Club, Knife and Gun Defenses.....

[Goldendragon7]

One of the most interesting groups of study within Kenpo (IMHO).

These particular areas of study involve weapons which equate to distance most of the time. In the initial phases of our system, we teach a "few" maneuvers for the defense of a " few" scenarios.

I think we must all realize that initially the techniques in the ideal phase of learning is all about coordination and learning what you are dealing with.

As one progresses to more advanced levels of training (which some studios don't I understand) these scenarios, we must become more realistic. This involves an improved replica in size, weight, sound, heat, and possibly a safe projectile.

At this point, fingers, plastic or wood, don't really fill the bill. Of course, safety is paramount. We now can only start to learn the ins and outs, goods and bads, speeds and skills necessary to further develop our steps towards our skill development in defending against these devices if ever confronted in reality.

This "PROCESS" is actually the same for any other category as well such as punches, armlocks etc..
Several have posted some good ideas, tips and training ideas towards skill enhancement. Yet others have chosen not to graphically discuss these defenses outside of their studios (which I honor and understand the reasons), unless in person.

The most important part of training for these situations is the conditioning we receive from the countless hours invested. Obviously we need to know that what we are practicing works, and there is no better way than to do that with a live partner. Solo training is good in the initial phases but in the later, you must up the ante.

Discussion...........?

 

[Michael Billings]

In essence, we are practicing for these scenarios from the day we walk in the school. Real life assaults, unfortunately, involve knives, clubs, and firearms. Setting aside whether or not you think they "work", I think that the techniques, as taught, open the door for you to consider all the options available. Long Form 6 is just a starting point when it comes to considering weapons attacks. Think of it as maybe a preface, and techniques against each weapon could be separate chapters, (or Forms), in their own right. PCT's as Rainman calls them, (Principles, Concepts, and Theories), apply at all levels, and are the tools we need to use when trying to explore this catagory of attacks.

Good Topic!
-Michael

edited for spelling

 

[Ceicei]

I agree.

I wonder, however, if the lack or decrease of realistic practice with weapons is because of personal/societal bias against these weapons, particularly guns? So many in society have a fear of weapons--for two reasons, our unfamilarity with them and the hope/wish they didn't exist in a utopian society.

I understand and know the gun is a deadly weapon and not to be trifled with. However, ducking our heads and pretending/hoping that we never will encounter an assailant carrying a weapon is too idealistic at best and at worst, unrealistic. Risky, and definitely life threatening--perhaps deadly--if it ever happens.

Aren't we into martial arts for self defense? If that is the goal, then we need to work on scenarios as nearly realistic as possible. That includes split second timing and a paramount emphasis on stances/techniques--a mistake could cost our lives. Time-wasting motions must be eliminated.

Nothing is as realistic as an actual street encounter, but we certainly can't just go out and procure bad guys to bang with just for the sake of experience.

The psychology of the mind is an interesting process. When we feel "safe", we may not respond as quickly. But we must build up to the point beyond that. Wooden/plastic/rubber weapons have a place and allows us to progress with experience and speed.

Some martial artists advocate working with decomissioned weapons (ie. guns that might have firing pins removed, barrells filled, or whatever and blunt knives). This offers a feel of weight, density, and if there is a sound (clicks or blanks). This allows you to realize what you can do with hard objects (grappling with gun slides or knife blades, assailant's wrist motions [our counter-attacks may inadvertently cause the guns/knives to point towards us]. The sounds give us the timing realization--are we fast enough with the defense to escape injury or death?

Even then, because these weapons aren't "soft" to work with, injuries in the course of practice is very real.

What we need then to consider is the trade-offs between imitation of reality and safety while practicing.

- Ceicei

 

[satans.barber]

The other night we were discussing stick defenses, and one of my brown tips pointed out that in his experience (he's ex military and a trouble maker so has been in a few scraps in his time) pretty much all stick/baseball bat/golf club etc. attacks are two handed, rather than the one handed attacks practised in our system (I personally don't know any two handed stick attack techniques).

