# Aggression with the knife



## bujuts (Sep 15, 2006)

Greetings,

I had posted this on the kenponet, and it hadn't sparked much in the way of a technical discussion, so I thought I'd try here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY_6nQT89vQ&mode=related&search=

The effectiveness of the actual responses you see here are obvious and don't really need to be the subject of debate. However, the attacks bring up a few things we as kenpoists should consider.

Leaving it at that. Your thoughts?

Steven Brown
UKF


----------



## MJS (Sep 15, 2006)

Nothing like adding some realism into the mix!!:ultracool  Nothing stationary about those attacks and most likely what would happen in a real assault.  The concepts of the defense, are along the line of what you'd see from Karl Tanswell and his STAB program as well as Red Zone.  The idea is to gain control of the weapon arm and working for control and eventually a disarm.

Looking at the thread on the KN, I saw that some were questioning the reasoning behind some of the grappling we saw.  Now, I for one, prefer to stand rather than roll, when dealing with weapons, but I can only assume that it was to show that the person is not going to stand there, and let us do our thing, but instead, he's going to be fighting back.

Overall, I thought the clip was pretty good.  There is alot that can be added into ones training from watching that.

Mike


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 15, 2006)

bujuts said:


> Greetings,
> 
> I had posted this on the kenponet, and it hadn't sparked much in the way of a technical discussion, so I thought I'd try here.
> 
> ...


 
Why in the blue blazes did you post something on KN and expect a technical discussion? LMAO

Personally I like the idea of the attacks.  Very realistic to a degree (except they seldom switched targets) and definitely in good training scenarios.  Good meaning outnumbered, hard ground, close quarters etc.  There was some comments about the attackers portraying cowards and "stacking the deck" in favor of attackers on KN but......that's reality.

Hey Mike, I posted about the grappling for one reason....they weren't controlling weapon arm! LOL. Number one rule of grappling if you don't want to grab clothing or have no clothing to grab is to control the head and an arm.  This rule falls to rule number 2 when a weapon comes into play.

Kenpoists, like many other martial artists get in a comfort zone about the attacks they deal with.  People get confident against static attacks and think that it's really going to be that way for real...


----------



## MJS (Sep 15, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> Why in the blue blazes did you post something on KN and expect a technical discussion? LMAO


 
:lfao: 



> Personally I like the idea of the attacks. Very realistic to a degree (except they seldom switched targets) and definitely in good training scenarios. Good meaning outnumbered, hard ground, close quarters etc. There was some comments about the attackers portraying cowards and "stacking the deck" in favor of attackers on KN but......that's reality.


 
Agreed.  I saw the comment you're talking about, and after I saw who posted it, I was a little baffled by that.



> Hey Mike, I posted about the grappling for one reason....they weren't controlling weapon arm! LOL. Number one rule of grappling if you don't want to grab clothing or have no clothing to grab is to control the head and an arm. This rule falls to rule number 2 when a weapon comes into play.


 
I went back and played and replayed and replayed the clip again.  In the first scenario, it looked to me like the attacker used his left arm to push the defender back, keeping him at bay, so to speak, while he thrust with his right.  I'm sure he ate a few shots before he gained control.  About 1:20 in, similar scenario and again with the forearm rush, and that time, I saw no control at all of the weapon hand.  1:50 in, the defender was at a huge disadvantage IMO....mounted with the knifer raining down on him.  Pretty much up a creek at that point.  2:20 in, the knifer grabbed the defender around the neck and proceeded to stab fast, but the defender seemed more interested in clinching rather than that arm control.

I misread your post, but yes, I do agree with what you're saying, now that I went back. 



> Kenpoists, like many other martial artists get in a comfort zone about the attacks they deal with. People get confident against static attacks and think that it's really going to be that way for real...


 
Very true!

Mike


----------



## Ceicei (Sep 15, 2006)

It is my understanding that depending on the type, scenario, and who, certain knife attack methods tend to be favored.

Most of the attacks shown in the video clip are underhand.  Would out in the street show a prevalence in underhand attacks and domestic violence situations show a tendency for overhand attacks?  The gangs that I'm aware here seem to go for slashing motions.

Just wondering if there are statistics on types of knife attacks.  I'm curious because I know the media (movies, TV, news, etc.) plays a part in forming my perception.

