How to introduce unorthodox study into a commercialized dojo, as a student?

[drop bear]

Isn't the OP's fundamental point about the average carry knife not having the heft for cutting flawed? I mean, my little folding Benchmade with it's tanto style blade is light as feather, sure you're not going to hack or chop bludgeon style with it. But it'll slice you to ribbons. I'm not carrying my big ole heavy kukri knife around.

Yes.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I'm honestly just confused about what your issue is here.

You acknowledge that slicing drills are the basics in FMA. You acknowledge that it makes sense to learn those. When you were asked to do those drills, that you acknowledge are part of the art and should be learned first, you started talking about stabbing instead of doing the drill?

I can't say that school, but FMA in general does teach stabbing as well. What you did sounds like going to a boxing gym, learning how to jab and complaining that it's not an uppercut, then thinking you need to start a study group to teach them different ways to use their fists. If you know that you were specifically learning drills that involve cutting, there's no need to focus on unrelated stuff.

For the record, I think most instructors would tell you just to focus on the drill you're learning, in this situation.

Specifically, I was asking about transitioning from the cut of the limb, to the body, while using carry blade, which is essentially what the trainers were. I didn’t think what we were doing made sense, given the type of blade. I’m not sure if he understood me. He light-heartedly chastised me for asking a theoretical question. My partner laughed and told me “you’re overthinking it, just do the drill.” Not wanting to upset anyone, I didn’t press it.

This is what got me worried. Not the drill itself.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Yes.

Nice knife. “Average” was the wrong word to use. I was referring to the use of cheap trash folders, fruit knives, and blades that haven‘t been freshly sharpened.

But in any case, previous observation led me to conclude that weight distribution was what mattered in “defanging.” This footage may have proved that wrong.

Still, I take note that from the WWII combatives curriculum, going back to the Romans, that cutting is not the preferred method in lethal force encounters with a knife.

 

[Badhabits]

I think the Romans made the gladius short sword famous. They aped it from who was it, Hannibal's army? It was roughly 2ft long and designed for hacking and stabbing. I mean obviously hacking away with a big heavy tool will do more damage, but it's not like you're going to be carrying something like that around. I know next to nothing about knife fighting, but being that a 3-4 inch blade is what you'd probably carry around, I'd assume different tactics would need to be used for a small lightweight blade. In other words why be so concerned with stabbing when a knife that size may be better used in a different way. Cutting tendons etc. I could be way off base here though

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I think the Romans made the gladius short sword famous. They aped it from who was it, Hannibal's army? It was roughly 2ft long and designed for hacking and stabbing. I mean obviously hacking away with a big heavy tool will do more damage, but it's not like you're going to be carrying something like that around. I know next to nothing about knife fighting, but being that a 3-4 inch blade is what you'd probably carry around, I'd assume different tactics would need to be used for a small lightweight blade. In other words why be so concerned with stabbing when a knife that size may be better used in a different way. Cutting tendons etc. I could be way off base here though

Earlier swords were designed to open up the blood vessels through hacking, and people still fight that way today with machetes,

If I remember correctly, once the Rapier was invented, there was less interest in hacking. It became more about smaller movements and stabs.

As @drop bear pointed out—depends on the hardware. The most reliable thing is using the knife, or improvised weapon, to press and hook around the limbs towards vital targets. If you have a sharp knife, you’ll cut regardless doing that. Much like with shooting, you hit quickly several times, whatever targets present themselves, then you run. I should clarify this is strictly for lethal force encounters, and that one should not plan their self-defense around knife, unless you‘re literally out of options. Courts do not like people who stab other people, even if it was completely justified.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Specifically, I was asking about transitioning from the cut of the limb, to the body, while using carry blade, which is essentially what the trainers were. I didn’t think what we were doing made sense, given the type of blade. I’m not sure if he understood me. He light-heartedly chastised me for asking a theoretical question. My partner laughed and told me “you’re overthinking it, just do the drill.” Not wanting to upset anyone, I didn’t press it.

This is what got me worried. Not the drill itself.

