# Understanding the knife encounter.



## BLACK LION

from an observational standpoint and even a training and practice one:





I often see references of knife encounters as some sort of deul in which two opposing forces face off in some sort of sanctioned death match...   

This is far from actuality and possibly stems from unharnessed fear or misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of a knife attack itself and how a person that wishes to utilize a knife must act in order to be successful.... 
I belive it also stems from various media and mediums that have subliminally domesticated violence in its entirety to where we actually behave like we see in the movies or video or what have you... It seems many have been inadvertently trained to accept a knife attack exactly how it does NOT happen....  

I also see references of knife attacks in which the would be victim attempts to adorn themselves with some sort of deterrent like a briefcase or a jacket or belt etc. in an attempt to prolong the innevitable or somehow prevent it...   

Here lies another pitfall that stems from fear or lack of knowledge and understanding as stated above... 

Another major reference I have come across is "disarming techniques" in which the would be victim attempts to perform specified techniques in order to strip away the blade and or avoid being stabbed or cut by utilizing various techniques...including but not limited to all out grappling matches with the tool or device...   

Here lies another misconception and even though its not a detrimental as the previous two its still on dangerous ground just the same... although I do not believe this particular action or actions stem from fear I do believe they stem from other irrelevant stimuli and the lack of understanding of how one who utilizes a blade attacks...   







Its important to me that those who train and practice with and against tools understand the nature of thier use as well as their effects. 
A knife for example is most often employed or deployed as a menas of assassination by ambush...  hence the term "felt not seen"... rarely if ever will an end user brandish the blade and wave it around like some trinket in some hypnotic ritualistic fashion... they will pull and crash into you wile stabbing perfusely in any spot they can get it into... often times the kill is prolonged by defensive measure that most people being stabbed take... hence the term "defensive wounds"... many times a person is cut or stabbed dozens of times only to have the final few be the fatal ones... 
The surprise is overwhelming...even in prison footage this fact remains the same...    
Rarely does a knifer step to toe toe with the blade if full view in order to secure thier needs...    they will exploit ever opportunity of surprise to their advantage....  they also understand the fear associated with being stabbed and use that as a tool to further thier agenda... 

Its important to understand that there are only 2 "safe" places when faced with the blade...  1.far far away from it  2.the attacker rendered nonfunctional....   option one may or may not involve being cut or stabbed while option 2 will involve being cut or stabbed... you may not have to sacrifice any blood or tissue to escape but you will if you agress to protect yourself or others....  there will be blood... regardless 

Once again... understanding that there will be blood and cuts is paramount... but killers dont quit and neither should you.   

Understanding the use of the knife tool and how to access targets and vitals with it is also paramount... if you become the end user you want to ensure success and it needs to be immediate...  understanding what eefects slashes get as opposed to thrusting the blade into a vital...  what makes more blood...what makes less...  and so on...  

Most often people in training do not realize that if you attack correctly by utilizing the proper principles the knife itself becomes inert...  most "disarms" come not by technique but after injuries are affectuated and the knife is dislodged from impact or trauma or inability to use it from nonfunctioning parts....   
Most often people in trainin do not realize that attacking the tool itself wont stop the job from getting done...   
stop the living breathing thinking being behind the device and the threat ceases to exist... there is no deuling or fancy techniques that get this done... just sheer agressive or egressive precision and decisive execution on the real targets and thats the operationg system of the machine(s) you are up against...not thier extensions


----------



## GBlues

BLACK LION said:


> from an observational standpoint and even a training and practice one:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I often see references of knife encounters as some sort of deul in which two opposing forces face off in some sort of sanctioned death match...
> 
> This is far from actuality and possibly stems from unharnessed fear or misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of a knife attack itself and how a person that wishes to utilize a knife must act in order to be successful....
> I belive it also stems from various media and mediums that have subliminally domesticated violence in its entirety to where we actually behave like we see in the movies or video or what have you... It seems many have been inadvertently trained to accept a knife attack exactly how it does NOT happen....
> 
> I also see references of knife attacks in which the would be victim attempts to adorn themselves with some sort of deterrent like a briefcase or a jacket or belt etc. in an attempt to prolong the innevitable or somehow prevent it...
> 
> Here lies another pitfall that stems from fear or lack of knowledge and understanding as stated above...
> 
> Another major reference I have come across is "disarming techniques" in which the would be victim attempts to perform specified techniques in order to strip away the blade and or avoid being stabbed or cut by utilizing various techniques...including but not limited to all out grappling matches with the tool or device...
> 
> Here lies another misconception and even though its not a detrimental as the previous two its still on dangerous ground just the same... although I do not believe this particular action or actions stem from fear I do believe they stem from other irrelevant stimuli and the lack of understanding of how one who utilizes a blade attacks...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its important to me that those who train and practice with and against tools understand the nature of thier use as well as their effects.
> A knife for example is most often employed or deployed as a menas of assassination by ambush... hence the term "felt not seen"... rarely if ever will an end user brandish the blade and wave it around like some trinket in some hypnotic ritualistic fashion... they will pull and crash into you wile stabbing perfusely in any spot they can get it into... often times the kill is prolonged by defensive measure that most people being stabbed take... hence the term "defensive wounds"... many times a person is cut or stabbed dozens of times only to have the final few be the fatal ones...
> The surprise is overwhelming...even in prison footage this fact remains the same...
> Rarely does a knifer step to toe toe with the blade if full view in order to secure thier needs... they will exploit ever opportunity of surprise to their advantage.... they also understand the fear associated with being stabbed and use that as a tool to further thier agenda...
> 
> Its important to understand that there are only 2 "safe" places when faced with the blade... 1.far far away from it 2.the attacker rendered nonfunctional.... option one may or may not involve being cut or stabbed while option 2 will involve being cut or stabbed... you may not have to sacrifice any blood or tissue to escape but you will if you agress to protect yourself or others.... there will be blood... regardless
> 
> Once again... understanding that there will be blood and cuts is paramount... but killers dont quit and neither should you.
> 
> Understanding the use of the knife tool and how to access targets and vitals with it is also paramount... if you become the end user you want to ensure success and it needs to be immediate... understanding what eefects slashes get as opposed to thrusting the blade into a vital... what makes more blood...what makes less... and so on...
> 
> Most often people in training do not realize that if you attack correctly by utilizing the proper principles the knife itself becomes inert... most "disarms" come not by technique but after injuries are affectuated and the knife is dislodged from impact or trauma or inability to use it from nonfunctioning parts....
> Most often people in trainin do not realize that attacking the tool itself wont stop the job from getting done...
> stop the living breathing thinking being behind the device and the threat ceases to exist... there is no deuling or fancy techniques that get this done... just sheer agressive or egressive precision and decisive execution on the real targets and thats the operationg system of the machine(s) you are up against...not thier extensions


 
I think that you've got the right idea. I do believe like you that there is too much made out of the dueling. I think if you want to learn or study realistic knife defenses you have to study the people that are the best at it. That would be the criminals in our prisons. Most of them have never studied or had any training at all, yet they seem to be the best at performing violence. Especially when it comes to knife fighting. I think your idea about hitting specific targets, is very important. Because if you don't, you don't get injuries and then you don't end the confrontation. To take it one step further, people who think that targeting is bunk or b.s. Look at the Aryan Brotherhood in the prisons. Targeting is so important, that they now make it mandatory that all of the members study human anatomy. Why? Because they have found that when they want to kill somebody they only have so much time, and in reality people have been stabbed multiple tens of times and not died. Why? Because no vital target was hit. So the Aryan Brotherhood realizing this decided that, "Hey, if I can kill a guy in 3 stabs instead of say 50 then I have time to get rid of the weapon, and I killed the guy before the guards can stop me." Mission accomplished. Targeting is so important. More than people realize. It's often said that "The same techniques you do empty handed can be done with a weapon." WHile this is true to a point, it's not true also. Because if your not stabbing vital targets, if your not puncturing vital organs, your not getting the job done. Your making a mess for yourself because your giving this attacker time to put an injury on you. Conversely when empty handed if your not targeting vital organs on the human body, your again giving this guy with a knife time to put an injury on you, perhaps a life ending one. You can get the same results targeting with no weapon as you can with a weapon. If bare handed you go for targets above and beyond anything else, why wouldn't you when the guy has a knife? It's even more important. The reality of a knife fight, is that your not dueling, as a matter of fact here's a link to what a knife fight most commonly looks like.....





 

Now understand these guys are martial artists. There is actually more to this video than the 10 secs shown. But, that is how a knife attack looks. IT's brutal, it's viscious, and all the dueling and bouncing around in the world isn't going to help you. Getting injuries will though. By  the way this is just a training session nobody was harmed during the filming of this video. LOL! 

One last point if you read the description to the right of the video. Who did you identify with? THe guy being stabbed or the guy doing the stabbing? Did you see it as a failure on the stabbies part, or a successful use of the tool of violence by the guy doing the stabbing? It is important because it will make you think in a little different manner. Think about it.


----------



## MA-Caver

BLACK LION said:


> Most often people in training do not realize that if you attack correctly by utilizing the proper principles the knife itself becomes inert... most "disarms" come not by technique but after injuries are effectuated and the knife is dislodged from impact or trauma or inability to use it from non functioning parts....
> Most often people in training do not realize that attacking the tool itself wont stop the job from getting done...
> stop the living breathing thinking being behind the device and the threat ceases to exist... there is no dueling or fancy techniques that get this done... just sheer aggressive or regressive precision and decisive execution on the real targets and that's the operating system of the machine(s) you are up against...not their extensions


I would have to agree with the statement that the knife is about as dangerous as a gun when it's not being held by someone... anyone. Sitting on a table it won't harm anyone unless it's picked up and used. 
Yet definitely getting the job done means incapacitating the user and not the tool. Still you have to do something to prevent the tool from being used against you. 

You spoke about how dueling is not how knife fights go. You are mostly correct... but they do happen, I've been in one such event... got a thin white scar on my right arm to show for it. But I agree the classic "West Side Story" knife dueling is more cinematic mythology than real life. Now a days if I'm going to employ my blade I'm going to keep it well hidden/out of sight best as I can throughout. You cannot defend against what you cannot see. 



GBlues said:


> I think that you've got the right idea. I do believe like you that there is too much made out of the dueling. I think if you want to learn or study realistic knife defenses you have to study the people that are the best at it. That would be the criminals in our prisons. Most of them have never studied or had any training at all, yet they seem to be the best at performing violence.


 I'll have to disagree with the term "best at it" when describing the average prisoner ... Just because it's common place to use a shiv (not a real blade) in prison doesn't make a fighter out of them. As mentioned it's more of an opportunistic assassin's weapon, a quick thrust (or three) in a hoped for vital area and move on before the guards can pinpoint who did it. 
The military has units which train with bladed weaponry, particularly knives and bayonets, but not exclusively. Special forces units (Berets, Seals, Rangers, et al) would be these units for their occasional need for stealth and surprise attacks. 



GBlues said:


> Especially when it comes to knife fighting. I think your idea about hitting specific targets, is very important. Because if you don't, you don't get injuries and then you don't end the confrontation. To take it one step further, people who think that targeting is bunk or b.s. Look at the Aryan Brotherhood in the prisons. Targeting is so important, that they now make it mandatory that all of the members study human anatomy. Why? Because they have found that when they want to kill somebody they only have so much time, and in reality people have been stabbed multiple tens of times and not died. Why? Because no vital target was hit. So the Aryan Brotherhood realizing this decided that, "Hey, if I can kill a guy in 3 stabs instead of say 50 then I have time to get rid of the weapon, and I killed the guy before the guards can stop me." Mission accomplished. Targeting is so important. More than people realize. It's often said that "The same techniques you do empty handed can be done with a weapon." While this is true to a point, it's not true also. Because if your not stabbing vital targets, if your not puncturing vital organs, your not getting the job done. Your making a mess for yourself because your giving this attacker time to put an injury on you. Conversely when empty handed if your not targeting vital organs on the human body, your again giving this guy with a knife time to put an injury on you, perhaps a life ending one. You can get the same results targeting with no weapon as you can with a weapon. If bare handed you go for targets above and beyond anything else, why wouldn't you when the guy has a knife? It's even more important. The reality of a knife fight, is that your not dueling, as a matter of fact here's a link to what a knife fight most commonly looks like.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now understand these guys are martial artists. There is actually more to this video than the 10 secs shown. But, that is how a knife attack looks. IT's brutal, it's vicious, and all the dueling and bouncing around in the world isn't going to help you. Getting injuries will though. By  the way this is just a training session nobody was harmed during the filming of this video. LOL!
> 
> One last point if you read the description to the right of the video. Who did you identify with? The guy being stabbed or the guy doing the stabbing? Did you see it as a failure on the stabbies part, or a successful use of the tool of violence by the guy doing the stabbing? It is important because it will make you think in a little different manner. Think about it.