- Ceicei


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 15, 2006)

Ceicei said:


> It is my understanding that depending on the type, scenario, and who, certain knife attack methods tend to be favored.
> 
> Most of the attacks shown in the video clip are underhand. Would out in the street show a prevalence in underhand attacks and domestic violence situations show a tendency for overhand attacks? The gangs that I'm aware here seem to go for slashing motions.
> 
> ...


 
Through our research (not just training scenarios but compiled evidence from knife encounters), the most common attacks are (please excuse the fma/western terminology here) #1 angles (overhand) and number 5 stabs underhand. 

I am sure that there are hard numbers to support this statistically, of which I don't have available at my fingertips at the moment, but you can see for yourself that this is usually the case by observing report after report, and incident after incident.

Paul


----------



## bujuts (Sep 15, 2006)

I think one of the things that struck me in previous discussions on KN is no one really talked about hitting, and they certainly didn't do much of it in these clips. IMHO, weapons fixation is a problem that comes from focusing technique on the blade.

The blade is dangerous, yes, but IMHO it should not be the primary concern. The primary concern should be the person wielding it. In other words, ATTACK THE ATTACK. Hit the friggin' guy, crack a skull, gouge an eye - _while _we deflect and seize. And do it ASAP. It should be no more than a very small fraction of a second from the deflection (before or after) should we be inflicting damage, and manipulating the skeleton through impact. Contact manipulation comes later.

I like to work a prison shanking quite frequently in my training, its a tough attack to defend against, and can be as forceful as a tackle. At the onset of our action, we must attack, jamming the offending arm, cancel dimensions, and move the spine, namely by hitting the skull with all sorts of authority. If done correctly, a second thrust should not be possible. In the sequence of engagement, contact penetration and impact manipulation comes _before _contact manipulation. To attempt contact manipulation with an enemy who is not dazed, hurt, reeling, or damaged is very dangerous game of grappling a knife attacker - these videos are a testament to the success of that approach. Furthermore, these attackers are still being benevolent by using only the knife, and not their (very available) knuckles, elbows, etc.

So, empty hand or with a knife should not matter. We must inflict damage ASAP and gain control of the body. I work Delayed Sword (and nearly everything else) as if there is a scalpel or razor blade between the thumb and forefinger that I cannot see. Truth is, there could be. Nothing should be taken for granted.

Notice on the one scene what happened when the defender was set on by the two in the alley. He backed his way against the wall while still assessing the situation. They closed on him like sharks. In my mind, once he decided the game was on, there should have been a broken occiptal lobe in a single shot to the closest attacker. He barely tapped the one guy during the maylay, and that discouraged him enough for a second.

Back to the knife, though. Keep it simple, don't forget the fundamentals of plain ol' hitting, and the importance of it.

Your thoughts?

Thanks,

Steven Brown
UKF


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 15, 2006)

Tulisan said:


> Through our research (not just training scenarios but compiled evidence from knife encounters), the most common attacks are (please excuse the fma/western terminology here) #1 angles (overhand) and number 5 stabs underhand.
> 
> I am sure that there are hard numbers to support this statistically, of which I don't have available at my fingertips at the moment, but you can see for yourself that this is usually the case by observing report after report, and incident after incident.
> 
> Paul


 
I wish my personal experience reflected that but sadly it does not.  I've had "more than a handful" of blade encounters of which two ended in my belly and I managed to avoid the others.  The primary atack for closing the distance were wild slashes usually from top corner to bottom corner followed by underhand stabs when up close.

I'm curious as to what research though.  You mention that "through your research" you've found out something.  Then you mention that you're "sure that there are hard numbers to support this statiscally" as if you've heard of these statistics existing but not seen them yourself.  Did you conduct this research or was it through word of mouth that you heard of the compilation(which involves numbers usually).  As I'm sure that any research worthwhile would include hard numbers and you would be able to state that more assertively had you been directly involved.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 15, 2006)

bujuts said:


> I think one of the things that struck me in previous discussions on KN is no one really talked about hitting, and they certainly didn't do much of it in these clips. IMHO, weapons fixation is a problem that comes from focusing technique on the blade.
> 
> The blade is dangerous, yes, but IMHO it should not be the primary concern. The primary concern should be the person wielding it. In other words, ATTACK THE ATTACK. Hit the friggin' guy, crack a skull, gouge an eye - _while _we deflect and seize. And do it ASAP. It should be no more than a very small fraction of a second from the deflection (before or after) should we be inflicting damage, and manipulating the skeleton through impact. Contact manipulation comes later.
> 
> ...


