance to test his techniques in real life. Perhaps he had some other experiences back in the Phillippines but dozens of knife fighting encounters just dont seem probable to me.

Possibly, the only place youre going to find people with that sort of experience are among duelists from hundreds of years ago. Musashi supposedly engaged in 60 duels, though Im told by Meik Skoss, one of the leading authorities on classical kenjutsu, that most of those were likely done with wooden swords used by both parties. Richard Cohen, in his book By the Sword, did mention a French nobleman, the Chevalier DAndreux, who allegedly killed 72 men in duels by the time he was 30 years old (supposedly, another cocky young nobleman, who didnt know DAndreuxs reputation, challenged him to a duel saying something like Youll be the 14th man Ive killed in a duel to which DAndreux replied with something like, Oh yeah? Youll be my 73rd,... and he was.) But I dont know how reliable that information was as Im told there were certain inaccuracies in Cohens book. In any case, that was certainly a different time and a different culture. Also, they were using swords not knives. With a knife, or even a machete, you have to get a lot closer which means its going to be a lot more difficult to avoid getting cut. On the rare occasions you do see people dueling each other with those sort of weapons, both parties generally seem too leery to get close enough to do serious damage. Again, I cant see too many people dueling a whole lot of times with knives. And anyone who has doesnt seem to be talking about it much so there just isnt that much evidence to go on.

Even with swords, while you hear about Musashi and DAndreux (assuming they actually did have multiple duels with real blades) you may simply be hearing about the exceptions, the rare guys who were willing to engage in duels and who were successful. And its possible they were exceptions because they were simply bigger and stronger than all the guys they killed. In Musashis Go Rin No Sho (if you believe its an accurate autobiography) he even says he didnt win because of his skill, that it was probably his athleticism or just bad opponents.

I agree with whats been said above about many knife attacks being more ambush than fair fight and with others turning into asymmetrical battles. One thing Ive heard MacYoung recommend, which Ive both seen and heard of from others as being effective, is simply throwing things at a knife wielding attacker to make them keep back. But again, unless youve done any of these things many times, or at least seen them done many times, were really going on guesswork here about whats effective.

Also thought I would mention that the issue of Black Belt magazine which just came out finally has my story on pekiti tirsia kali expert Bill McGrath, for those who are interested (not sure whats on the cover but its supposed to be in there under my Far East column).


----------



## Chris Parker (Mar 29, 2013)

Mark Jacobs said:


> Possibly, the only place you&#8217;re going to find people with that sort of experience are among duelists from hundreds of years ago. Musashi supposedly engaged in 60 duels, though I&#8217;m told by Meik Skoss, one of the leading authorities on classical kenjutsu, that most of those were likely done with wooden swords used by both parties. Richard Cohen, in his book By the Sword, did mention a French nobleman, the Chevalier D&#8217;Andreux, who allegedly killed 72 men in duels by the time he was 30 years old (supposedly, another cocky young nobleman, who didn&#8217;t know D&#8217;Andreux&#8217;s reputation, challenged him to a duel saying something like &#8220;You&#8217;ll be the 14th man I&#8217;ve killed in a duel&#8221; to which D&#8217;Andreux replied with something like, &#8220;Oh yeah? You&#8217;ll be my 73rd,&#8221;... and he was.) But I don&#8217;t know how reliable that information was as I&#8217;m told there were certain inaccuracies in Cohen&#8217;s book. In any case, that was certainly a different time and a different culture. Also, they were using swords not knives. With a knife, or even a machete, you have to get a lot closer which means it&#8217;s going to be a lot more difficult to avoid getting cut. On the rare occasions you do see people dueling each other with those sort of weapons, both parties generally seem too leery to get close enough to do serious damage. Again, I can&#8217;t see too many people dueling a whole lot of times with knives. And anyone who has doesn&#8217;t seem to be talking about it much so there just isn&#8217;t that much evidence to go on.
> 
> Even with swords, while you hear about Musashi and D&#8217;Andreux (assuming they actually did have multiple duels with real blades) you may simply be hearing about the exceptions, the rare guys who were willing to engage in duels and who were successful. And it&#8217;s possible they were exceptions because they were simply bigger and stronger than all the guys they killed. In Musashi&#8217;s Go Rin No Sho (if you believe it&#8217;s an accurate autobiography) he even says he didn&#8217;t win because of his skill, that it was probably his athleticism or just bad opponents.



Just to clarify here, Meik is an authority on his systems, not on all Japanese sword, nor on Musashi, or his history. That really does need to be stated. And, as far as Musashi engaging in duels with steel or friendly matches with wooden items, it should be noted that strikes with wooden items can be rather lethal in and of themselves (there are records of other kenjutsu-ka, as well as Musashi, using bokken or similar in duels, to lethal effect). But, it should also be recognized that a large proportion of his duels were with steel, and did result in the death of his opponents. Exact numbers are a little harder to come by, but the early part of his career were dominantly using steel, according to his history.

When it comes to dueling (and the records of them) being the exception, I'd be less likely to think that, depending on when (and where) you're talking about... there was a time in Europe that about a third of the noblemen were being killed in duels... you weren't considered a true gentleman unless you'd engaged in at least one duel, preferably having killed your opponent (again, though, depending on the form of duel, it might just be to the first injury, or any agreed upon situation).

Oh, and the comments about Musashi's success don't attribute his survival to badly skilled opponents (he actually states that he wasn't necessarily more skilled than they were, indicating that they weren't "worse" swordsmen), nor to his athleticism. In fact, he attributes it to his attitude towards combat, the willingness to engage, even at the risk or loss of his own life, without holding back. That, combined with his natural physical attributes (being a fair bit taller/larger than most Japanese), and his natural understanding of strategy, lead to his success.


----------