I identified with both, the stabbed and the stabber. I've been fortunate, nay... blessed to come out of both incidents alive. 
Being stabbed is a unique feeling, it's like being punched in the gut but a much more focused and sharper pain (literally) at first, almost like a quick twinge of muscle spasm then nothing. It's later when it hurts like hell. 
Perhaps it's also shock that numbs the system and dulls the pain. Being stabbed multiple times... I haven't had that and don't ever want it. Especially as in that (excellent) video you linked us to. Sheesh, might as well write it all off because there's no defense against that... especially after the first two or three thrusts into your body. 
Again hollywood tends to over (or even under) exaggerates the effects of a blade attack on the body. The mind has difficulty wrapping itself around the event. I would think even the most prepared individual will not react as trained to do once that blade enters and exits the body. 

Good stuff fellas, thanks.


----------



## MJS

BLACK LION said:


> from an observational standpoint and even a training and practice one:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I often see references of knife encounters as some sort of deul in which two opposing forces face off in some sort of sanctioned death match...
> 
> This is far from actuality and possibly stems from unharnessed fear or misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of a knife attack itself and how a person that wishes to utilize a knife must act in order to be successful....
> I belive it also stems from various media and mediums that have subliminally domesticated violence in its entirety to where we actually behave like we see in the movies or video or what have you... It seems many have been inadvertently trained to accept a knife attack exactly how it does NOT happen....
> 
> I also see references of knife attacks in which the would be victim attempts to adorn themselves with some sort of deterrent like a briefcase or a jacket or belt etc. in an attempt to prolong the innevitable or somehow prevent it...
> 
> Here lies another pitfall that stems from fear or lack of knowledge and understanding as stated above...
> 
> Another major reference I have come across is "disarming techniques" in which the would be victim attempts to perform specified techniques in order to strip away the blade and or avoid being stabbed or cut by utilizing various techniques...including but not limited to all out grappling matches with the tool or device...
> 
> Here lies another misconception and even though its not a detrimental as the previous two its still on dangerous ground just the same... although I do not believe this particular action or actions stem from fear I do believe they stem from other irrelevant stimuli and the lack of understanding of how one who utilizes a blade attacks...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its important to me that those who train and practice with and against tools understand the nature of thier use as well as their effects.
> A knife for example is most often employed or deployed as a menas of assassination by ambush... hence the term "felt not seen"... rarely if ever will an end user brandish the blade and wave it around like some trinket in some hypnotic ritualistic fashion... they will pull and crash into you wile stabbing perfusely in any spot they can get it into... often times the kill is prolonged by defensive measure that most people being stabbed take... hence the term "defensive wounds"... many times a person is cut or stabbed dozens of times only to have the final few be the fatal ones...
> The surprise is overwhelming...even in prison footage this fact remains the same...
> Rarely does a knifer step to toe toe with the blade if full view in order to secure thier needs... they will exploit ever opportunity of surprise to their advantage.... they also understand the fear associated with being stabbed and use that as a tool to further thier agenda...
> 
> Its important to understand that there are only 2 "safe" places when faced with the blade... 1.far far away from it 2.the attacker rendered nonfunctional.... option one may or may not involve being cut or stabbed while option 2 will involve being cut or stabbed... you may not have to sacrifice any blood or tissue to escape but you will if you agress to protect yourself or others.... there will be blood... regardless
> 
> Once again... understanding that there will be blood and cuts is paramount... but killers dont quit and neither should you.
> 
> Understanding the use of the knife tool and how to access targets and vitals with it is also paramount... if you become the end user you want to ensure success and it needs to be immediate... understanding what eefects slashes get as opposed to thrusting the blade into a vital... what makes more blood...what makes less... and so on...
> 
> Most often people in training do not realize that if you attack correctly by utilizing the proper principles the knife itself becomes inert... most "disarms" come not by technique but after injuries are affectuated and the knife is dislodged from impact or trauma or inability to use it from nonfunctioning parts....
> Most often people in trainin do not realize that attacking the tool itself wont stop the job from getting done...
> stop the living breathing thinking being behind the device and the threat ceases to exist... there is no deuling or fancy techniques that get this done... just sheer agressive or egressive precision and decisive execution on the real targets and thats the operationg system of the machine(s) you are up against...not thier extensions


 
I agree with the majority of this.  To touch on a few points that you bring up....yes, I've felt for a long time, that if you're going to have any success defending against a weapon, you need to understand how the weapon can be used.  I had my eyes opened after training in the FMAs, and while the BG we face may not be a Filipino knife master, the training has provided me with many ways the blade can be used.  

The same can be applied to a gun, or grappling.  You need to know how things function, to better your chances of survival.

As far as techniques go.....I put them in the same category as my empty hand techs......use the set techs. to build a base from, to gain the concepts and principles, and from there, adapt to whats presented to you at the moment.  I'm probably not going to pull off a set tech., but again, I will use the ideas from them.

I also agree with the way the attack happens.  Now, someone using a blade in an attempted mugging will probably wave it around in a threatening fashion for intimidation or press it up against you, vs. what we'd see in a prison yard, where the attack is fast and relentless.  

This past Wed., I was doing some blade work during a private session.  The majority of the time, I was close enough to throw a strike to the eyes, face, etc., so I'd do that, and then work for the control.  Of course, nothing says that you have to stick around.  Once you throw a strike, that may buy you enough time to get the hell out of the area.  If you do stay, and work for control of the weapon, the punishing shots should still be coming.  Just because I have control, doesnt mean that I won't stop punishing the person.

Of course, one other thing that, IMO, is often overlooked, is the other hand of the BG.  So its important to keep in mind, that while we're doing whatever it is we're doing, he could be striking us with his free hand.


----------



## MJS

GBlues said:


> I think if you want to learn or study realistic knife defenses you have to study the people that are the best at it. That would be the criminals in our prisons. Most of them have never studied or had any training at all, yet they seem to be the best at performing violence.


 
Good points, however I don't think I'd go so far as to say they're better skilled, but instead, that they're more conditioned to dish out violence.  Given the environment that they live in, they're most likely not going to think twice about doing anything violent.  I say this in comparison to the average Joe, because the thought of doing anything violent, has a tendancy to gross some people out.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*Definitely good points made by all!*

I think one of the most important things to remember is to not talk, think or act *in absolutes*.  What does this mean?  If you deal in absolutes you are shutting your mind off to other possibilities.  Those possibilities may come to happen and walla you may freeze.  This is why like MJS above I feel you need to be well rounded and have a very good idea of how to use a knife or any tool you may encounter.  The knowledge of how to use it and it's properties may then help you in defending yourself should you be caught in a disadvantageous position by a person using one.  Bottom line if you think an attack may happen a certain way and that is the only way you train Murphy's Law will probably bite you and give you a different scenario.  So *do not think in absolutes* but insteadin your training explore the possibilities!


----------



## GBlues

MA-Caver said:


> I would have to agree with the statement that the knife is about as dangerous as a gun when it's not being held by someone... anyone. Sitting on a table it won't harm anyone unless it's picked up and used.
> Yet definitely getting the job done means incapacitating the user and not the tool. Still you have to do something to prevent the tool from being used against you.
> 
> You spoke about how dueling is not how knife fights go. You are mostly correct... but they do happen, I've been in one such event... got a thin white scar on my right arm to show for it. But I agree the classic "West Side Story" knife dueling is more cinematic mythology than real life. Now a days if I'm going to employ my blade I'm going to keep it well hidden/out of sight best as I can throughout. You cannot defend against what you cannot see.
> 
> I'll have to disagree with the term "best at it" when describing the average prisoner ... Just because it's common place to use a shiv (not a real blade) in prison doesn't make a fighter out of them. As mentioned it's more of an opportunistic assassin's weapon, a quick thrust (or three) in a hoped for vital area and move on before the guards can pinpoint who did it.
> The military has units which train with bladed weaponry, particularly knives and bayonets, but not exclusively. Special forces units (Berets, Seals, Rangers, et al) would be these units for their occasional need for stealth and surprise attacks.
> 
> 
> I identified with both, the stabbed and the stabber. I've been fortunate, nay... blessed to come out of both incidents alive.
> Being stabbed is a unique feeling, it's like being punched in the gut but a much more focused and sharper pain (literally) at first, almost like a quick twinge of muscle spasm then nothing. It's later when it hurts like hell.
> Perhaps it's also shock that numbs the system and dulls the pain. Being stabbed multiple times... I haven't had that and don't ever want it. Especially as in that (excellent) video you linked us to. Sheesh, might as well write it all off because there's no defense against that... especially after the first two or three thrusts into your body.
> Again hollywood tends to over (or even under) exaggerates the effects of a blade attack on the body. The mind has difficulty wrapping itself around the event. I would think even the most prepared individual will not react as trained to do once that blade enters and exits the body.
> 
> Good stuff fellas, thanks.


 
I just wanted to clarify something real quick. I guess it's not that prisoners are the best at "it", however they are the most successful at using the tool of violence. Those are the kinds of guys that Black Lion is talking about going up against. The A-Social individual who just plain doesn't care whether you live or die, and in all probability in a violent situation is doing everything in his power to kill you. As far as there being no defense against that. Well, that short video is not the end of that segment, they do show you how they recommend that you deal with it. Let me see if I can find it. No I can't find the other half of that video, but the basic premise is hit the guy, and get an injury. That stops that attack. As far as the dueling part of it goes. Yeah duel type situations do happen, very rarely though. I think that they are in the minority. I was 19 when I had to defend against a knife for the first time. It was a duel type, except I didn't have a knife, so, not really a duel. But anyway, I think they happen more like what Torin demonstrated on a whole, than the dueling. I think that training to duel gives a sense of preparedness, a sense of that we know what were doing. It's not about seeing how good the other guy is, it's about stopping him, and not giving him a chance to show you how good he is. If you duel you give him that chance.


----------



## BLACK LION

for me...these are the conceivable possibilities...  this works for firearms and blunt object as well....          aside from being sniped from long range.  

"stand off" or "face off".... in which the threat is cocked and ready to engage face to face.  

 "assassination".... in which the victim is ambushed with a level of skill and expertise wether it be by distraction or what have you. A specific target is marked for quick and easy removal.  Sentry removal and other combat apps apply here. This is basically a skilled execution of the target by means of surprise or ambush.   

"brandishing"....  in which a knife is pulled and brandished in order to gain copitulation ur some sort of control.  

"hold up" or "hostage" in which a knife is put to the throat or back or whatever by the threat in order to gain control...

"draw" or "reach"... in which the threat is reaching for something or attempting to draw or pull something.  

I put more emphasis on worst case actuality because here lies to most iminent danger...  I believe its easier to work your way down to the lesser threatening or "I wish he would" scenarios rather than up.     an ambush or assassination is worst case becuase of the element of surprise...  the others at least afford a visual reference to what thier intent is as well as afford more time.... 



good job guys




most end users with some level of skill and understanding would most likely approach it from an ambush or assassination standpoint....  I know I do.


----------



## zDom

MA-Caver said:


> I identified with both, the stabbed and the stabber. I've been fortunate, nay... blessed to come out of both incidents alive.
> Being stabbed is a unique feeling, it's like being punched in the gut but a much more focused and sharper pain (literally) at first, almost like a quick twinge of muscle spasm then nothing. It's later when it hurts like hell.
> Perhaps it's also shock that numbs the system and dulls the pain. Being stabbed multiple times... I haven't had that and don't ever want it. Especially as in that (excellent) video you linked us to. Sheesh, might as well write it all off because there's no defense against that... especially after the first two or three thrusts into your body.
> Again hollywood tends to over (or even under) exaggerates the effects of a blade attack on the body. The mind has difficulty wrapping itself around the event. I would think even the most prepared individual will not react as trained to do once that blade enters and exits the body.



Great info and followup comments.

I got stabbed in the chest when I was 16.

It started with the guy waving it around demanding my money (that he already HAD in his POCKET! &#8212; I had given it to him for a purchase ...)

then he "put it away" (actually he just didn't.. he pretended to, then put his hands under his T-shirt, one of which was still holding the knife)

The stab felt pretty much as Caver described it: like a punch in the chest. I wasn't even sure I had been stabbed until about 5 minutes later when I went into a donut shop and pulled up my shirt.

But later: yep, hurt like HELL. Started when the hospital staff began sticking huge iodined Q-tips in the wound and kept ramping up from there 

While prisoner-type attacks and trained knife attacks may be the most dangerous types and should be prepared for (worst case scenarios!)

"Train for the worst, hope for something less than that."

I think other types of attacks may really be more likely &#8212; for example, a Significant Other going bezerk and coming at you with the Psycho Icepick attack; or a wanna-be thug menacing with a knife (which, in retrospect, was what I encountered).