 
This is kind of what I was implying with my "why the grappling" comments.  Hit the B*****d, cause some shock and a disarm, then follow what course of action you deem necessary be it flight or fight.


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 15, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> I wish my personal experience reflected that but sadly it does not. I've had "more than a handful" of blade encounters of which two ended in my belly and I managed to avoid the others. The primary atack for closing the distance were wild slashes usually from top corner to bottom corner followed by underhand stabs when up close.


 
Re-read what I said. That is exactly what I said are the most common attacks; #1 angle, which is basically an overhand slash (from top to bottom), and #5 angle, or underhand stabs to the abdomen. So, it sounds as if your experience mirrors our data. 



> I'm curious as to what research though. You mention that "through your research" you've found out something. Then you mention that you're "sure that there are hard numbers to support this statiscally" as if you've heard of these statistics existing but not seen them yourself. Did you conduct this research or was it through word of mouth that you heard of the compilation(which involves numbers usually). As I'm sure that any research worthwhile would include hard numbers and you would be able to state that more assertively had you been directly involved.


 
Scenario after scenario that both our research group, as well as other groups have run have shown this to be the case. Then you can observe report after report, and watch scenario's caught on tape and see that this is also the case. 

What I don't have at my fingertips is hard statistics on entry wounds for knife encounters to present to you on this forum, but I know that they exist as I have been told by colleagues that there are hard numbers to support our conclusions. Perhaps if I publish another article or any related material, I will then have a catalyst to look up the stats for sure.

Paul


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 16, 2006)

Tulisan said:


> Re-read what I said. That is exactly what I said are the most common attacks; #1 angle, which is basically an overhand slash (from top to bottom), and #5 angle, or underhand stabs to the abdomen. So, it sounds as if your experience mirrors our data.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
So a "number 1" is an overhead angled slash and not an overhead stab. Cool, I read the initial post as a number 1being the stereotypical overhead stab.  I don't do FMA so I don't know your numbering conventions.

And thanks for answering about whether or not you did the research or someone else told you about the numbers.  I'm a statistics and hard data junkie so I was hoping you would say "yeah, I did the wrok and have the dat" sp I could say "Cool! can you share?".  Instead I got "Well....I heard there was this guy that has this data..." I guess not until you get a catalyst...

Salute!


----------



## Doc (Sep 17, 2006)

Tulisan said:


> Through our research (not just training scenarios but compiled evidence from knife encounters), the most common attacks are (please excuse the fma/western terminology here) #1 angles (overhand) and number 5 stabs underhand.
> 
> I am sure that there are hard numbers to support this statistically, of which I don't have available at my fingertips at the moment, but you can see for yourself that this is usually the case by observing report after report, and incident after incident.
> 
> Paul



True dat sir. Most knife attacks are also not planned, but spontaneous and emotional responses. Planned knife assaults usually come from the rear to intimidate as a control mechanism for robbery, etc.

In the clip it appears the attack was an assasination, not an assault with any other purpose. If that was the case, he'd get stuck when he wasn't looking. Even in a semi-controlled environment such as incarceration, no one comes 'headup.'

On one level the clip was realistic, but clearly in my experience it was atypical of actual majority knife assaults as they normally present themselves in the street. FBI Statistics support this.

Still much to be learned. In the knife defenses I teach, the attack always includes multiple and different uses of the weapon, in conjunction with the 'off hand' assault inclusive. No attack is independent, and no atacker has only one weapon.

Take that from an Old South Central Ninja. (I said NINJA Dennis).


----------



## Carol (Sep 17, 2006)

Doc said:


> Take that from an Old South Central Ninja. (I said NINJA Dennis).


 
:lfao:  Maybe that will bring him out of hiding 

Doc, speaking of Ninjas,  what do you think of the Bujinkan training idea where (I'm paraphrasing and may not be getting this completely right) one treats every punch as if the attacker had a knife in his hand?


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 17, 2006)

Carol Kaur said:


> :lfao: Maybe that will bring him out of hiding
> 
> Doc, speaking of Ninjas,  what do you think of the Bujinkan training idea where (I'm paraphrasing and may not be getting this completely right) one treats every punch as if the attacker had a knife in his hand?


 
One more reason to perfect Aishu-Tibeta...


----------



## Carol (Sep 17, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> One more reason to perfect Aishu-Tibeta...


 
ROFL!  Can't say I disagree!

I like the way you think.