Are you by any chance more used to videos and/or attending seminars than attending regular classes?
Reason I ask, is I can see your question making sense if you are. In those situations, you have to get all the information at once so you can then train with it. In classes, it tends to be more typical to train, and as you come to get a better understanding, you'll slowly (and more naturally) begin to understand the nuance. But the big thing is getting the muscle memory in place first.



As a side note, and as a possible answer to your question, typically in FMA the theory is that whatever size blade you train with, the skills can transfer to another size. So while a specific drill may not make sense with the training blade that you're using, that's not all that important. You're learning the mechanics, which is what's important.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I think the Romans made the gladius short sword famous. They aped it from who was it, Hannibal's army? It was roughly 2ft long and designed for hacking and stabbing. I mean obviously hacking away with a big heavy tool will do more damage, but it's not like you're going to be carrying something like that around. I know next to nothing about knife fighting, but being that a 3-4 inch blade is what you'd probably carry around, I'd assume different tactics would need to be used for a small lightweight blade. In other words why be so concerned with stabbing when a knife that size may be better used in a different way. Cutting tendons etc. I could be way off base here though

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Are you by any chance more used to videos and/or attending seminars than attending regular classes?
Reason I ask, is I can see your question making sense if you are. In those situations, you have to get all the information at once so you can then train with it. In classes, it tends to be more typical to train, and as you come to get a better understanding, you'll slowly (and more naturally) begin to understand the nuance. But the big thing is getting the muscle memory in place first.



As a side note, and as a possible answer to your question, typically in FMA the theory is that whatever size blade you train with, the skills can transfer to another size. So while a specific drill may not make sense with the training blade that you're using, that's not all that important. You're learning the mechanics, which is what's important.

I would say, that in recent time, I’ve gotten used to that. Before, I did both ways.

I’ve seen that some instructors provide theory, before providing kata. I prefer it that way entirely, because then I understand why I’m doing the drills, and I progress faster. I try to research what will be taught at a class or seminar before attending, so that I better absorb what’s taught, and can ask more technical question. Some instructors make this up on the go, so….that requires intensive research.

I‘ve started to realize the nuance of this within FMA. However, I get concerned that doing slicing motions with the knife on the body, will train bad habits, which will not be transferrable if I’m using something dull.

 

[JowGaWolf]

However, the way you approach limbs with a fruit knife versus a machete is going to change.

I'm not sure if this is a good comparisons. These are two different tools.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I'm not sure if this is a good comparisons. These are two different tools.

I mean…it wasn’t intended to be a comparison.

 

[JowGaWolf]

@hoshin1600 @skribs @MuayJitsu @Buka @gyoja @frank raud @Badhabits @Chris Parker

Initially, I was surprised and off-put by how intense this got. Now though, I’m grateful for the criticism. It’s made me more aware of how I might offend instructors. I will modify my approach accordingly, avoid unintentionally coming off as arrogant or egotistical. Thank you all.

Ther truth about martial arts instructors is that they can be very sensitive about martial arts things. This is especially true if they are part of a larger organization.

 

[gyoja]

Much like with shooting, you hit quickly several times, whatever targets present themselves, then you run.

I don’t recommend this.

 

[JowGaWolf]

My recommendation on swords and knives for anyone that is highly interested.

There are some documentaries on historical weapons that are created by well known education based TV networks like The Discovery Channel, The BBC, and national Geographic that give really good historical context of swords. I think it will give you a healthy historical perspective of why sword and knives were made with a specific type of design to address the purpose of the blade. Things like curved blade and straight blade serve different functions and require specific techniques to be be efficient with.

Some weapons were dueling weapons while others where made for the battlefield against armor and Lance. Just like modern day guns. Some are for civilian purposes and others are for military purposed.

Much of this knowledge is historical so the most reliable place for this information are museums and historical organizations. They have already spoken to the experts of the blase. Not just from the use but from the perspectives of the blacksmith.

 

[Chris Parker]

Let's go through this again... I'm not sure the message is actually getting through...

Woooow….I did not expect the vitriol and rage this thread has elicited. I don’t know if I made a grievous error in wording, or if it’s my mistake expecting a level-headed discussion on the internet.