Even the most rudimentary training for knife attacks is going to help you SOME in these.

(I'd be interested in seeing statistics on the types of knife attacks...)

I think the most important things to remember are, in this order:

1) GET the knife/knife hand under control. Yea, he might be punching, pinching or scratching with the OTHER hand, but whatever he is doing with that other hand is almost certainly not as bad as wounds from the knife hand.

2) Having achieved Objective 1, DISABLE the knife's operator for the reasons stated above in this thread.

(note: _DON'T_ give up on these two objectives, even if you take multiple cuts and/or stab wounds. This may be one of the most critical things to remember.)

3) IMMEDIATELY seek medical attention and law enforcement. You may not even realize you've been wounded, so get checked out, ASAP.


Agree? Disagree? Additions?



As for identifying with the STABBER, while I wouldn't hestitate to use a firearm in self defense if the situation called for it, I don't know that I would EVER use a knife: empty hand techniques I am familiar with, I would think, should have as much stopping power as anything I could do with a short blade, as I have no real training with a blade.

And STOPPING the aggressor should always be the goal (for me, at least). I don't see myself in any situation where my goal is killing someone.

Compelled to act with the intention of lethal force and not having a firearm available (say, a zombie attack for instance and out of bullets ...) I think I would go for LONGER blunt or bladed weapons: bokken, machete, escrima sticks.

YMMV...


----------



## GBlues

zDom said:


> Great info and followup comments.
> 
> I got stabbed in the chest when I was 16.
> 
> It started with the guy waving it around demanding my money (that he already HAD in his POCKET!  I had given it to him for a purchase ...)
> 
> then he "put it away" (actually he just didn't.. he pretended to, then put his hands under his T-shirt, one of which was still holding the knife)
> 
> The stab felt pretty much as Caver described it: like a punch in the chest. I wasn't even sure I had been stabbed until about 5 minutes later when I went into a donut shop and pulled up my shirt.
> 
> But later: yep, hurt like HELL. Started when the hospital staff began sticking huge iodined Q-tips in the wound and kept ramping up from there
> 
> While prisoner-type attacks and trained knife attacks may be the most dangerous types and should be prepared for (worst case scenarios!)
> 
> "Train for the worst, hope for something less than that."
> 
> I think other types of attacks may really be more likely  for example, a Significant Other going bezerk and coming at you with the Psycho Icepick attack; or a wanna-be thug menacing with a knife (which, in retrospect, was what I encountered).
> 
> Even the most rudimentary training for knife attacks is going to help you SOME in these.
> 
> (I'd be interested in seeing statistics on the types of knife attacks...)
> 
> I think the most important things to remember are, in this order:
> 
> 1) GET the knife/knife hand under control. Yea, he might be punching, pinching or scratching with the OTHER hand, but whatever he is doing with that other hand is almost certainly not as bad as wounds from the knife hand.
> 
> 2) Having achieved Objective 1, DISABLE the knife's operator for the reasons stated above in this thread.
> 
> (note: _DON'T_ give up on these two objectives, even if you take multiple cuts and/or stab wounds. This may be one of the most critical things to remember.)
> 
> 3) IMMEDIATELY seek medical attention and law enforcement. You may not even realize you've been wounded, so get checked out, ASAP.
> 
> 
> Agree? Disagree? Additions?
> 
> 
> 
> As for identifying with the STABBER, while I wouldn't hestitate to use a firearm in self defense if the situation called for it, I don't know that I would EVER use a knife: empty hand techniques I am familiar with, I would think, should have as much stopping power as anything I could do with a short blade, as I have no real training with a blade.
> 
> And STOPPING the aggressor should always be the goal (for me, at least). I don't see myself in any situation where my goal is killing someone.
> 
> Compelled to act with the intention of lethal force and not having a firearm available (say, a zombie attack for instance and out of bullets ...) I think I would go for LONGER blunt or bladed weapons: bokken, machete, escrima sticks.
> 
> YMMV...


 

I would disagree with you on your number 1. I don't think it's important to grab the knife hand. Most people can't and won't grab the knife hand. I think your main focus should be to turn the brain off. If you turn his brain off you accomplish all of your objectives and do so at once. 1) he is no longer a knife wielding attacker. and 2) he is no longer a threat. 

Just go for an injury. Get it, and everything changes in your favor. You know, a knife is an inanimate object, it can not hurt you by itself. A gentleman that I respect a great deal said, " It doesn't matter whether it's a knife or a gun, everything changes the second you do something. You get in there you get an injury and you keep piling on injuries. Until your attacker is in a non-fuctional state." The only weapon we need to concern ourselves with attacking is the human brain. WIthout it, no more attack can be forth coming.


----------



## zDom

GBlues said:


> I would disagree with you on your number 1. I don't think it's important to grab the knife hand. Most people can't and won't grab the knife hand. I think your main focus should be to turn the brain off. If you turn his brain off you accomplish all of your objectives and do so at once. 1) he is no longer a knife wielding attacker. and 2) he is no longer a threat.
> 
> Just go for an injury. Get it, and everything changes in your favor. You know, a knife is an inanimate object, it can not hurt you by itself. A gentleman that I respect a great deal said, " It doesn't matter whether it's a knife or a gun, everything changes the second you do something. You get in there you get an injury and you keep piling on injuries. Until your attacker is in a non-fuctional state." The only weapon we need to concern ourselves with attacking is the human brain. WIthout it, no more attack can be forth coming.



And I disagree with you. There is no magic switch you can just reach out, push and "turn the brain off."

While you are poking around trying to find that switch, he (or she) is stabbing you.

However good you are (or THINK you are), there is NO technique that you can execute that gaurentees they won't continue stabbing you. You can list them off  throat strike, eye gouge, temple strike, etc. etc. etc.

I've seen folk shrug them ALL off and continue to fight. Continuing to fight with a knife in hand while you _attempt_ to "shut off the brain" means you are getting stabbed and cut again.. and again.. and again.

I stand by my assertation that No. 1 goal of getting the knife/knife hand under control.

This doesn't mean that I won't take a strike FIRST (especially if they are holding knife back and there is an opportunity), it just means the the TOP priority is to make sure you are not getting repeatedly stabbed and cut.

Top priority doesn't dictate that I will act exclusively toward grabbing the knife hand. But given an opportunity to control that hand or deliver some technique I HOPE will be disabling? I'll take the knife/knife hand, thanks.

Some people just will NOT "turn off" no matter what you do. I've seen some people who have NEVER been knocked unconcious (OK, truth is I AM that person); 

and if close enough, being blind doesn't mean that can't stab you...

and how many times can they stab you before losing unconciousness even if their trachea IS crushed?

No, a knife can't hurt you by itself. That is one reason I want the knife OUT of the attacker's hand.

I wish you the best of luck with your "shut off the brain" theory. I hope you never have to put it into practice and if you do, I hope it works out well for you.

I won't


----------



## GBlues

zDom said:


> And I disagree with you. There is no magic switch you can just reach out, push and "turn the brain off."
> 
> While you are poking around trying to find that switch, he (or she) is stabbing you.
> 
> However good you are (or THINK you are), there is NO technique that you can execute that gaurentees they won't continue stabbing you. You can list them off  throat strike, eye gouge, temple strike, etc. etc. etc.
> 
> I've seen folk shrug them ALL off and continue to fight. Continuing to fight with a knife in hand while you _attempt_ to "shut off the brain" means you are getting stabbed and cut again.. and again.. and again.
> 
> I stand by my assertation that No. 1 goal of getting the knife/knife hand under control.
> 
> This doesn't mean that I won't take a strike FIRST (especially if they are holding knife back and there is an opportunity), it just means the the TOP priority is to make sure you are not getting repeatedly stabbed and cut.
> 
> Top priority doesn't dictate that I will act exclusively toward grabbing the knife hand. But given an opportunity to control that hand or deliver some technique I HOPE will be disabling? I'll take the knife/knife hand, thanks.
> 
> Some people just will NOT "turn off" no matter what you do. I've seen some people who have NEVER been knocked unconcious (OK, truth is I AM that person);
> 
> and if close enough, being blind doesn't mean that can't stab you...
> 
> and how many times can they stab you before losing unconciousness even if their trachea IS crushed?
> 
> No, a knife can't hurt you by itself. That is one reason I want the knife OUT of the attacker's hand.
> 
> I wish you the best of luck with your "shut off the brain" theory. I hope you never have to put it into practice and if you do, I hope it works out well for you.
> 
> I won't


 

I had a very long response to your post and I've just decided to answer it this way. Your very luck you've never been knocked out. You obviously haven't met the man that could do it yet. I applaud you for superior toughness and resilience. While you must protect yourself however you feel is appropriate. I personally feel  that the safest way to end the threat of the knife, is to end the real threat which is the person weilding the knife. That being said, I feel that it absolutely will work if and when I ever need it too.


----------



## Thems Fighting Words

GBlues said:


> I would disagree with you on your number 1. I don't think it's important to grab the knife hand. Most people can't and won't grab the knife hand. I think your main focus should be to turn the brain off. If you turn his brain off you accomplish all of your objectives and do so at once. 1) he is no longer a knife wielding attacker. and 2) he is no longer a threat.



Controlling the live hand doesn't require you grab that hand. Other tactics for control include positioning yourself on the opposite side (such as Silat might do) or sinking the opponent's body down (such as Kung Fu might do). In both instances you are controlling the live hand by using the opponent's own body as a shield. Note that it is still considered primarily a live hand control tactic because the focus is to keep the live hand from being able to attack you.


----------



## MJS

IMHO, I think some sort of control, either by physically grabbing or as TFW said, using positioning, is very important.  For myself, and I've said this before, but I'm not a member of the 1 shot/1 kill club.  Sure, it has happened, but I'm not going to put all my money on that.  As it was said, while I'm trying to counter strike, the other person will most likely be trying to cut me.  Now yes, we will most likely get cut, however, I want to minimize as much damage to myself as possible, and not controlling the weapon arm is not going to help me avoid those potential cuts.

I'm at work right now, so I can post them, but if you go to youtube and watch the Die Less Often clips by the Dog Bros, we will see them putting an emphasis on control.  Given their weapon background, I think I'll take their advice.


----------



## MJS

GBlues said:


> I had a very long response to your post and I've just decided to answer it this way. Your very luck you've never been knocked out. You obviously haven't met the man that could do it yet. I applaud you for superior toughness and resilience. While you must protect yourself however you feel is appropriate. I personally feel that the safest way to end the threat of the knife, is to end the real threat which is the person weilding the knife. That being said, I feel that it absolutely will work if and when I ever need it too.


 
While I see your point, I still feel that control is very important.  Nothing says that you can't strike the person while you're controlling.  I was working this, this past Wed night and I didn't have any issues.


----------



## GBlues

MJS said:


> IMHO, I think some sort of control, either by physically grabbing or as TFW said, using positioning, is very important. For myself, and I've said this before, but I'm not a member of the 1 shot/1 kill club. Sure, it has happened, but I'm not going to put all my money on that. As it was said, while I'm trying to counter strike, the other person will most likely be trying to cut me. Now yes, we will most likely get cut, however, I want to minimize as much damage to myself as possible, and not controlling the weapon arm is not going to help me avoid those potential cuts.
> 
> I'm at work right now, so I can post them, but if you go to youtube and watch the Die Less Often clips by the Dog Bros, we will see them putting an emphasis on control. Given their weapon background, I think I'll take their advice.


 
Just got done checking out there videos. And I have to say the very end proves my point.





 
THe two guys at 6:34 are practicing and the guy in the blue catches the guy in black "wrong" or "right" depending on your point of view. Got the injury, and yes it's an injury. Knocks the guy down, and he's not getting up real fast, he's laying there, like a mini electrocal knock out. Now in real life if you started to pile on the injuries....... targeted injuries. Notice he isn't continuing to try and stab the guy in blue, he is momentarily helpless. That's what I'm talking about.


----------



## redantstyle

i figure nobody can really resist skeletal deformation.  take their body out of line and they cant do anything.  without the base for the muscles to leverage the body,  you get no power.

ime, which is not all that magnificent or anything, you are striving to take up a position, with a safeguard or two, whilst striking and sticking to effect some type of twist-prefixed* takedown.

we train the woodpecker/shank/ambush style with the stipulation he gets only one swing.  as long as you stop him, that is.

that makes it real tough, but i believe in training worst case scenario. 

not to devalue anyone's training, but i was taught to pre-empt, or counter strike on an angle.  no sinwalli, hubud lubub, or other drill patterns.  just hit and dont stop hitting while you take him off his feet one way or another.

as far as 'shutting down brains' goes, no PP is guaranteed.  doubtless they can and do work, but i would be looking more along the lines of skeletal destruction, takedowns, and momentum combing techniques.   there are alot of target areas that can put someone out like a light, or even net a standing k.o. aka 'altered state'. 

i must say, all this is nice, but in general, if you are confronted with a knife, it is best to use Run Fu,  or perhaps even Nike Do.  

  i've found that the technique "Pilgrim Threatens Swordsman with Brick"  is effective against 'brandishers'.   