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 17, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> I guess not until you get a catalyst...
> 
> Salute!


 
No problem sir...I promise to share if I get around to seeking the data out (buried right now in some graduate coursework).


----------



## bujuts (Sep 17, 2006)

Carol Kaur said:


> ...what do you think of the Bujinkan training idea where (I'm paraphrasing and may not be getting this completely right) one treats every punch as if the attacker had a knife in his hand?



Its not going to work for every delf defense situation obviously, but its a good practice, I believe.  The razor between the thumb and forefinger is an excellent example - a what we might think is a simple haymaker might just open you up cheek to cheek.

This is the premise on which we should, I believe, understand knife defenses to be platformed on an effective empty handed system, not an advanced adjunct to it in which body mechanics and tactics change.  In other words, control, domination, and destruction is the universal approach.  The empty handed system should work just fine with and against a knife, and not have to change just because the attacker(s) are wielding something.

Bloody ('xcuse the pun) good point ('xcuse that one too).

Steven Brown
UKF


----------



## MJS (Sep 18, 2006)

bujuts said:


> I think one of the things that struck me in previous discussions on KN is no one really talked about hitting, and they certainly didn't do much of it in these clips. IMHO, weapons fixation is a problem that comes from focusing technique on the blade.
> 
> The blade is dangerous, yes, but IMHO it should not be the primary concern. The primary concern should be the person wielding it. In other words, ATTACK THE ATTACK. Hit the friggin' guy, crack a skull, gouge an eye - _while _we deflect and seize. And do it ASAP. It should be no more than a very small fraction of a second from the deflection (before or after) should we be inflicting damage, and manipulating the skeleton through impact. Contact manipulation comes later.
> 
> ...


 

I agree with this!  Why not attempt to soften up the attacker?  I saw many times in those clips, where some knee shots to the leg or groin, as well as a stomp to the foot, would have been pretty usefull, yet they didn't attempt them. 

Mike


----------



## Zarnyk (Nov 3, 2006)

Defintely some kicks of some sort would've slowed the attacker some. Weapon fixation should be left to the untrained wielder and not the experienced martial artist. Don't get me wrong, the most important item, when a weapon enters the mix, is the weapon. But you can't just grab onto the wrist with the weapon and hope for the best. You have to take actions with all of your tools. The situation is hightened. Your life is threated. Turn your defense into offense and return the threat.

Basic weapon defense includes - block + control the hand + ground the weapon. A lot happens in that split second. You may or may not have time/need to strike to soften your attacker. 

The objective is to damage the appendage that wields the weapon so they can't hold it. To do this, you need time to get control of the hand. Block and move your center line, poke, strike, kick somethin to get the attacker thinking about something else besides that weapon for just a split second. Control the hand that wields the weapon. Make sure it's the hand and not just the wrist or the wrist can twist, they can still escape the hold and do much more damage. Once you gain control of the hand, ground the weapon. This means, slam it to the ground, reverse the hold into the attacker, submissive position(arm bar,wrist locks,ground control etc), something to neutralize the attacker. Now, if you haven't done much damage by this point, now your ready to break an arm, elbow, hand, wrist etc.

Of course if you can avoid the confrontation all together by talking your way out or escaping etc., it's much better than having to deal with any of this.


----------



## Stryder (Dec 21, 2006)

Just to add my $.02 pesos.  I've been threatened by a knife wielding attacker and the person held it (in their right hand) palm facing up, knife facing me, with their hand slightly extended in front of them, the other hand out at medimum height as a guard.  He waved it slowly back and forth in a small pattern and then slashed front-top-right to bottom-left once in a while.  

Thankfully, the encounter ended without any contact.  

I'm quite sure that had we engaged, I would have taken a slash as the first attack while closing distance and then had a nice surprise for him when in tight.  

I plan for this scenario in the 1st 2nd 3rd contact sense - meaning; he might slash and make contact as the 1st event, but a little blunt force trauma will likely reduce the effectiveness of his 2nd event attempt - so on and so forth.  

Knife defenses always work in the dojo, but you should definitely try to put some realism into it - I WILL hit him, and that WILL effect his strikes.  The trick would be to contain the damage I take to non-mission-critical areas while I take out the opponents sight, hearing, reproductive capacity etc..  I've never been stabbed by an attacker so maybe this method won't work if I actually got cut....

I don't understand why the person being attacked in this video did not try to control the weapon weilding arm and strike more?


----------