This isn't vitriol, and is incredibly level-headed. You don't know what on earth you're talking about, or asking, and are expecting to be catered to. That's not expecting a level-headed discussion, it's expecting to be told you're right all the time... you aren't. I suggest you get used to that feeling if you're going to train in a class.

Let’s take a step back here.

Let's be clear. The step back needs to be on your side.

In simple terms, when I started going, it seemed to be the best place of limited options.

That's not an answer to 95% of my questions, and not even an answer as to why there. Care to try again?

I agree with you.

Then why repeat it?

“Average knife”—as in about 3 inches, varying sharpness. I may very well have misused the word “average.”

You may indeed have. But my point is more that "average/typical" blade carried will vary greatly depending on where you are (hence the question as to whether you are in the Philippines). The majority of people carrying a knife don't know what to do with it, though...and I note again that the majority of my questions go unanswered.

I’m not aware of any legal jurisdictions that don’t consider a knife a lethal force weapon. If, for example, you hit the femoral, left ventricle, or aorta, they’re not going to live very long. Ultimately though, the point of stabbing is to create distance for an escape, and your anatomical targets will vary in that situation.

Sure, it will be considered a lethal force weapon... but does that mean your tactics and application have to be lethal? A knife is a utilitarian tool primarily, that can act as a weapon... but this focus on lethality is, again, fear-based and unrealistic.

Yes. I’m aware there are different systems and blades.

I really don't think you are to any major degree. If you were, you wouldn't be trying to insist that you know "how these systems work" and trying to overrule the actual instruction in your class.

Fear-based?

Yes. And unrealistic.

I just prefer a more unified and comprehensive theory:

Fighting Hardware
—Grappling
—Striking
—Clinch
—Blundgeon
—Flexible weapons
—Long blade
—Short blade
—Shiv

1. Firearms
   1. Manipulation
   2. Movement in the open
   3. Movement in a structure

—Weapons access
—Weapons prepping
—Weapons of opportunity
—Preemption
—Use of force continuum

Situational Awareness
—Human Behavioral Pattern Recognition and Analysis (AKA Left of Bang)
—Personal awareness (not drawing attention to yourself)
—3rd party awareness

1. Managing unknown contacts
2. Deescalation

—Cultural awareness
—Legal awareness
—Physical security vulnerabilities

1. Non-destructive entry
2. Destructive entry
3. Covert entry
4. Choke points

Here's the funniest thing... what you're describing virtually doesn't exist. All schools will be specialised in one way or another to the methodology and application the school is based around. I am, however, aware of one school that actually does cover almost everything you've mentioned (with the exception of the firearm usage, as it's just not a part of the culture where the dojo exists), with a range of long weapons, mid-range weapons, short weapons, blades, impact weapons, projectile weapons, flexible weapons, composite weapons, unarmed combat covering grappling (standing and ground), striking, choking, locking, throws, weapon defence, weapon retention, improvised weaponry, everyday carry items, modern defensive tactics incorporating group defence, ground control and escape, pre-emptive striking, de-escalation (verbal, non-verbal, aggressive, and non-aggressive)legal considerations, psychological considerations, understanding of predator behaviour, habitual acts of violence (HAoV), protective driving concepts, anti-surveilance (recognising and losing a tail), active event training (shootings, hostage situations, bomb threats), and far, far more. So, what's the catch? You'd need to be in Melbourne, and you'd need to spend the majority of your time doing traditional/classical Japanese martial arts... and you'd need to be having a very different attitude in coming to me.

They seem exclusively focused, via the FMA and Krav Maga, on:
—Grappling
—Striking
—Clinch
—Blundgeon
—Long blade
—Short blade

Of course they do. They know what they do, and (wisely) don't go beyond into areas they don't know.

Here's the reality... martial arts are physical combative methodologies. They are not self defence. They are not legal advice centers. They are not designed to handle, deal with, or contain information beyond how that particular system deals with the concepts and context of violence in the way the school perceives and applies it. A Kendojo will not also spend time dealing with pistol disarms, nor will it talk about the concepts of de-escalation, as it's just not a part of the scope of the class. You want things that cover a wider scope? Either be lunatically lucky in having something that unique near you, or realise you're going to need to look to multiple sources, and expecting the closest, most convenient school to also be catering to everything you think is important, when the majority is outside of the scope of their teaching, is just arrogant and entitled.