Somehow, it drains their chi. 

regards.


*alot of times this would be the neck, or spine, or whatever you can get to twist.  hmmm....i guess 'breaking the waist' is generally what i am getting at.


----------



## MJS

GBlues said:


> Just got done checking out there videos. And I have to say the very end proves my point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THe two guys at 6:34 are practicing and the guy in the blue catches the guy in black "wrong" or "right" depending on your point of view. Got the injury, and yes it's an injury. Knocks the guy down, and he's not getting up real fast, he's laying there, like a mini electrocal knock out. Now in real life if you started to pile on the injuries....... targeted injuries. Notice he isn't continuing to try and stab the guy in blue, he is momentarily helpless. That's what I'm talking about.


 
And I chalk that up to what I said in my earlier post....getting lucky and taking your chance with the lucky one shot.  Of course, how much damage did the guy in the blue take prior to all that?  For me, it was hard to see, due to the fact that blacks back was to the camera.  

I'm not saying that it can't happen, as we saw in the clip, but we also saw control, some puninshing shots, and slamming the person down, into the wall, etc.  

In the end, whatever works.


----------



## GBlues

redantstyle said:


> i figure nobody can really resist skeletal deformation. take their body out of line and they cant do anything. without the base for the muscles to leverage the body, you get no power.
> 
> ime, which is not all that magnificent or anything, you are striving to take up a position, with a safeguard or two, whilst striking and sticking to effect some type of twist-prefixed* takedown.
> 
> we train the woodpecker/shank/ambush style with the stipulation he gets only one swing. as long as you stop him, that is.
> 
> that makes it real tough, but i believe in training worst case scenario.
> 
> not to devalue anyone's training, but i was taught to pre-empt, or counter strike on an angle. no sinwalli, hubud lubub, or other drill patterns. just hit and dont stop hitting while you take him off his feet one way or another.
> 
> as far as 'shutting down brains' goes, no PP is guaranteed. doubtless they can and do work, but i would be looking more along the lines of skeletal destruction, takedowns, and momentum combing techniques. there are alot of target areas that can put someone out like a light, or even net a standing k.o. aka 'altered state'.
> 
> i must say, all this is nice, but in general, if you are confronted with a knife, it is best to use Run Fu, or perhaps even Nike Do.
> 
> i've found that the technique "Pilgrim Threatens Swordsman with Brick" is effective against 'brandishers'.
> 
> Somehow, it drains their chi.
> 
> regards.
> 
> 
> *alot of times this would be the neck, or spine, or whatever you can get to twist. hmmm....i guess 'breaking the waist' is generally what i am getting at.


 
Yeah I like nike-do, it is real effective. I prefer it to being stabbed, or cut. LOL! I've also heard of an art called Ju do know, Ju do know I gotta knife, Ju do know I gun. LOL!


----------



## GBlues

MJS said:


> And I chalk that up to what I said in my earlier post....getting lucky and taking your chance with the lucky one shot. Of course, how much damage did the guy in the blue take prior to all that? For me, it was hard to see, due to the fact that blacks back was to the camera.
> 
> I'm not saying that it can't happen, as we saw in the clip, but we also saw control, some puninshing shots, and slamming the person down, into the wall, etc.
> 
> In the end, whatever works.


 
YOur absolutely correct. The bottom line is that it is whatever works. In reality if you grab the knife hand, and take the guy down or break his arm, or go for injuries and break the guys arm, I guess in the final analysis if it gets the job done, and you get to go home safe, it's the best in the world. At least for you, cause you got to go home, and the other guy got to go for a ride.


----------



## MJS

GBlues said:


> YOur absolutely correct. The bottom line is that it is whatever works. In reality if you grab the knife hand, and take the guy down or break his arm, or go for injuries and break the guys arm, I guess in the final analysis if it gets the job done, and you get to go home safe, it's the best in the world. At least for you, cause you got to go home, and the other guy got to go for a ride.


 
*****Note: The following Clip has strong language*****

I came across this clip.  Personally, I like the way Rich closes the gap, gains control of the weapon, and is still in a good position to punish the other guy with strikes.  

Now, just so I'm following your point of view here, you're basically saying that you would rather not work so much for control, but overwhelm the guy with strikes, so as to take him mind off of using the blade, and now putting him on the defensive due to your strikes?

As we said, whatever works so that we get home safe.


----------



## dnovice

BLACK LION said:


> Rarely does a knifer step to toe toe with the blade if full view


 
I disagree. From reading your post I deduce one source of your information: prison tapes or tales. Not sure of other sources. 

Yes. If someone is intent on killing you, and is planning ways to do so way ahead of time. sure. He'll ambush stab you. However, if the knife attack is a result of a robbery, or instantaneous passionate reaction then the weilder pulls out the knife in plain view. 

On the street here... If someone wants to stab you they pull out the knife and let you see. They aren't necessarily trained in using knives. Maybe your neighbourhood has a navy seal like assasins.



BLACK LION said:


> Once again... understanding that there will be blood and cuts is paramount... but killers dont quit and neither should you.


 
This i agree with. A lot of people think they won't get injured in a knife or empty hand encounter. This is just not realistic. If you don't get hit count it as a blessing not the norm. lol.


----------



## kaizasosei

There was just a knifefight a short while ago here at a subway station. I read about it in the news and saw the knives used, both guys pulled a knife and started going at it.  Apparently, both of them got stabbed and cut up pretty bad.  one knife was this long thin stilleto, the other was a badass foldout cutter with some jagged saw teeth at the bottom.


j


----------



## GBlues

MJS said:


> *****Note: The following Clip has strong language*****
> 
> I came across this clip. Personally, I like the way Rich closes the gap, gains control of the weapon, and is still in a good position to punish the other guy with strikes.
> 
> Now, just so I'm following your point of view here, you're basically saying that you would rather not work so much for control, but overwhelm the guy with strikes, so as to take him mind off of using the blade, and now putting him on the defensive due to your strikes?
> 
> As we said, whatever works so that we get home safe.


 
Good vid man. That is basically what I'm saying, but it's not just about overwhelming him with strikes, but targeted strikes. Where it hurts and you get a reaction that normal people are going to give you. You can hit a guy all you want, but if it doesn't cause damage, it does no good. Getting the injuries will help alot. Also when somebody attacks you with a knife, they don't expect you to move in on them and just attack them. They assume you will do what everybody else does, and either move back, like the guy in the video was demonstrating, or try to get the knife away. They don't expect, ( at least I don't think), you to charge them. It's not a normal reaction to a guy brandishing a knife. I think that anytime that we do something out of the norm, it's gonna give us that extra "oh ****" factor. It's going to take there brain time to process what's going on, and if were smart we'll capatilize on it, and put injuries on this dude, so that he can't collect himself. Till he's unconscious or non-functional, you don't stop. But yeah basically what you said.

LOL!


----------



## BLACK LION

dnovice said:


> I disagree. From reading your post I deduce one source of your information: prison tapes or tales. Not sure of other sources.*   I have been stabbed in the back before.  Your deduction is incorrect.  My source of information comes from actuality, not from some george foreman cook book.   If you also notice the term KNIFER...meaning skilled-experienced-tactical end user... not some piss pant meth head wanting money for a tall can.   *
> 
> Yes. If someone is intent on killing you, and is planning ways to do so way ahead of time. sure. He'll ambush stab you. However, if the knife attack is a result of a robbery, or instantaneous passionate reaction then the weilder pulls out the knife in plain view.  *Not always. And to bank on this would be catastrophic.   I would pray that someone intent on stabbing me would brandish his tool in hopes I will copitulate... this is the scenario we dream of...   a far cry from an ambush and assassination attempt with an object you cannot see... *
> 
> On the street here... If someone wants to stab you they pull out the knife and let you see. They aren't necessarily trained in using knives. Maybe your neighbourhood has a navy seal like assasins. *I live in a place where people actually use thier knives to kill people... not some punk whos never seen the inside or never put the metal to flesh... A real knifer is going to assassinate you...   there are times when a knifer may brandish to get you to copitulate so you let your gaurd down only to assassinate you...  they may ask for a wallet or money but dont really want it, they just want you to reach for it so they can stab you.*
> 
> 
> This i agree with. A lot of people think they won't get injured in a knife or empty hand encounter. This is just not realistic. If you don't get hit count it as a blessing not the norm. lol.


 I agree...one can essentially mitigate the damage.  I would rather get a cut on my neck than a blade though my carotid artery.   I would rather get shot in the shoulder than the head  etc.


----------



## Langenschwert

Knife encounters are perilous, make no mistake. W.E. Fairbairn said that "an unarmed man has no sure defence against it."

People often underestimate what weapons actually _do_. Controlling the weapon arm/hand is of vital importance, usually combined with a joint lock, break or throw if possible. Most authorities advocate this approach, and have for centuries (see Fiore, Meyer, and other medieval manuscrpits). Sometimes all you can do is bat it out of the way. That's all well and good, but it's not the end of the story. The simple fact of the matter is that even the best knife defences easily countered by a canny knife fighter. One of the simplest things is to transfer the knife to the other hand and continue the attack. Many modern defences assume the knifer won't be smart enough to figure that out. The reason for the uncertainty of knife defence is that the defence against a knife almost always has to be a "double time' defence... a cover followed by a counter. That gives the BG time to recover. Good defences attempt to be as close to a "single time" counter as possible so that the cover flows into the counter seamlessly. Easier said than done, of course. Knife defences must be drilled CONSTANTLY to become effective, but even then, there is no guarrantee.

Best regards,

-Mark


----------



## BLACK LION

I am an advocate of utilizing a check hand which is kept close to the torso and blocking the vitals from immediate impact.  That check hand is there regardless of wether I am unarmed or firing a pistol. The only time it is not there is when utilizing a rifle or long gun. I dont seek to defend gainst it rather than deflecting the "killing arc" if getting out of the way is impossible.  I have found that its simultaneous in its execution which is paramount.... any type of checking or deflection should be coupled with a strike...never should one just try to check or defelct without striking simultaneously....   I dont consider blocking becuase a skilled end user can easily drag the blade down the blocking medium and open it up.  checking or deflecting is more viable in that the killing arc is being rerouted away from the original point of impact and if you are rotating to the outside while deflecting then you find yourself at a vantage point.   

this is why I say...  if they reach drop em... if they flash, drop em... if danger is imminent shut them down asap but keep the tool in check... you will get cut ot poked but they are goona die....


----------



## lklawson

BLACK LION said:


> I often see references of knife encounters as some sort of deul in which two opposing forces face off in some sort of sanctioned death match...


It happens still sometimes.  Yes.  However, there's an old saying, "Show-ers don't cut and Cutters don't show."  So, yes, attack from ambush is a long standing, well known, highly effective technique.  But it's not 100% of the time.  Claiming otherwise is *ALSO *a modern myth.  It *DOES *happen that sometimes (yes, only sometimes) you know that he's got a knife and can enter on an equal (or superior) footing.  It's happened to friends of mine.



> This is far from actuality and possibly stems from unharnessed fear or misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of a knife attack itself and how a person that wishes to utilize a knife must act in order to be successful....


Nope.  It does still happen that way from time to time.  But if your point is that failing to accept and train for the possibility of attack from ambush is stupid and a huge gap in your training, then sure, I agree 100%.




> I belive it also stems from various media and mediums that have subliminally domesticated violence in its entirety to where we actually behave like we see in the movies or video or what have you... It seems many have been inadvertently trained to accept a knife attack exactly how it does NOT happen....


Basing your martial training around what you see in the movies or on TV is foolish.  TV is entertainment not reality, duh.  If I wanted reality, I'd turn on the evening news.  When I want to have a hero and watch him win, I go to a movie.  Good guys dying in ambush is reality and I can read that in the paper.  But it makes *SUCKY* movies.  Once we all understand that Billy Jack was nothing more than an entertaining story we can all move on past this self-evident point.



> I also see references of knife attacks in which the would be victim attempts to adorn themselves with some sort of deterrent like a briefcase or a jacket or belt etc. in an attempt to prolong the innevitable or somehow prevent it...


I very much disagree.  Puncture and slash resistant vests and clothing are par for the course for correctional officers and historically knife fighters used these measures all the dang time.  Navaja fighters in Spain would wrap their lead arms with cloth as would some rapier fighters.  A very old prison technique was to stuff magazines or periodicals into the waistband.  Shields, both light and heavy are the norm for riot police and improvised shields, even as small as those such as books, have proven effective.  Recently here in Ohio a Minister was shot to death.  He deflected the first of the bullets with his Bible.