He grabs it, and goes 'err, what would you do if I did *THIS*' and swung the bloody thing two handed at me head! I was pretty shocked that he actually went for me with it (randomly attacking your instructor isn't really on IMHO, I'm not Clouseau FFS!) , but instinctively I dropped to one knee and struck at his groin, and had he swung the stick full force (he held it back although it didn't look like that originally, I though he was committed to the strike) it would have passed over my head.

I wasn't too happy with this defence, dropping down to your knees is a poor response I think (although it was my gut one) as it puts you in a really vulnerable and poor position.

What could I have done better? Are single handed stick attacks un-realistic? What would *you* do if someone swung a baseball bat at your head with full force and speed? Is it acceptable to randomly attack your instructor?

Just feeding the discussion with a few yule logs really, not moaning as such...!

Ian.

 

[Goldendragon7]

Orig posted by satans.barber
One of my students grabs a stick, and goes 'err, what would you do if I did *THIS*' and swung the bloody thing two handed at me head!

I instinctively dropped to one knee and struck at his groin.

I wasn't too happy with this defence, dropping down to your knees is a poor response I think (although it was my gut one) as it puts you in a really vulnerable and poor position.

What could I have done better? Ian.

This is a perfect example for why we need to increase the level of training at the upper ranks.

""CONDITION" and guts take over where knowledge and skill end".

You need to "condition" yourself and students for more realistic attacks. If you have done your job teaching the basic technique and responses... you then need to "drill" the maneuvers so that extemporaneous reactions take over for you, and with realistic defenses.

:asian:

 

[Ceicei]

Was that swing done overhead or sideways like a baseball bat?

If it was like a baseball bat swing, then I might consider a modified "Returning the Storm" after ducking under the swing.

Perhaps another strategy would be ducking under the swing, checking the arm and getting in really close and doing something like "Thundering Hammers".

Alternatively, how about ducking and doing a crossover behind to do "The Back Breaker"?

- Ceicei

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by Ceicei
Perhaps another strategy would be ducking under the swing, checking the arm and getting in really close and doing something like "Thundering Hammers".

Alternatively, how about ducking and doing a crossover behind to do "The Back Breaker"?
- Ceicei

or ducking under like in Short Form 2 towards 6 or 12 with and upward block and center knuckle rake ...... (which is what it was designed for)

:asian:

So Ian..... YOU DID GOOD!

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7
or ducking under like in Short Form 2 towards 6 or 12 with and upward block and center knuckle rake ...... (which is what it was designed for)

Short Form 2? Uummmm, I would think portions of second half of the Long Form 2 in a modified way would have more application to this situation?

- Ceicei

 

[MisterMike]

I do not think anything from Short 1 through Long 2 should be used as a technique by itself. These are the basics forms, and while their embryonic motion can be found in a more sophisticated form of a technique or technique form(Short 3 - Long 6) the motions were not intended to be used as techniques.

They are more like building blocks.

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by MisterMike
I do not think anything from Short 1 through Long 2 should be used as a technique by itself. These are the basics forms, and while their embryonic motion can be found in a more sophisticated form of a technique or technique form(Short 3 - Long 6) the motions were not intended to be used as techniques.

They are more like building blocks.

On the other hand, many of these forms incorporate techniques into them. Because of that, these segments can definitely be used as techniques. Trapping an arm and doing an uppercut (as in long form 2) can certainly be used.

When it comes down to the nitty-gritty of a fighting encounter, there is a real possibility we may not necessarily go through the process of a technique from beginning to end (especially of fancier or extensive types). Rather, it is more than likely we may use part of it and/or modify by adding other moves depending upon circumstances.

- Ceicei

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by satans.barber
The other night we were discussing stick defenses, and one of my brown tips pointed out that in his experience (he's ex military and a trouble maker so has been in a few scraps in his time) pretty much all stick/baseball bat/golf club etc. attacks are two handed, rather than the one handed attacks practised in our system

Dr. Gyi of Bando makes this point often and strongly. He says he has searched the FBI statistics and an attack with a stick is so rare as to be negligible. But baseball bats, shovels, crowbars, etc., are all on there in number. Unless you're practicing to defend yourself against being arrested by a police officer wielding a baton, or riot police who are trying to stop you from rioting, or your correctional officer who is trying to get you back into your cell, a one-handed stick attack just isn't a real likely scenario.