I don’t know if my concerns are warranted or not.

Not only are they not warranted from anything we've seen, they're not even realistic.

Maybe they just have a different training mentality than what I’m used to.

What, exactly, is your "training mentality"?

One of the instructors once told me, they kind of limit what they teach about fighting and violence, to avoid frightening fresh students.

Which implies that you get more as you go, and develop within their system. So.... shut up and be a student.

I come from an environment where the instructors openly addressed comments and concerns from the students, and they were knowledgeable enough to give satisfactory responses. Students in turn would have their study groups during open gym.

But you haven't come in with a concern or comment that's worth dealing with. You've been given a drill (which will have specific reasons for it, potentially in this case to get used to weapon handling, or learning various angles and distancing, or particular targets, or the mechanics of cutting, or anything else that can then be built upon), you've said "but why don't we move onto a completely different drill that I think is more practical" (without even stopping to think about why you're doing the drill in the first place), and are told to just do the drill, as it has a specific purpose. That's your answer. It's completely satisfactory. It may not be feeding your ego about thinking you know something (not from what I'm seeing), but it's the answer. And it's valid. It is... shut up and be a student. And you still haven't learnt that very first lesson.

As for students having study groups, if I'm going to authorise that, I want to ensure that the group isn't going to take away from what I'm teaching or conflict with it, as that leads to confusion in the students, so only seniors who are well enough versed in the methods of the school would be able to lead such things... you haven't even learnt the first lesson of being a student, let alone anything about the class to be able to lead any kind of study group. So, I wouldn't let you do it either... and, if I found you were doing that on your own, with my students, you would not be back to the class. It's that simple.

So, you have actually attended classes previously? Based on all your previous threads, you were self learning, looking for video downloads and remote learning opportunities. Has that all changed? Have you actually done a Shivworks course, and if so, which one? You're claiming to potentially know more than your instructor, that's impressive considering how little you knew a short time ago.

Well... that explains a fair bit...

I understand where you’re coming from. Yes, I have. I’ve used remote and in-person learning combined, practicing stuff with other students and willing instructors. I try to “read ahead” if you will. I’ve since changed locations, and it’s difficult to have something consistent, that’s a similar training environment.

So... no, you haven't attended classes previously, as Frank asked... you've used remote learning, and "practiced stuff" with people outside of formal classes. Right.

Isn't the OP's fundamental point about the average carry knife not having the heft for cutting flawed? I mean, my little folding Benchmade with it's tanto style blade is light as feather, sure you're not going to hack or chop bludgeon style with it. But it'll slice you to ribbons. I'm not carrying my big ole heavy kukri knife around.

Almost everything about the OP's OP is flawed...

Well, by cutting, I’m referring to hacking.

So... not "cutting", then.

There’s opening up someone’s arm, and then there’s the arm literally hanging by the tissue.

What are you talking about?

It occurs to me, that if you’re using techniques correctly, it’ll work with a benchmade or a filed-down piece of scrap metal. Difference is, the benchmade will get consistent slices on the way.

It occurs to you that the techniques work. Wow. I'm sure your teachers will be happy to hear that.

Dude. Shut up and be a student.

@hoshin1600 @skribs @MuayJitsu @Buka @gyoja @frank raud @Badhabits @Chris Parker

Initially, I was surprised and off-put by how intense this got. Now though, I’m grateful for the criticism. It’s made me more aware of how I might offend instructors. I will modify my approach accordingly, avoid unintentionally coming off as arrogant or egotistical. Thank you all.

I hope so, but don't see any evidence of it thus far.

Specifically, I was asking about transitioning from the cut of the limb, to the body, while using carry blade, which is essentially what the trainers were. I didn’t think what we were doing made sense, given the type of blade. I’m not sure if he understood me. He light-heartedly chastised me for asking a theoretical question. My partner laughed and told me “you’re overthinking it, just do the drill.” Not wanting to upset anyone, I didn’t press it.