> Another major reference I have come across is "disarming techniques" in which the would be victim attempts to perform specified techniques in order to strip away the blade and or avoid being stabbed or cut by utilizing various techniques...including but not limited to all out grappling matches with the tool or device...


Well, gee willikers friend.  Of *COURSE *disarming techiques are dangerous and comparatively "low percentage."  But for crying out loud, it's better than crying like a little girl and crapping in your panties!



> A knife for example is most often employed or deployed as a menas of assassination by ambush...


I'm not disagreeing with you, but I wonder if you have any statistics on this.  FBI report or the like?  The reports I've seem generally indicate that most of the time a knife attack is with a kitchen knife, from the front, against an unarmed victim (frequently a spouse or S.O.).  I'm truly interested in your source.



> hence the term "felt not seen"... rarely if ever will an end user brandish the blade and wave it around like some trinket in some hypnotic ritualistic fashion... they will pull and crash into you wile stabbing perfusely in any spot they can get it into...


Sure.  Show-ers don't cut and Cutters don't show.  Brandishing the blade is silly.  It has a lot of intimidation factor, no doubt, but as a general rule of S.D., if you're gonna pull it, then get to work because you can't count on the other person trying to "merely intimidate" you.



> The surprise is overwhelming...even in prison footage this fact remains the same...


That's the *POINT *of an ambush.  And it hardly applies exclusively to the knife.  People who are "sucker punched" are always surprised.  People who are tackled from out of the blue are always surprised.  Ambush with a weapon is no different in this regard.  The weapon simply makes the ambush more deadly.



> Rarely does a knifer step to toe toe with the blade if full view in order to secure thier needs...    they will exploit ever opportunity of surprise to their advantage....  they also understand the fear associated with being stabbed and use that as a tool to further thier agenda...


Well, that kinda depends on the nature of the attack. If they're just out to assassinate you then you'll "see" (hahaha) some sort of modified Folsom "hidden knife" type technique.  If it's a "Crime of Passion" (as many are) a raging lunatic will frequently be beating the piss out of the victim or yelling and gesticulating wildly and then just grab the handy butcher knife from the knife block on the kitchen counter.  It's still surprising but it ain't exactly an assassination from icepick grip stab to the kidneys as you're waking by a random stranger.

This sort of behavior is also typified by attacks with "knife-like objects" held in reverse grip as well.  I was reading a few months back about a Perp who attacked *his own* lawyer in court with a sharpened pencil he grabbed from the table.  He held in in reverse grip, capping the eraser, and making a single direct-line stab to the chest.



> Its important to understand that there are only 2 "safe" places when faced with the blade...  1.far far away from it  2.the attacker rendered nonfunctional....   option one may or may not involve being cut or stabbed while option 2 will involve being cut or stabbed... you may not have to sacrifice any blood or tissue to escape but you will if you agress to protect yourself or others....  there will be blood... regardless


Maybe yes, maybe no.  There *are *times when the defender simply will not get cut, through either good luck or skill.  However, from a psychological perspective, it is very important for the defender to accept that "he will get cut."  That way if it does happen he won't be paralyzed by the psychological impact of the injury.  If it doesn't happen, well, then it just doesn't happen.  Good for him.




> Once again... understanding that there will be blood and cuts is paramount... but killers dont quit and neither should you.


Sure they do.  You just can't count on it that's all.  Some do, some don't and you can't guess which will and which will not.  Guessing wrong will be much more likely to get you dead.  Further, from both a moral and legal perspective, if you use Deadly Force in Self Defense, and make no mistakes, deploying a knife *IS *Deadly Force, then you'd better be darn well justified in using Deadly Force.  In such a circumstance, there is no reason to hold back until the attack on you is stopped.  You simply cannot cut once and admire your handiwork.  Keep cutting and stabbing until the attack on you stops.  When it stops it will be because either the attacker has quit or he is no longer physically able to continue the attack.



> Understanding the use of the knife tool and how to access targets and vitals with it is also paramount... if you become the end user you want to ensure success and it needs to be immediate...  understanding what eefects slashes get as opposed to thrusting the blade into a vital...  what makes more blood...what makes less...  and so on...


I've been told there is a great book out now.  Something like "Human Anatomy for the Martial Artist" or the like.



> Most often people in training do not realize that if you attack correctly by utilizing the proper principles the knife itself becomes inert...  most "disarms" come not by technique but after injuries are affectuated and the knife is dislodged from impact or trauma or inability to use it from nonfunctioning parts....


They don't?  I find that amazing considering that attacking the weapon bearing limb is one of the primary targets for pretty much every melee weapon system I've ever seen.



> Most often people in trainin do not realize that attacking the tool itself wont stop the job from getting done...


I really can't agree.  I've never seen a S.D. technique shown against a knife attack, even really, *really*, *REALLY *bad ones that do not in some way include a follow up attack to the attacker or an immobilization or incapacitation of the weapon-bearing limb or the attacker as a whole.  People may be dumb but, as a general rule, they ain't THAT dumb.



> stop the living breathing thinking being behind the device and the threat ceases to exist... there is no deuling or fancy techniques that get this done... just sheer agressive or egressive precision and decisive execution on the real targets and thats the operationg system of the machine(s) you are up against...not thier extensions


Again, I must disagree, at least in part. Aggressive and decisive action are a must, I completely agree.  However, simply going "Cave Man" won't necessarily get the job done.  And you absolutely *MUST *deal with the weapon in order to deal with the weapon's operator.  In historic fencing, this is (sometimes) called "Passing the Point."  You must somehow render the weapon ineffective against you before you can render its operator hors de combat.  Perhaps that means getting off line of the weapon and then attacking the operator.  Perhaps that means preemptively attacking the attacker before the weapon can be brought into effective play.  Perhaps it means "defanging the snake" to take the weapon out of action.  Perhaps it means entering in closer than the effective range of the weapon and grappling the weapon limb to render the weapon inoperable against you. Heck, perhaps it means having a gosh darn longer range weapon. But in any and every case YOU MUST DEAL WITH THE WEAPON IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THE ATTACKER.  Ignoring the weapon in order to attack the "operating system of the machine" is a sure recipe for catastrophe.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Carol

lklawson said:


> That's the *POINT *of an ambush.  And it hardly applies exclusively to the knife.  People who are "sucker punched" are always surprised.  People who are tackled from out of the blue are always surprised.  Ambush with a weapon is no different in this regard.  The weapon simply makes the ambush more deadly.



Well said.  

"The punch that knocks you out is the punch you don't see."


----------



## MJS

What a great post from lklawson!!  2 thumbs up!!   Its always nice to see another point of view, because after I read your post, things that I missed in the post you quoted, came to light more. 

To summarize the post....

I agree, depending on the situation, that will determine how the knife is presented.  A prison attack will most likely be the case where the other guy doesnt see it until its too late.  Standing at the ATM will most likely result in the blade being shown for intimidation or pressed up against us.

As far as using a tool to aid in your defense...damn right I'm going to use something, and if someone thinks thats foolish, oh well.  First thing, you should try to get the hell out of the area, but if running/escape isn't an option, yes, I'm going to pick something up and use it.  A chair, something I can throw at the person to momentarily distract them, something that I can hit them with, whatever it takes.  All else fails, then I would engage empty handed.  Standing at the ATM, well, probably isn't going to be a chair nearby, but in a bar, damn right I'd pick up a beer bottle, chair or ashtray.

Disarming techniques...yes, there are many that I've seen...some of which would probably get you killed, and others that stand a pretty good chance of working.  However, just like our empty hand vs. empty hand techs. they are designed to teach you principles and ideas.  Will I pull off that textbook move?  Probably not, but thats not my goal.  Control, counterstrike.  

We're probably going to get cut, but for myself, I would like to minimize that as much as possible, therefore, even if I'm hitting good targets, to cause pain, ie: groin, eyes, etc., I do not want to rely on those and assume that by hitting those shots, that alone will work.  I want to gain control of that weapon, and at the same time, punish the person.  Its not a difficult concept to grasp, although I think some here may have a hard time seeing this.  Its all what and how you train.


----------



## lklawson

GBlues said:


> I would disagree with you on your number 1. I don't think it's important to grab the knife hand. Most people can't and won't grab the knife hand. I think your main focus should be to turn the brain off. If you turn his brain off you accomplish all of your objectives and do so at once. 1) he is no longer a knife wielding attacker. and 2) he is no longer a threat.


No.  You must "Deal with the Steel" in some way or another.  That doesn't always mean grabbing the weapon bearing limb but that is certainly one way to do so.  You simply can *NOT *ignore the weapon.  There is only one way in which to instantly "turn the brain off" in the attacker and that is a CNS hit.  The problem is that the CNS is comparatively small and is very well protected by dense bone.  One-punch K.O.'s, though nice, are rare, even by people who are known to have great skill and capacity in that regard.

Nope.  Gotta find some way to deal with the weapon, even if it just means being able to counter-attack at a range greater than the effective range of the attacker's weapon.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

zDom said:


> And I disagree with you. There is no magic switch you can just reach out, push and "turn the brain off."


Sure there is.  All you have to do is sever the spinal cord above the arms.

I'll get back with you when I find a safe, quick, and efficient method of doing that which doesn't involve a sniper or a guillotine.    

Seriously, a CNS hit can achieve the desired result.  The problem is that getting a CNS hit is kinda like winning the Lottery and a one-punch K.O. is kinda like winning the local Boy Scouts raffle.  When all it costs me is $1, sure I might play.  When it could cost me my life, I think I'll look for better odds.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

GBlues said:


> I had a very long response to your post and I've just decided to answer it this way. Your very luck you've never been knocked out. You obviously haven't met the man that could do it yet. I applaud you for superior toughness and resilience. While you must protect yourself however you feel is appropriate. I personally feel  that the safest way to end the threat of the knife, is to end the real threat which is the person weilding the knife. That being said, I feel that it absolutely will work if and when I ever need it too.


The number of times I've seen someone knock out another fella without that other fella getting in a few licks can be counted on one hand.  The number of times that has happened when the other fella is the *initiating* the attack... none at all.  

Knock outs are *NOT *a magic wand against an attacker with a weapon.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## BLACK LION

The CNS is the brain and spinal cord and there is no magic to causing trauma to it....  CNS injury is either a brain or spinal injury.  They are quite common...a lil' too common.


----------



## lklawson

BLACK LION said:


> The CNS is the brain and spinal cord and there is no magic to causing trauma to it....


Yes, I know.  That's why I said what I did about it.



> CNS injury is either a brain or spinal injury.  They are quite common...a lil' too common.


Severe trauma is necessary.  One common method is trauma to the back of the head or top of the spine due to falling such as after a judo/aikido style throw or being knocked off the feet and hitting the back of the head on concrete.  Again, this necessitates putting yourself in range of the weapon, thus in danger, by closing the gap with the attacker.  Unless you're planning in him slipping on a bannana peel that is.  There is no magic off switch that can be flipped safely without the use of distance weapons or prior restraint.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## BLACK LION

No matter how one wishes to "deal with the steel"... One better be causing injuries and denying that piece of meat its function... 

I train to shift the POI by rotating outside the LOF or killing arc... the safest place against a blade is outside its range wether its straight or circular.  Getting inside to control or combat the tool leaves the solution to the equation up to whos the stronger hungrier killer rather than whos more tactical and assertive...   You get inside to shut em off not to combat the tool.  
If its extreme close quarters or imminent contact then that check hand should be ingrained along with a simultaneous strike,rotation and follow through...continuing the chain of trauma in this fashion till there is no threat.  

I like to do actuality drills in which I attempt to assassinate co workers out of the blue with a rubber blade and they do the same.  The elevator has became the proving ground one day.  Even though I had placed myself in a good position ini the corner, a much shorter co-worker was in front of me and he turned and tried to get me center mass and that check hand came to the rescue while striking his neck...it deflected to the side and grazed my ribcage...  he would have been out and I would have been cut....   but alive...        my focus was not on the blade but at the same time I wont deny its there... thats why I train the check hand to deal with the inside while I cover the outside...


----------



## BLACK LION

lklawson said:


> Yes, I know. That's why I said what I did about it.
> 
> Sever trauma is necessary. One common method is trauma to the back of the head or top of the spine due to falling such as after a judo/aikido style throw or being knocked off the feet and hitting the back of the head on concrete. Again, this necessitates putting yourself in range of the weapon, thus in danger, by closing the gap with the attacker. Unless you're planning in him slipping on a bannana peel that is. There is no magic off switch that can be flipped safely without the use of distance weapons or prior restraint.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
The CNS response was to the part where it was referred to as a small area and that attacking it successfully was akin to winning the lottery.  

evasion and escape would be much easier than agressing the threat...  