I wasn't too happy with this defence, dropping down to your knees is a poor response I think (although it was my gut one) as it puts you in a really vulnerable and poor position.

Well, I'm probably guilty of being off-topic here as I have nothing to say from an EPAK point of view, but with my good record I think I can stand a couple of Mod. Warnings. (It wouldn't be my first!) To me it sounds--as I'm visualizing it--like you were "passing in front of the net" as the hockey players say: Moving your head through the line of the strike. Perhaps that isn't so and I'm picturing it wrong. If it was a pure horizontal plane strike aimed at your upper head this might work, but if it's more diagonal or starts aimed more at shoulder height is seems to risk having your head crossing the line of the bat's tip at the worst possible time. Also, if your counterstrike doesn't drop him, you've reduced your mobility by putting yourself in a kneeling position just when you need mobility the most: How will you avoid his next strike? He could call "Fore!" and golf strike you!

My arnis instructor keeps at his school things like bats, axe handles, over-szied sticks, etc., so we can practice for this sort of situation. The big axe handle really changed things--it's weighted differently, for one thing.

What would *you* do if someone swung a baseball bat at your head with full force and speed? Is it acceptable to randomly attack your instructor?

Well: a.) I like to close the distance to clinching if he's close and time permits or back way the heck up if he isn't close or I think I can get away, and b.) I always say "Call my bluff!" to my students!

I've had good luck (in training!) jamming these by jumping in and blocking the hands where they grip the bat, but it depends on where one starts and where the swing is starting from. People can thrust with the bat too of course!

 

[Michael Billings]

No, no, no ... not two of clubs, but we practice against 2 types of clubs.

There is your basic beer bottle-Fu, as I call it, or the short baton ... and the "half a cue stick", ax handle, or baseball bat. You have to play with both to understand the differences.

Single arm swings happen with the half a cue stick, but would be rare with a baseball bat, due to the relative weight differences. The existing techniques still give us various options for both, although most schools probably, no certainly, train against the traditional short club (beer bottle, mug, etc.) My school's bat is red, it helps with recognition. As the length of the weapon increases, and the weight, momentum has to be considered and the variable options open to the attacker with both types of weapons.

(I personally think chairs, thrown, and used a blockade are a good answer ... and good Kenpo)

-Michael

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by MisterMike
I do not think anything from Short 1 through Long 2 should be used as a technique by itself.

Why?.... I totally disagree with you here. Is there a rule that states a quality "self defense" maneuver has to be more than one or two movements in length to be considered an effective action? I have used and have witnessed numerous "single movement" <<techniques>> that have been devastating.

Originally posted by MisterMike
These are the basics forms (Short 1 through Long 2), the motions were not intended to be used as techniques. They are more like building blocks.

Once again, I believe you are a little off base. While I "do" agree that these forms are correctly considered the "dictionaries of motion", indexing the major components of Kenpo with no "specific" application intended, they still have the possibility of causing harm and can be used independently... effectively.

If this is not the case, then our basics within these forms are basically useless except for teaching.... and then I ask teaching what?

Originally posted by MisterMike
While their embryonic motion can be found in a more sophisticated form of a technique or technique form(Short 3 - Long 6)

I do agree that motions found in the first 4 forms can be found in "all" of the upper forms ...... since (from the beginning)the forms of our system are all tiered by design.

:asian:

 

[Rainman]

Originally posted by Michael Billings
In essence, we are practicing for these scenarios from the day we walk in the school. Real life assaults, unfortunately, involve knives, clubs, and firearms. Setting aside whether or not you think they "work", I think that the techniques, as taught, open the door for you to consider all the options available. Long Form 6 is just a starting point when it comes to considering weapons attacks. Think of it as maybe a preface, and techniques against each weapon could be separate chapters, (or Forms), in their own right. PCT's as Rainman calls them, (Principles, Concepts, and Theories), apply at all levels, and are the tools we need to use when trying to explore this catagory of attacks.