You know another way to say it? Shut up and be a student.

And, you didn't think it "made sense"? Based on... your own incomplete and inaccurate understanding, based on non-education? Without being able to see what the purpose of the drill was? Yeah... you're overthinking, but not overthinking the drill... you're overthinking the idea that you know what you are talking about. Shut up and be a student.

This is what got me worried. Not the drill itself.

Do the drill. Listen to the instructor and your seniors. They know more than you, and far more than you realise. Shut up and be a student already.

Nice knife. “Average” was the wrong word to use. I was referring to the use of cheap trash folders, fruit knives, and blades that haven‘t been freshly sharpened.

Probably the wrong word, yeah.

But in any case, previous observation led me to conclude that weight distribution was what mattered in “defanging.” This footage may have proved that wrong.

Take that feeling (being proven wrong). Keep it. Get used to it.

Still, I take note that from the WWII combatives curriculum, going back to the Romans, that cutting is not the preferred method in lethal force encounters with a knife.

They are military applications, where the aim is to kill the enemy. That is not the reality of a real-world confrontation in the main.

Earlier swords were designed to open up the blood vessels through hacking, and people still fight that way today with machetes,

That's a bizarre way to look at it. No, they are not designed to "open up the blood vessels through hacking", they are designed to remove limbs and whole sections of people by hacking. And that's not knife work. You literally don't have the first clue what you're talking about.

If I remember correctly, once the Rapier was invented, there was less interest in hacking. It became more about smaller movements and stabs.

No, it's that the rapier (which had its own time of being in fashion) is optimal for thrusting, and rather ineffective for cutting, and completely useless for "hacking"... you'll also note the range the thrusts are coming from, which is a factor as to how effective they are to "stop" a fight/encounter. Additionally, they were a duelling weapon, where death was a possibility, but not necessarily an aim... thrusts can be treated and survived, depending on the target... often these duels would be to first strike, not to the death, so small, light actions to gain a speed and reach advantage found popularity. Again, your information is rather incomplete, leading you to lacking understanding.

As @drop bear pointed out—depends on the hardware. The most reliable thing is using the knife, or improvised weapon, to press and hook around the limbs towards vital targets. If you have a sharp knife, you’ll cut regardless doing that. Much like with shooting, you hit quickly several times, whatever targets present themselves, then you run. I should clarify this is strictly for lethal force encounters, and that one should not plan their self-defense around knife, unless you‘re literally out of options. Courts do not like people who stab other people, even if it was completely justified.

Okay, just stop now. You are so out of your depth that it's difficult to know where to start with your lack of understanding and awareness of the actuality of all of this...

"The most reliable thing is..." how do you know? The most reliable in what sense? This comment is completely devoid of context and meaning, and is stated as an absolute when it absolutely is not.

"Much like with shooting, you hit quickly several times, whatever targets present themselves, then you run." What? Where did you get that from? Look, I'm not going to give firearms tactics out, but this is potentially some of the worst advice I can think of.

Then you go on to say this is about lethal force encounters, and that you shouldn't plan around knife, and that courts don't like people who stab other people... er, okay? Then why is it seemingly the only thing you're focused on?

Personally, I'm not overly fond of either of those videos. With the first one (the Libre clip), I have both stylistic and tactical issues with how they do things... relying on the arms, and keeping the body and head basically stationary goes against what we teach, but I can see the systematic reasoning, so not my preference, but okay. More importantly, the many cut response is one I always have issues with, but the biggest problem I have with training like this is the fantasy aspect, born from fear.

This manner of training is, psychologically, an attempt to feel powerful, and the most power you can have is to be in control of someone's life, so such methods have multiple (potentially) lethal actions... however, as a training situation removes the reality from it, the psychological conditioning required to actually bring yourself to a point where you can take someone's life is missing. It becomes just a series of movements, and the reality of the actions is muted. This is what I was getting at with the idea of a knife being used non-lethally (as well as things like stabbing actions being slower to actually stop a threat than you'd expect... you mention in another thread about people stopping as soon as they're stabbed... that's, simply, wildly incorrect).