One can evade and/or escape and remain completely outside its "range" or one can agress and yet still remain outside its "range" if you shift or rotate outside the line of fire or killing arc...  its not a gun... it must be swung,thrusted or thrown and there are only so many physiological variances in how this is done...  by understanding this one can train to shift the point of impact by rotating ...    once the blade is out there it must complete its cycle before its retracted...   

wether you agress or egress you are taking a chance but thats what you train for....


----------



## zDom

lklawson said:


> Severe trauma is necessary.  One common method is trauma to the back of the head or top of the spine due to falling such as after a judo/aikido style throw or being knocked off the feet and hitting the back of the head on concrete.



Most of our Bang Chang Kum (defense against knife) set of techniques in Moo Sul Kwan hapkido involve exactly the components described above:

a "check hand" type block with an immediate/near simulataneous "judo type" throw;

a couple move outside the arc, then enter and destroy attacking arm.


----------



## GBlues

lklawson said:


> No. You must "Deal with the Steel" in some way or another. That doesn't always mean grabbing the weapon bearing limb but that is certainly one way to do so. You simply can *NOT *ignore the weapon. There is only one way in which to instantly "turn the brain off" in the attacker and that is a CNS hit. The problem is that the CNS is comparatively small and is very well protected by dense bone. One-punch K.O.'s, though nice, are rare, even by people who are known to have great skill and capacity in that regard.
> 
> Nope. Gotta find some way to deal with the weapon, even if it just means being able to counter-attack at a range greater than the effective range of the attacker's weapon.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
I don't believe I ever said that I was or believed that I could get a one hit knockout. Nope I didn't. As far as dealing with the steel. The bottom line is if your in a knife vs no-knife situation, your going to get cut or stabbed. YOu just have to figure that your going to, because the odds are greatly in favor of it. That being said, if you know your going to get cut or stabbed what does it matter if he gets one or two on you, if you rupture his testicles, break both clavicles, snap his ankle, and crush his windpipe? Not much. I guarantee if I landed all of those attacks and got all of those results my odds of surviving that encounter are now a lot better than his, and guess what, I shut his brain off. He's  now non-functional. I'm going to get a trip to the hospital to get sown up, he's probably going to the morgue. See the difference? It's not about grabbing the knife, if you feel comfortable with that, do it, it's about ending the attack so he can't continue to stab and slash and cut you. He who gets the first injury wins my friend, and dinking around getting cut up ain't getting it done. It's just getting you cut up. You have to remember when a man pulls a knife on you, he has one goal, and that is to end your life. Dancing around outside of knife range is prolonging the inevitable fact that you are going to have to get inside, and get injuries, the longer you wait the more time you spend trying to control the steel, the longer he gets to practice till he finally puts an injury on you, and then your all his. Be the one to get the injury first. Just hit the guy, but break something when you do.


----------



## lklawson

GBlues said:


> if you rupture his testicles, break both clavicles, snap his ankle, and crush his windpipe? Not much. I guarantee if I landed all of those attacks and got all of those results my odds of surviving that encounter are now a lot better than his, and guess what, I shut his brain off.


Perhaps a different terminology would be in order.  "Shut the brain off" doesn't generally mean "I broke his ankle" to most folks.  Maybe something along the lines of "Get him thinking about something other than stabbing you" would be more appropriate and help prevent future misunderstandings?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## zDom

The techniques we train to deal with knife attacks consider that a cut or stab to a limb is not as bad as a cut or stab to the vital organs and structures in the abdomen, neck and head.

We know we are likely to get cut. We are training to mitigate that to the best of our ability.

Of course we are looking to cause grave injury to the attacker: that is part of EVERY technique. NONE of our techniques "grab the knife hand" and STOP.

(What do you think we are doing while controlling the knife hand?) But in doing so we are also looking to ensure we are not taking multiple wounds to vital systems.


Just to make sure we understand each other, lets deal with a concrete example:

One of our techniques presupposes the attacker stabs downward with an icepick grip (we have other techniques for other angles of attack; lets just stick with this one for the moment) with a right hand.

Stepping in to meet the attack, our left arm *strikes* in an upward rising block-type motion; right arm slips behind their elbow; driving them to the ground with, if they haven't already hit the ground, a major outer reap to the attacker's right leg.

As the attacker hits ground, we grab knife, dislocate shoulder (or vice verse: dislocate shoulder to encourage them to drop the knife ...)

We will probably get cut on our left arm. Few people will hit the ground head first backward without significant injury.

Suggest how better to "shut off the head" directly while ignoring the knife if facing this specific attack


----------



## BLACK LION

Rotate outside the downward arc(letting knife continue its course uninterrupted), while projecting through or beyond the threats base with a strike to the target then continue the chain until satisfied.  Normally the first couple strikes set the threats body in position for a break and a dump or a dump then a break...  

My focus would be less on which technique could deter the blade and more on stacking targets and injuries to "shut them off"


----------



## GBlues

zDom said:


> The techniques we train to deal with knife attacks consider that a cut or stab to a limb is not as bad as a cut or stab to the vital organs and structures in the abdomen, neck and head.
> 
> We know we are likely to get cut. We are training to mitigate that to the best of our ability.
> 
> Of course we are looking to cause grave injury to the attacker: that is part of EVERY technique. NONE of our techniques "grab the knife hand" and STOP.
> 
> (What do you think we are doing while controlling the knife hand?) But in doing so we are also looking to ensure we are not taking multiple wounds to vital systems.
> 
> 
> Just to make sure we understand each other, lets deal with a concrete example:
> 
> One of our techniques presupposes the attacker stabs downward with an icepick grip (we have other techniques for other angles of attack; lets just stick with this one for the moment) with a right hand.
> 
> Stepping in to meet the attack, our left arm *strikes* in an upward rising block-type motion; right arm slips behind their elbow; driving them to the ground with, if they haven't already hit the ground, a major outer reap to the attacker's right leg.
> 
> As the attacker hits ground, we grab knife, dislocate shoulder (or vice verse: dislocate shoulder to encourage them to drop the knife ...)
> 
> We will probably get cut on our left arm. Few people will hit the ground head first backward without significant injury.
> 
> Suggest how better to "shut off the head" directly while ignoring the knife if facing this specific attack


 
This is actually a good example of a standard defense against a knife. It is one that my father taught me. But, there is a problem with it. So let's step back just for a moment, and think about the three kinds of basic fighters there are in the world. Offensive fighters, defensive fighters, and counter fighters right? I mean that's a pretty simple concept. Now, you can pretty much throw the counter fighter out of the picture because he is still defending to mount an immediate attack, or offense. So we now have two kinds of basic fighters offensive and defensive. The reality is we can't do both at the same time. Your either attacking or defending, no matter how you look at it.

So your basic ice pick downward strike with a knife is a great example because whether you are going to hold on to the knife or throw the knife you still have to have some kind of aim to hit your target. The same is true with guns, knive, knees, punches, kicks, elbows, knees, etc...they all require aiming. Putting your strike where you want it. A moving target is obviously harder to hit than a stationary target right? So your gonna say, "Yeah exactly!", but here is the caveat to that, a target 5 feet away that bursts at you with everything it's got, is no longer where your aim was at. They've moved. So let's look at what we can take away from your basic technique.

First we have an opponent striking with a downward strike. So we are going to either step back or step forward into our neutral bow, while executing an upward strike or block with our left arm to his right downward knife weilding travelling arm. At the same time we are going to grab his elbow, (Which we didn't break yet, nor did we break the knife arm, we've merely stopped the attack momentarily), and sweep his legs out from under him, hoping he'll drop the knife, and we'll get a dislocation.

On the other hand, when he attacks with that knife in his downward arc, we could just burst forward with our forearm in the lead, putting all of our weight behind that one strike and strike him in the throat. Now, if we're slightly late we may get struck on the left shoulder, but because we've moved inside of the knife's arc we probably won't get stabbed. We might get a two fer on this one. He might hyper extend his elbow if were late and he lands just right on our shoulder. Don't count on it, but it could happen. We know were going to crush the guys throat, even if we don't we know he's going to move backward, drop the knife and grab his throat. If he doesn't drop the knife he's going to cut his own throat, and from there we just start piling on injuries. I just bypassed three whole steps in your technique with one and got a result that is going to allow me to get more injuries and results. Plus I didn't have to mess with the knife, at all. I just hit the guy and got a result.

Now, wait a minute right, that's all well and good if your standing but what if they have you on your knees. The same applies, just the targets are different. Now you would burst forward with your weight, into the guys testicles causing him to bend over, or his bladder even, it's going to make him bend over. Or you can throw your weight behind a left to right or right to left strike to the knee either one is fine, and buckle or perhaps even dislocate or break it, the one that has the most weight on it, is preferable to make these knee strikes work. But either way, you need to get him to stop attacking and starting defending, or trying to anyways. Once his knee buckles and he falls, then it's just a simple matter of striking the first target that you see, which is probably going to be the testicles, punch him in the gonads dude. He's going to bend forward to protect them after the fact, he just exposed at least 2 more targets, from there, break a clavicle, or strike the carotid artery, or for a third grab his head and begin to gouge his eye out. Remember this guy pulled this knife on you not because he wanted to ask your sister out on a date, but because he wants to kill you.
If you don't like going for the knees as he steps forward with his left foot, drop your weight with your forearm leading just above that little knob on the ankle and break it. Very effective. 

YOu see the difference in thinking? I'm not the one having violence done to them trying to play catchup with defense. I'm now the one doing the violence, and that is what you want. If your having to try and stop the violence using socially acceptable rules, you may get hurt very badly. You play by their rules, (The bad guys), and you flip the tables on them, and just start doing the violence. Once you get an injury everything changes in your favor. The secret is in striking targets, but not just targets, destroying those targets so that they don't work anymore. When your done with this guy there should be life altering changes done to his anatomy. Whether it be that he limps for the rest of his life, only has one eye, or is dead. Something should be destroyed. It's not pretty and nobody likes it, and nobody wants to do it, except the guy doing it to you. He loves it, cause he's getting what he wants. What does he want? YOur life. For him it's just another day at the office. The same way the lion hunts it's meal and kills it for food. It isn't bothered by the fact that it took a life, it's just how the lion survives. THe same with these a-social sociopaths, it's just how they live, and if your in the wrong place at the wrong time, they are going to do everything in there power to do you in. If respond with anything less than utter violence, you play russian roulette with your life.


----------



## lklawson

BLACK LION said:


> Rotate outside the downward arc


"Arc?"  What arc?  An icepick stab isn't going to be performed in an arc, it's gonna be just like a hammerfist except with a sharp stabby thing sticking out.  Short strokes, hard, fast, and *linear*.

Maybe that's not what you're talking about, but when people talk about "arcs" in regard to icepick attacks, I start thinking Jim Carry.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## BLACK LION

lklawson said:


> "Arc?" What arc? An icepick stab isn't going to be performed in an arc, it's gonna be just like a hammerfist except with a sharp stabby thing sticking out. Short strokes, hard, fast, and *linear*.
> 
> Maybe that's not what you're talking about, but when people talk about "arcs" in regard to icepick attacks, I start thinking Jim Carry.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
an arc is a circular attack in my verbage...  they could be linear but circular in nature becuase of the body mechanics be hind the type of attack or just linear...  most often its both unless you attack them with your arm and the blade completely straight which would be akin to a spear and seemingly unusual... I see less fencing type straight thrusts in using knives.... 

an icepick hold will most likely be traveling downward in a straight path or at and angle but will be circular in nature... it can also travel sideways in a straight line or diagonal but will be circular in nature... it will arc because of the rotation in the shoulder and/or bending of the elbow...  

a downward icepick stab is circular in nature even if the path is in a straight or diagonal line becuase of the shoulder rotation and or bend of the elbow... In fact even the classic or chinese hold uses the same principles...    regardless of the hold the attack will most often be based on some sort of rotation or arc simply due to the anatomical mechanics of the joints...

make sense


----------



## BLACK LION

lklawson said:


> "Arc?" What arc? An icepick stab isn't going to be performed in an arc, it's gonna be just like a hammerfist except with a sharp stabby thing sticking out. Short strokes, hard, fast, and *linear*.
> 
> Maybe that's not what you're talking about, but when people talk about "arcs" in regard to icepick attacks, I start thinking Jim Carry.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
The rotation in the nature of the attack and the ability to shift poi and poa in a heartbeat are what sets the blade apart from the gun...  a gun attack will always be linear becuase no matter what the bullets path cannot be interrupted by the end user at will and it does not require joint rotation to be executed...  for these resons the blade is far more dangerous at bad breath distance...  

make sense...