Good Topic!
-Michael

edited for spelling

Something for your personal consideration- using opposites and reverses change the order in which the hands move on certain techniques as far as parries go. Same technique you just reversed the parries and gave the knife technique a different meaning. Take special note of the constituents of (CM) and lever classification... just out of six and you may want to think about weapons of mass destruction. Mass being the person in front of you, destruction meaning structural breakdown, weapons replace tools because you are now speaking of what gives life to your hands and feet.

What do you control and what controls you? An excellent example of this was sharp phil and we can utilize his picture to look at directional harmony as he attempted to defend. Remeber his left arm flapping in the breeze? It gave me the feeling of someone trying to unwind a top with their foot placed on the top of the top! Meaning because he didn't know the principle of directional harmony he took off with a brake on so now the principle controlled him and sorry to say, phil died from the gunshot wound because he only had an understanding of what the movements were not what gave them life.

 

[Michael Billings]

Rainman orig posted:

... using opposites and reverses change the order in which the hands move on certain techniques as far as parries go. Same technique you just reversed the parries and gave the knife technique a different meaning. Take special note of the constituents of (CM) and lever classification... just out of six and you may want to think about weapons of mass destruction. Mass being the person in front of you, destruction meaning structural breakdown, weapons replace tools because you are now speaking of what gives life to your hands and feet.

Sweet! I have seen John Sepulveda demonstrating the reverse and opposites, specifically with parries. I know Larry Tatum's TOW had a very simple one for Attaching Mace, but it was not really "reversing" or an "opposite", just taking what was available in the normal course of the technique.

I like the idea of sequential structrual breakdown as you execute techniques, up the attacking weapon (fingers, wrist, elbow, shoulder, etc.), to equate to "Mass Destruction."

Too late for me to dialogue more, but I like and understand the Concept, (hopefully). Sequential Destruction until you reach center-man Mass, or break / injure / harm every target (and view everything as a target), with the idea of Contact Manipulation (CM), Control, or Immobilizations, at every available joint.

I gotta play with this soon. Advanced class on Thursday nights ... OUCH!

Night All,
-Michael

 

[satans.barber]

Originally posted by Ceicei
Was that swing done overhead or sideways like a baseball bat?

If it was like a baseball bat swing, then I might consider a modified "Returning the Storm" after ducking under the swing.

It was done purely horizontally, just like my head was actually a baseball! Had I been doing it slowly and actually discussing it then yeah, I would have probably done with a Returning the Storm motiong myself, but since it was just a random attack with no forewarning I just reacted purely from instinct!

Perhaps another strategy would be ducking under the swing, checking the arm and getting in really close and doing something like "Thundering Hammers".

Certainly that might have been an option, or what I thought afterwards when I considered it was that Dance of Death might have grafted in there best, i.e. duck the swing (going right down to one knee if needs be) then rise up with a ridgehand to the groin and a pinning check to his arms, followed by a takedown (neutralising the stick in the process if possible).

Alternatively, how about ducking and doing a crossover behind to do "The Back Breaker"?

- Ceicei

We don't do that one, I'll have to look it up

I think the point is though, if someone attacks you truly randomly, then as long as you don't get hurt your training has paid off! Yes it may be a bit of a sloppy defence, but that comes with a lack of real experience I suppose; too much pre-programmed training.

I mean, if I was out late at night, I would already be expecting an attack, so if I was jumped I'd still be in a state of readiness and I wouldn't call that random. Same as in training, we'll sometimes get an any attack-any defense line up going (with the higher belts), but again that's not random.

Thanks everyone for your input,

Ian.

 

[MisterMike]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7
Why?.... I totally disagree with you here. Is there a rule that states a quality "self defense" maneuver has to be more than one or two movements in length to be considered an effective action? I have used and have witnessed numerous "single movement" <<techniques>> that have been devastating.