The second video I find even more inaccurate... an attack, particularly with a weapon, is completely committed to it's execution, especially if you have the weapon, and the other side doesn't. There is no reason that someone with a knife is worried about the "blocks" to the point that they are ready to change direction to counter-cut as the block is attempted... that only happens as an intellectual exercise that is removed from the psychological reality of these situations.

I would say, that in recent time, I’ve gotten used to that. Before, I did both ways.

I don't know what you mean by that... do you mean that "before", whenever that was, you trained in classes as well as videos and seminars, but "in recent time" you've gotten used to... what?

I’ve seen that some instructors provide theory, before providing kata.

Than you have no grasp on the purpose and practice of kata (not that anything you're doing uses kata itself...).

I prefer it that way entirely, because then I understand why I’m doing the drills, and I progress faster.

Except that's not how it works... you do the drills in order to instill the concepts, and then look to the theory to flesh out your understanding. But the drills come first. To go the other way is to fill your head with intellectual concepts without a framework or reference, which stops you from discovering the actuality of the drills, as you're typically far too much in your head thinking you already know it.

I try to research what will be taught at a class or seminar before attending, so that I better absorb what’s taught, and can ask more technical question. Some instructors make this up on the go, so….that requires intensive research.

Firstly, you're not in a position to actually "research". Secondly, if they're "making it up as they go", leave. If they are, in the moment, expressing ingrained principles, and therefore don't need to work to a script, that's exactly the opposite, and will be consistent. Stop, listen to them in the moment, and don't try to think you already know what to look at or for. You'll miss every single lesson.

I‘ve started to realize the nuance of this within FMA. However, I get concerned that doing slicing motions with the knife on the body, will train bad habits, which will not be transferrable if I’m using something dull.

Actions are instrument and context dependent. I don't use the exact same methods with a staff and a sword, although the same ryu-ha will share a great deal, the instrument itself will factor a great deal. Bluntly, you're barely a beginner who thinks they're an expert... take the time to actually train, and learn for the first time. This is not an issue, it's your mind and ego thinking you already know something you simply don't. And, realistically, you are not, in any way, likely to actually use any of this outside of the training hall itself (Krav Maga and FMA? It ain't a dojo, you know... same reason there's no kata there...). But you may also note that Monkey said "no matter what size BLADE you use, the skills will be transferable"...

I mean…it wasn’t intended to be a comparison.

I mean... you literally wrote "a fruit knife versus a machete"... that's kinda the definition of a comparison... or is this another communication issue where you write something, and it means something completely different to its literal meaning to you?

 

[isshinryuronin]

So... not "cutting", then.

Right. Cutting vs hacking/chopping, so different in every respect - biomechanically, tactically, purpose and even the spirit in which they're executed.

you do the drills in order to instill the concepts, and then look to the theory to flesh out your understanding. But the drills come first. To go the other way is to fill your head with intellectual concepts without a framework or reference, which stops you from discovering the actuality of the drills,

Agree. The theory is contained in the drill/kata. Without experiencing the "what" and "how", the details of "why" are difficult to understand and internalize. As Ed Parker was fond of saying, ".....to hear is to misunderstand, but to feel is to know." That said, for someone not engaged in and oriented to physical execution, I think it's natural for them to default to intellectualizing. Misguided, but not a crime.

BTW, we know Musashi was particular about "cutting," but you did a job hacking on poor GreenieMeanie. He seems naïve, young, confused, inexperienced and overreaching his knowledge, but not of ill intent. Perhaps rather than chopping him up, a couple of clean cuts would have done the job.

 

[Chris Parker]

BTW, we know Musashi was particular about "cutting," but you did a job hacking on poor GreenieMeanie. He seems naïve, young, confused, inexperienced and overreaching his knowledge, but not of ill intent. Perhaps rather than chopping him up, a couple of clean cuts would have done the job.

Well... Musashi made distinctions between "hitting" and "striking"... but also said that, when taking up a sword, the only thought should be to cut the other man down. He was also rather famous for his sharp and immediate takedown of anyone that he saw as incorrect... so, yeah, this is actually very "Musashi" of me, so you know... besides which, our OP has been here for close to 3 years at this point, so a bit beyond being a complete neophyte to the forum. Ill intent? Perhaps not. Ill effect? Perhaps. And I've seen too many "students" come in thinking they already know it all... if that's the case, you have no need to be a student, so stop wasting my and the other (real) students' time... off you go.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

My recommendation on swords and knives for anyone that is highly interested.