----------



## lklawson

BLACK LION said:


> The rotation in the nature of the attack and the ability to shift poi and poa in a heartbeat are what sets the blade apart from the gun...  a gun attack will always be linear becuase no matter what the bullets path cannot be interrupted by the end user at will and it does not require joint rotation to be executed...  for these resons the blade is far more dangerous at bad breath distance...
> 
> make sense...


Sure, just not in context of an icepick grip attack at close range.  It's not going to travel in any sort of significant "arc."

As I said, it'll travel in a linear path, like a hammerfist.  Same as if the bottom of the fist were being used to bang loudly on a door to get the occupant's attention.  Travel path of the point is going to be 24 inches or less.  Linear, no "arc."  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

BLACK LION said:


> an arc is a circular attack in my verbage...  they could be linear but circular in nature becuase of the body mechanics be hind the type of attack or just linear...  most often its both unless you attack them with your arm and the blade completely straight which would be akin to a spear and seemingly unusual... I see less fencing type straight thrusts in using knives....
> 
> an icepick hold will most likely be traveling downward in a straight path or at and angle but will be circular in nature... it can also travel sideways in a straight line or diagonal but will be circular in nature... it will arc because of the rotation in the shoulder and/or bending of the elbow...
> 
> a downward icepick stab is circular in nature even if the path is in a straight or diagonal line becuase of the shoulder rotation and or bend of the elbow... In fact even the classic or chinese hold uses the same principles...    regardless of the hold the attack will most often be based on some sort of rotation or arc simply due to the anatomical mechanics of the joints...
> 
> make sense


I get what you are saying but you are mixing terms.  As I said, when you bang away on a door with your hammerfist, knocking loudly, the strokes are short, powerful, and the travel of the fist is linear, even if the shoulder has to "rotate."  The simple fact is that the shoulder is going to rotate less than 90 degrees at the maximum, the point is going to travel less than 24 inches and along a linear path, with the elbow extending to expand the length of the arm (and therefore the strike) so that the path is more or less linear.  It's very linear and very "caveman."  Unless you are lucky, prescient, have Spidersense, or a gold pocket watch that stops time, I see little way of "rotating outside the arc" without engaging the attacking limb in a "parrying" type action.

That's the issue with icepick attacks.  As you say, they happen at "bad breath range."  This is *WELL *within what Silver calls "Time of the Hand."  It's where Prestidigitators steal the phrase "The hand is quicker than the eye" from.  Silver is saying that when a person is close enough to strike an attack by only moving the "hand" (instead of additionally shifting the body or taking steps) then the "eye" (human reaction time) is simply too slow.  You will get hit.  The Hand is quicker than the Eye.  For defensive purposes, Silver considers this a "False Time," while, for offensive purposes, silver considers this a "True Time."

But I digress far afield from the original point.

Again, I'm just not seeing any significant "arc" and I have some minor quibbles with your functional definition.  You mention a Fencing Lunge as an example of a linear attack however, the body mechanics still dictate "arc" movement.  The arm extends at the shoulder making an "arc" and the elbow extends also making an "arc."  But, as in the case with the icepick stab, the "arcs" are counter to each other and "cancel" each other out into a linear movement.

Anyway, I think this thread is rapidly exhausting itself and is diverging significantly from the original intent.  I think it may be best for me to leave off of it soon.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## GBlues

lklawson said:


> I get what you are saying but you are mixing terms. As I said, when you bang away on a door with your hammerfist, knocking loudly, the strokes are short, powerful, and the travel of the fist is linear, even if the shoulder has to "rotate." The simple fact is that the shoulder is going to rotate less than 90 degrees at the maximum, the point is going to travel less than 24 inches and along a linear path, with the elbow extending to expand the length of the arm (and therefore the strike) so that the path is more or less linear. It's very linear and very "caveman." Unless you are lucky, prescient, have Spidersense, or a gold pocket watch that stops time, I see little way of "rotating outside the arc" without engaging the attacking limb in a "parrying" type action.
> 
> That's the issue with icepick attacks. As you say, they happen at "bad breath range." This is *WELL *within what Silver calls "Time of the Hand." It's where Prestidigitators steal the phrase "The hand is quicker than the eye" from. Silver is saying that when a person is close enough to strike an attack by only moving the "hand" (instead of additionally shifting the body or taking steps) then the "eye" (human reaction time) is simply too slow. You will get hit. The Hand is quicker than the Eye. For defensive purposes, Silver considers this a "False Time," while, for offensive purposes, silver considers this a "True Time."
> 
> But I digress far afield from the original point.
> 
> Again, I'm just not seeing any significant "arc" and I have some minor quibbles with your functional definition. You mention a Fencing Lunge as an example of a linear attack however, the body mechanics still dictate "arc" movement. The arm extends at the shoulder making an "arc" and the elbow extends also making an "arc." But, as in the case with the icepick stab, the "arcs" are counter to each other and "cancel" each other out into a linear movement.
> 
> Anyway, I think this thread is rapidly exhausting itself and is diverging significantly from the original intent. I think it may be best for me to leave off of it soon.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
Ok, no I see what your saying.  This guy is swinging this icepick in a hammer type fashion. It's possible to pull off a key-lock in this situation also. However, the principle is the same. It doesn't matter whether he's trying to use your head as a giant nail head and shove this ice pick through it. It's not going to change the principle. The only difference is your attack. Instead of maybe a forearm strike, you go with a kick more distance, and you put everything in it to rupture the testicles. I think a big problem a lot of people have with this knife defense scenarios, is they make it more complicated than it has to be. It's not complicated. It's still a fist fight, just one guy has a knife, which makes him potentially more dangerous, but not necassarily so. Consider a commited attack. When you decide to throw a punch, and you commit to that, you wouldn't be throwing it out there with commitment and intent if you didn't think it would land right? Exactly. The problem with commited attacks they are hard to redirect, and move to doing something else until they have finished there path of travel. In the case of a punch it has to return back to it's starting point, or return enough to strike again. So in the case of knife, yes, you can get cut very easily even on a knifes return path, however, he has the knife, if he's really trying to kill you, every attack most likely is commited. So you don't have to worry about redirection until the end of his travel. Then it has to retract some to strike again. If you don't worry about it, and just hit the guy it all changes. I'm telling you, I know you think I'm full of crap. But, get one of your training partners, and have him put a cup on, and give the guy a practice knife, and just practice your regular techniques. Then instead of doing that, just reach out and kick the guy in the nads as hard as you can. Even with the cup on your going to get a reaction, it's normal, it's a vital target. It's one that every man knows hurts. You'll see a huge difference in how things happen. It all changes that instant. I've kicked guys close to the groin and missed the testicles all together, and had them doubled over swearing I kicked them in there fun bag. It doesn't take much. The more power the better, because it's a potentially life altering injury. I mean don't injure your partner obviously but you see what I'm getting at. If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Why try and grab a potentially dangerous item, when all you have to do is attack the mongrel trying to use it against you. When you attack you want to make sure that when your attack ends your body is where his used to be at? Make sense?


----------



## zDom

The technique does not initiate with a "grab" at the weapon.

It places your forearm in between you and the attack while simultaneously throwing the attacker to the ground.

IMO, throwing the attacker to the ground hurts them worse and with more certainty than any single strike. 

The keylock and disarm are follow ups to the initial response.

A prone attacker who has just fallen hard to their head/shoulders with the force of their bodyweight and rotation from the sweep is much more likely be stunned (brain "shut off") then having received any single strike from a hand or foot and should provide ample opportunity for the follow ups.

FWIW, these techniques were not dreamed up in a hypothetical discussion: they were tried and tested in violent encounters in post-WW2 Korea.

Again, I wish you the best of luck in your concept for knife defense and I sincerely hope it works out as conceived for someone depending on it.

As for me, I'm going to stick with what I've been taught and train and hope I'm never put to the test. Knife attacks are always nasty business.

In any case, discussing ideas is what this forum is all about &#8212; but sometimes folks will just disagree


----------



## zDom

GBlues said:


> ... instead of doing that, just reach out and kick the guy in the nads as hard as you can. Even with the cup on your going to get a reaction, it's normal, it's a vital target. It's one that every man knows hurts. You'll see a huge difference in how things happen. It all changes that instant. I've kicked guys close to the groin and missed the testicles all together, and had them doubled over swearing I kicked them in there fun bag. ...



Ok, once back in my more foolish and drunken days before I started training martial arts (we won't go into the details ...), I had a HUGE bouncer (6 foot 3 inches or so, athletic build of about 260) do exactly what you are proposing.

He TRIED to kick me in the nuts. His foot stopped in its upward arc about an inch below my testicles. His eyes bugged out in complete surprise for the millisecond before I punched him square in his teeth.

I was later informed by law enforcment officers that that bouncer ended up in the hospital. What if I had been a knife wielder instead? That one stab to the face would have been the end for him.

You can't depend on a kick to the nuts. Ergo, trading nut kicks for stabs banking that you are going to end the fight with said kick is a BAD idea.


----------



## BLACK LION

_"throwing the attacker to the ground hurts them worse and with more certainty than any single strike."   _Its the striking getting you there in the first place and the reason for the dump or drop...  It is my feeling that nothing is given and you must strike targets to compromise and control and that means throwing or dumping and breaking or joint manipultaion...
If I step through your base with my forearm to the trachea, the effected body will most likely fly straight back on thier tooshy and damage thier coccyx before banging the back of thier head on ground...maybe breaking a wrist or finger from attempting to mitigate the fall...    a "throw" or drop or dump is a gravitational injury thats practically accomplished from striking targets...  I want a guarantee for every situation not a probability for some or most situations... body weight strikes with rotation and projection through the base gets me everywhere I want to be...  wether its dumping someones back onto my knee or smashing through a hip joint...   its all about striking...   

As far as the kick to the "jacobs"... if you fumble of flop over a kick then no..you may get a slight reaction due to discomfort or pain but not a significant reflex action to set up a chain...  now if I take that same leg and srtike up and through the base of the threat with the toe boot or shin to the same target , I will bank on a different reaction and the fact that once the striking leg lands it will be past the axis point in between the legs and someones getting thier eyes rammed and dumped on the ground...     I would rather get a full body weight swing with a sledgehammer on a brick wall than throwing it at it with all my might.  
Sometimes the groin is all you got and you have to learn how to make it work for you when you need it, same with all the other vital targets... They do work if executed correctly becuase they lead to something else and so on...


----------



## GBlues

zDom said:


> Ok, once back in my more foolish and drunken days before I started training martial arts (we won't go into the details ...), I had a HUGE bouncer (6 foot 3 inches or so, athletic build of about 260) do exactly what you are proposing.
> 
> He TRIED to kick me in the nuts. His foot stopped in its upward arc about an inch below my testicles. His eyes bugged out in complete surprise for the millisecond before I punched him square in his teeth.
> 
> I was later informed by law enforcment officers that that bouncer ended up in the hospital. What if I had been a knife wielder instead? That one stab to the face would have been the end for him.
> 
> You can't depend on a kick to the nuts. Ergo, trading nut kicks for stabs banking that you are going to end the fight with said kick is a BAD idea.


 
Either you have thighs of steel or your grossly exaggerating, or he wasn't commited, or there is another possibility........

He just as easily could have stuck his thumb two inches into your eyeball socket, and you'd of been going to the hospital. Guarantee you had he done that, you wouldn't have been busting anybody's teeth out.


----------



## lklawson

GBlues said:


> Either you have thighs of steel or your grossly exaggerating, or he wasn't commited, or there is another possibility........


Adrenaline and Fight/Flight parasympathetic response do really strange things to the body and brain.  I've been nailed in the nuts and not had it do more than piss me off.  Other times, I've taken a shot to the nuts and had it stop me cold.  I know a guy who was rolling SD BJJ and actually had one of his testicles ruptured.  He didn't know it until *AFTER *the sparring session when the pain and massive swelling set in.

When groin shots work, they work great.  But you can't count on them, no way, no how.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## zDom

BLACK LION said:


> _"throwing the attacker to the ground hurts them worse and with more certainty than any single strike."   _Its the striking getting you there in the first place and the reason for the dump or drop...  It is my feeling that nothing is given and you must strike targets to compromise and control and that means throwing or dumping and breaking or joint manipultaion...
> If I step through your base with my forearm to the trachea, the effected body will most likely fly straight back on thier tooshy and damage thier coccyx before banging the back of thier head on ground...maybe breaking a wrist or finger from attempting to mitigate the fall...    a "throw" or drop or dump is a gravitational injury thats practically accomplished from striking targets...  I want a guarantee for every situation not a probability for some or most situations... body weight strikes with rotation and projection through the base gets me everywhere I want to be...  wether its dumping someones back onto my knee or smashing through a hip joint...   its all about striking...
> 
> As far as the kick to the "jacobs"... if you fumble of flop over a kick then no..you may get a slight reaction due to discomfort or pain but not a significant reflex action to set up a chain...  now if I take that same leg and srtike up and through the base of the threat with the toe boot or shin to the same target , I will bank on a different reaction and the fact that once the striking leg lands it will be past the axis point in between the legs and someones getting thier eyes rammed and dumped on the ground...     I would rather get a full body weight swing with a sledgehammer on a brick wall than throwing it at it with all my might.
> Sometimes the groin is all you got and you have to learn how to make it work for you when you need it, same with all the other vital targets... They do work if executed correctly becuase they lead to something else and so on...