Once again, I believe you are a little off base. While I "do" agree that these forms are correctly considered the "dictionaries of motion", indexing the major components of Kenpo with no "specific" application intended, they still have the possibility of causing harm and can be used independently... effectively.

If this is not the case, then our basics within these forms are basically useless except for teaching.... and then I ask teaching what?



I do agree that motions found in the first 4 forms can be found in "all" of the upper forms ...... since (from the beginning)the forms of our system are all tiered by design.

:asian:

My definition of a technique is one defensive move and at least 2 offensive. So the Upward block, middle-knickle strike would not constitute a technique. There would have to be a followup. So I worded it as "by itself". Otehrwise, I'd have ruled out using a reverse stepthrough/inward block from Short Form 1.

The same for Long Form 1, Step bakc/Block/Forward bow punch. While this can be used, it is only part of a technique.

I have no doubts that is it possible to throttle someone with a single blow, but it doesn't fit my definition of a technique.

So Forms S1-L2 do not really have any "techniques" per say.

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by MisterMike
<<<My>>> definition of a technique is one defensive move and at least 2 offensive. Since it doesn't fit my definition of a technique, Forms S1-L2 do not really have any "techniques" per say..

Ok, I can't debate your opinion, you have a right to it.

Once again, as I stated earlier I "do" agree with you that these forms (S1, L1, S2 & L2) were developed and are correctly considered the "dictionaries of motion", indexing the major components of Kenpo with no "SPECIFIC" application intended.

I don't limit the interpretive possibilities that Mr. Parker taught me regarding the usefulness and understanding of the forms, so I was merely pointed out that "ONE" of their uses could be independent actions (or stand alone) responses vs., combinations. Both are useful and necessary.

:asian:

 

[Michael Billings]

I realize Forms are expressions of Basics, with the 2's being "more sophisticated basics", however, I find, and choose to teach application for all the moves within the Form. I do these against a partner in order to teach range and depth of motion. I stress they are not self-defense techniques per se, but they can certainly be applied as such, and should be.

Some students learn better when they do them in the air, as related to 1st person (their body), others need the visual referent in terms of application of the basics to correct targets, with correct angles of entry and angles of incidence.

Just my way of teaching the Forms.

-Michael

 

[Rainman]

Originally posted by MisterMike
My definition of a technique is one defensive move and at least 2 offensive. So the Upward block, middle-knickle strike would not constitute a technique. There would have to be a followup. So I worded it as "by itself". Otehrwise, I'd have ruled out using a reverse stepthrough/inward block from Short Form 1.

The same for Long Form 1, Step bakc/Block/Forward bow punch. While this can be used, it is only part of a technique.

I have no doubts that is it possible to throttle someone with a single blow, but it doesn't fit my definition of a technique.

So Forms S1-L2 do not really have any "techniques" per say.

One defensive and two offensive... (1D) upward block- (1O) thrusting middle knuckle to the process (2O) Continuing and raking vertically downward "nip the tip" refers to a "groin shot" after the thrust. Two targets two different methods of execution.

No movement is singular in action anyways- even if the strike is to only one target. Here is another example- a thrusting inward block and a vertical outward block. Two defensive movements no? NO. Put an arm in between. Sophisticated basics. Sophisticated basics make a technique out of what might seemingly be called a singular movement... such as a "reverse punch" with a chambered opposing hand. The chambered hand may represent many things and not necessarily be only highlighting opposing forces.

The biggest problem with what you are saying is that is in absolute form. Start putting this is what I am thinking currently- it tricks your mind into being more open. It also allows others to add to your philosophies.

Lastly lets look at long 1 for a sec. Step back- pivot with an inward "block" which cancels width and heighth. Utilizing rotational force pivot to a forward bow with a reverse punch. Add exact targets for each strike er "block" and strike. Does that sound more like a technique? How about this definition, a technique is something that does what it was designed to do efficiently.