There are some documentaries on historical weapons that are created by well known education based TV networks like The Discovery Channel, The BBC, and national Geographic that give really good historical context of swords. I think it will give you a healthy historical perspective of why sword and knives were made with a specific type of design to address the purpose of the blade. Things like curved blade and straight blade serve different functions and require specific techniques to be be efficient with.

Some weapons were dueling weapons while others where made for the battlefield against armor and Lance. Just like modern day guns. Some are for civilian purposes and others are for military purposed.

Much of this knowledge is historical so the most reliable place for this information are museums and historical organizations. They have already spoken to the experts of the blase. Not just from the use but from the perspectives of the blacksmith.

Skallagirm, Scholalgladiator on youtube.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

I don’t recommend this.

Does anyone recommend stabbing their way out of life or death situation? That’s a pretty bad life circumstance to be in.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Let's go through this again... I'm not sure the message is actually getting through...



This isn't vitriol, and is incredibly level-headed. You don't know what on earth you're talking about, or asking, and are expecting to be catered to. That's not expecting a level-headed discussion, it's expecting to be told you're right all the time... you aren't. I suggest you get used to that feeling if you're going to train in a class.

I mean…this has gotten you rather…passionate in the tone. It would seem to me, that you’re restraining yourself from screaming and cursing altogether.

That's not an answer to 95% of my questions, and not even an answer as to why there. Care to try again?

Literally….limited options…not a lot of places to choose from geograpically.

You may indeed have. But my point is more that "average/typical" blade carried will vary greatly depending on where you are (hence the question as to whether you are in the Philippines). The majority of people carrying a knife don't know what to do with it, though...and I note again that the majority of my questions go unanswered

Fair enough.

Sure, it will be considered a lethal force weapon... but does that mean your tactics and application have to be lethal? A knife is a utilitarian tool primarily, that can act as a weapon... but this focus on lethality is, again, fear-based and unrealistic.

Lethal force means, that if it’s coming out, it’s to kill. Period. If your intention wasn’t to kill, and you had no reason to kill, that will probably hurt your legal defense. I do not know how it is in Australia, but in the US legal community, the general mentality is that you’re not using a gun or knife to “put em down easy.” If it’s anything like what I hear about the UK establishment’s wishful thinking about violence, then….

Here's the funniest thing... what you're describing virtually doesn't exist. All schools will be specialised in one way or another to the methodology and application the school is based around.

Some schools have regular seminars for these things

Here's the reality... martial arts are physical combative methodologies. They are not self defence. They are not legal advice centers.

Unless your focus is “non-permissive environments,” are you really teaching self-defense properly, if you‘re unable to complement the curriculum with legal advice?

expecting the closest, most convenient school to also be catering to everything you think is important, when the majority is outside of the scope of their teaching, is just arrogant and entitled.

I expect open-mindedness, not catering.

So... no, you haven't attended classes previously, as Frank asked... you've used remote learning, and "practiced stuff" with people outside of formal classes. Right.

Ok, tell me I haven’t attended classes before. I don’t care if you believe that or not.

I think you’ve gotten a bit presumptuous, given communication with someone you’ve never met. But I suppose that comes with the territory, in online text-based conversation. In any case, I think you’ve already made up your mind about me, which would make any further response or clarification a waste of time. Given the conclusions you’ve come to, I imagine you’d be thinking the same soon enough.

 

[GreenieMeanie]

Right. Cutting vs hacking/chopping, so different in every respect - biomechanically, tactically, purpose and even the spirit in which they're executed.

I agree I’ve made semantical errors.

Agree. The theory is contained in the drill/kata. Without experiencing the "what" and "how", the details of "why" are difficult to understand and internalize

It’s worked out pretty well for me so far.

for someone not engaged in and oriented to physical execution…

If that’s what you believe, then so be it