There's a lot of "if's" in there, Black Lion. And "If executed correctly" isn't something even the very best fighters can count on. 

You want a guarantee? Sure, we ALL do. But there isn't one. Period.

And striking is definitely NOT surefire, even for the very best of strikers. If it was, boxing and MMA fights would be a lot shorter: first punch wins!

Striking, throwing, parries, blocks  they ALL have their place in combat. 


*Recognizing when to use which tool WHILE IN COMBAT (not in imagined, "Well, I would just ..." scenarios) and being able to successfully USE that tool are what makes someone effective, ultimately, as a fighter.*

Imagining "if does he X then I will just do Y" just doesn't always work out like we think it will. Really: it doesn't. Ask anybody who has EVER been in a dire close combat situation.

*No battle plan survives contact with the enemy. *  Colin Powell (I think)


----------



## zDom

GBlues said:


> Either you have thighs of steel or your grossly exaggerating, or he wasn't commited, or there is another possibility........
> 
> He just as easily could have stuck his thumb two inches into your eyeball socket, and you'd of been going to the hospital. Guarantee you had he done that, you wouldn't have been busting anybody's teeth out.





Yea: I bet he was thinking "I can just easily end this with a kick to his Jimmy" but how did THAT work out for him? Not so well.

That's a big, giant "if" there, GBlues, because it turns out: I wasn't the type of fella that stood still and let him insert his thumb into my eye.

And there was no exaggeration whatsoever. It was a committed kick. I got the idea he was seriously intending put an end not only to the fight, but also to the possibility of me ever having children.

There are NO "guarantees" in combat. He had his ideas but failed to execute  them.

All we can hope for in training is to increase the odds increasingly in our favor. Select what you train accordingly and know, without doubt, that ANY of what you train may simply NOT WORK.

Train hard, hope for the best, and be prepared to deal with the worst. That's all any of us can do.


----------



## lklawson

zDom said:


> All we can hope for in training is to increase the odds increasingly in our favor. Select what you train accordingly and know, without doubt, that ANY of what you train may simply NOT WORK.


This is why you hear some people yammer and drone on about "High Percentage Techniques."

In most instances simple is best and the more complex the response the more chances for it to break down.  Sometimes you have no choice but the complex so you take it.  Other times you have a choice.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## BLACK LION

there are 2 ways you can approach it...  basic and complex... 

basic is= recognize the threat >>>> injure threat until nonexistent

complex is=  recognize the threat>>>> does threat specific technique(s)>>>>injure threat until non-existent

the basic way cuts through all the variables and simplifies it to running down a man with a knife and injuring him to non-functionality 

the complex way adds all the variables and confuses the simple fact that you need to run him down and take him out regardless of what tool he has...  

Its the same with a gun...  why overload a complex system with more complexity...  simple is, running that man down or getting in there torso to torso and destroying them...   the inanimate object is insignificant in the overall picture...  

the only threat specific technique with any threat armed or unarmed is injury...  you want to be the one doing it and you shouldnt settle for anything less... on a mental or physical level...


----------



## MJS

BLACK LION said:


> there are 2 ways you can approach it... basic and complex...
> 
> basic is= recognize the threat >>>> injure threat until nonexistent
> 
> *complex is= recognize the threat>>>> does threat specific technique(s)>>>>injure threat until non-existent*
> 
> the basic way cuts through all the variables and simplifies it to running down a man with a knife and injuring him to non-functionality
> 
> the complex way adds all the variables and confuses the simple fact that you need to run him down and take him out regardless of what tool he has...
> 
> Its the same with a gun... why overload a complex system with more complexity... simple is, running that man down or getting in there torso to torso and destroying them... the inanimate object is insignificant in the overall picture...
> 
> the only threat specific technique with any threat armed or unarmed is injury... you want to be the one doing it and you shouldnt settle for anything less... on a mental or physical level...


 
Much like empty hand SD, I'm not looking for a specific technique when dealing with a weapon.  Instead, I'm taking the ideas, concepts and principles from all of those things, and responding in the fashion that is apropriate at the time.  Due to the fact that things can change in the blink of an eye, I don't want to be bound by 1 thing.  

I also dont want to disregard the weapon, even though you dont agree with that, and instead rely on overwhelming the guy.  I agree with the overwhelming, however, control needs to be there.  I get the impression that you're thinking that if you have control, that you cant overwhelm the guy.  I beg to differ.


----------



## Langenschwert

zDom said:


> The technique does not initiate with a "grab" at the weapon.
> 
> It places your forearm in between you and the attack while simultaneously throwing the attacker to the ground.
> 
> IMO, throwing the attacker to the ground hurts them worse and with more certainty than any single strike.
> 
> The keylock and disarm are follow ups to the initial response.
> 
> A prone attacker who has just fallen hard to their head/shoulders with the force of their bodyweight and rotation from the sweep is much more likely be stunned (brain "shut off") then having received any single strike from a hand or foot and should provide ample opportunity for the follow ups.
> 
> FWIW, these techniques were not dreamed up in a hypothetical discussion: they were tried and tested in violent encounters in post-WW2 Korea.
> 
> Again, I wish you the best of luck in your concept for knife defense and I sincerely hope it works out as conceived for someone depending on it.
> 
> As for me, I'm going to stick with what I've been taught and train and hope I'm never put to the test. Knife attacks are always nasty business.
> 
> In any case, discussing ideas is what this forum is all about  but sometimes folks will just disagree


 
Ain't that the truth. So much modern knife defence is wishful thinking. You simply can't ignore the weapon. You'll get killed, plain and simple. In FMA, there's the admonition to  "defang the snake". If you don't, you pay the price. The same techniques were used in medieval Europe. I'm sure you'll recognize them zDom. Take a look at these plates from Talhoffer's 1467 manual:

http://www.schielhau.org/taldagger.html

And his Ambraser Codex from 1459: 

http://www.schielhau.org/talhoffer1459_ac_dagger.html

And Hundfeld: http://www.schielhau.org/hundfeld-dagger.html

Here's Fiore dei Liberi from 1410: http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/liberi/wildRose/section2.html

Note the principles involved: control the dagger at all costs to ensure safety and then kill the guy ASAP. Note the prevalence of joint locks. The difference between Talhoffer's techniques and those of some modern "experts" is that Talhoffer and his contemporaries are people who actually _*fought with knives*_, not modern armchair martial artists who've never been in a knife fight. I know people who've studied the medieval masters and who have used their techniques on the street in knife encounters and lived to tell the tale without a scratch (which is almost unheard of). The stuff works for real, it's been tested for real for centuries. Compared to those guys, we're a bunch of sewer snoids, and anything we think we know about knives (and fighting in general) doesn't amount to much in comparison.

Best regards,

-Mark


----------



## BLACK LION

All of those options come to fruition once you injure them. the control or "defanging the snake" or whatever terminology that could be used to describe the "de-tooling" or "disarming" process...  sometimes striking is simultaneous with control or disarming like a knife to the throat... sometimes deflection and striking is simultaneous, like a knife to the back ... sometimes is just striking... but never should it just be about control or disarming the tool....


----------



## sgtmac_46

zDom said:


> Ok, once back in my more foolish and drunken days before I started training martial arts (we won't go into the details ...), I had a HUGE bouncer (6 foot 3 inches or so, athletic build of about 260) do exactly what you are proposing.
> 
> He TRIED to kick me in the nuts. His foot stopped in its upward arc about an inch below my testicles. His eyes bugged out in complete surprise for the millisecond before I punched him square in his teeth.
> 
> I was later informed by law enforcment officers that that bouncer ended up in the hospital. What if I had been a knife wielder instead? That one stab to the face would have been the end for him.
> 
> You can't depend on a kick to the nuts. Ergo, trading nut kicks for stabs banking that you are going to end the fight with said kick is a BAD idea.




I've been struck in the testicles on several occasions.......yeah, it hurts.......but it's an interesting sort of pain that can be ignored until business is finished many times.  Adrenaline is a funny thing.


----------



## sgtmac_46

Langenschwert said:


> Ain't that the truth. So much modern knife defence is wishful thinking. You simply can't ignore the weapon. You'll get killed, plain and simple. In FMA, there's the admonition to  "defang the snake". If you don't, you pay the price. The same techniques were used in medieval Europe. I'm sure you'll recognize them zDom. Take a look at these plates from Talhoffer's 1467 manual:
> 
> http://www.schielhau.org/taldagger.html
> 
> And his Ambraser Codex from 1459:
> 
> http://www.schielhau.org/talhoffer1459_ac_dagger.html
> 
> And Hundfeld: http://www.schielhau.org/hundfeld-dagger.html
> 
> Here's Fiore dei Liberi from 1410: http://www.aemma.org/onlineResources/liberi/wildRose/section2.html
> 
> Note the principles involved: control the dagger at all costs to ensure safety and then kill the guy ASAP. Note the prevalence of joint locks. The difference between Talhoffer's techniques and those of some modern "experts" is that Talhoffer and his contemporaries are people who actually _*fought with knives*_, not modern armchair martial artists who've never been in a knife fight. I know people who've studied the medieval masters and who have used their techniques on the street in knife encounters and lived to tell the tale without a scratch (which is almost unheard of). The stuff works for real, it's been tested for real for centuries. Compared to those guys, we're a bunch of sewer snoids, and anything we think we know about knives (and fighting in general) doesn't amount to much in comparison.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> -Mark


 Exactly!

It's like training to fight a poisonous snake and being told to ignore the venomous fangs and attack the body.......it's all well and good until you get bit JUST ONCE!

I suspect that much of some 'theory' is being pushed by practitioners of non-weapon striking arts attempting to expand the applicability of their techniques to counter-weapon.......but a punch for a cut is NOT remotely a fair trade........boxers take punches to the head and body for 12 or 14 rounds........MMA practitioners take that kind of damage for 3 or 5 rounds..........throw a knife or two in the mix and the fight would be over in SECONDS!  

The weapon changes everything!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

sgtmac_46 said:


> Exactly!
> 
> It's like training for fight a poisonous snake and being told to ignore the venomous fangs and attack the body.......it's all well and good until you get bit JUST ONCE!
> 
> I suspect that much of some 'theory' is being pushed by practitioners of non-weapon striking arts attempting to expand the applicability of their techniques to counter-weapon.......but a punch for a cut is NOT remotely a fair trade........boxers take punches to the head and body for 12 or 14 rounds........MMA practitioners take that kind of damage for 3 or 5 rounds..........throw a knife or two in the mix and the fight would be over in SECONDS!
> 
> The weapon changes everything!



Very well put sgtmac_46.


----------



## sgtmac_46

Now I will say that working the streets i've seen real world examples where unarmed subjects fought off knife wielding subjects.......by punching and kicking the guy with the knife.  In several cases aggressive actions forced the knife attacker to retreat and disengage the attack.......but in EVERY case I can remember, the unarmed guy ended up in the hospital, in several cases needing surgery, and the knifer was relatively unscathed.

Now, that suggests that fighting the knifing attacker off is superior to doing nothing.......but I do not see trading knife for blow as remotely optimal, not when there are better options.......the best bet being to avoid the situation and/or have a weapon of your own to counter with.


----------



## MJS

sgtmac_46 said:


> Now I will say that working the streets i've seen real world examples where unarmed subjects fought off knife wielding subjects.......by punching and kicking the guy with the knife. In several cases aggressive actions forced the knife attacker to retreat and disengage the attack.......but in EVERY case I can remember, the unarmed guy ended up in the hospital, in several cases needing surgery, and the knifer was relatively unscathed.


 
Good point, and I believe it was the gun thread in which you said that you'd be willing to take a punch, as long as the other person was willing to trade that for a shot from the gun.  So, in a sense, that applies to what you just said...while the knifer may have a few bumps and bruises, it was the other guy who ended up with the short end of the stick.



> Now, that suggests that fighting the knifing attacker off is superior to doing nothing.......but I do not see trading knife for blow as remotely optimal, not when there are better options.......the best bet being to avoid the situation and/or have a weapon of your own to counter with.


 
Agreed, and that would be my first choice as well.  I'd rather avoid the situation, but if not possible, find something to use as a weapon.  If all else fails, empty hand defense is all thats left.


----------

