Is Knife defence even worth teaching?

[Dirty Dog]

If knife defense is taught correctly, it is invaluable. There are two fundamental rules:

1. You're most likely gonna get cut. Minimize the damage you take, maximize the damage you give.
2. If in doubt, see rule #1.

Remember that the attacker's focus is on the knife and his mindset is that he is superior because he is armed. Once you break his focus, you gain the advantage and you don't stop until he's on the ground and incapable of fighting with you any more. He's presented deadly force against you, so he's bought and paid for in my book. Anything you do is justified, up to and including lethal force in return.

I would add "control the weapon" as a fundamental rule. I agree with you on the mindset, though. On the occasions that I've been faced with a knife, the attacker has completely ignored their other limbs. They would struggle to regain control of the knife hand, but they never even tried to strike with their other hand. I've seen this in training as well. The weapon becomes THE weapon, to the exclusion of other options, to most people.

 

[lklawson]

Remember that the attacker's focus is on the knife

You sure about that? Cuz I know lots of folks who train knife and an important part of the training is that they're more than just the knife.

and his mindset is that he is superior because he is armed.

Umm... That's the whole point of weapons. They're a "Force Multiplier." Weapons are what lets smaller, weaker, less trained individuals overcome stronger, larger, better trained unarmed individuals. They do more damage than bare hands. It's why they were invented.

Once you break his focus, you gain the advantage and you don't stop until he's on the ground and incapable of fighting with you any more.

And, by corollary, once you realize you're cut it breaks your focus.

He's presented deadly force against you, so he's bought and paid for in my book. Anything you do is justified, up to and including lethal force in return.

So which is it, are weapons not "superior" or are they "deadly force?"

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

I would add "control the weapon" as a fundamental rule.

I teach "control the weapon bearing limb" instead of "control the weapon."

On the occasions that I've been faced with a knife, the attacker has completely ignored their other limbs. They would struggle to regain control of the knife hand, but they never even tried to strike with their other hand. I've seen this in training as well. The weapon becomes THE weapon, to the exclusion of other options, to most people.

That's just a matter of training. Most of the knife specific martial arts I've trained with go to great lengths to emphasize that you're more than just the knife. The Dog Brothers (and many others) teach ways to overcome and train out of "Monkey Fist Syndrome" and many FMA arts specifically call the hand without the weapon a "Live Hand" specifically to remind the practitioner that they've got another hand and they should use it.

So just because untrained people do one thing doesn't mean that we should expect everyone to do that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Dirty Dog]

I teach "control the weapon bearing limb" instead of "control the weapon."

Same idea, different words.

That's just a matter of training. Most of the knife specific martial arts I've trained with go to great lengths to emphasize that you're more than just the knife. The Dog Brothers (and many others) teach ways to overcome and train out of "Monkey Fist Syndrome" and many FMA arts specifically call the hand without the weapon a "Live Hand" specifically to remind the practitioner that they've got another hand and they should use it.

So just because untrained people do one thing doesn't mean that we should expect everyone to do that.

Of course. But the vast majority of people using a knife don't have any formal training. They just know "hold the dull end and stick them with the sharp end." I'm not saying I would ignore their other limbs. I'm saying that, in the vast majority of cases, they will do so.
As with unarmed combat; train to fight a trained attacker, but know that you're more likely to face an untrained or minimally trained attacker.

 

[drop bear]

A week into learning knife defence as a kid I gave a sick to a friend and told him to "come at me bro"

He punched me in the face with his free hand. Then stabbed me.

 

[drop bear]

I personally think the odds of being cut controlling the limb are about the same as just bashing the guy.

For the same set of preconceptions. Either they are fighting their hand free and not stabbing you. Or defending shots and not stabbing you.

 

[lklawson]

I personally think the odds of being cut controlling the limb are about the same as just bashing the guy.

For the same set of preconceptions. Either they are fighting their hand free and not stabbing you. Or defending shots and not stabbing you.

Use one of the "marking" trainers or a "shock knife" and pressure test. My person pressure tests give a slight "edge" (har har) to controlling the limb and punching over just punching. But try it yourself.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[drop bear]

Use one of the "marking" trainers or a "shock knife" and pressure test. My person pressure tests give a slight "edge" (har har) to controlling the limb and punching over just punching. But try it yourself.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Yeah i got some aluminium knives i will give it a go with those.

(i mean i would love some shock knives. They are just a bit costy. )

 

[JP3]

In some play with the shock knives we learned (really quick, I might add) that going in on the knife-hand side (the armed side) is kind of a losing endeavor, for both trained and non-trained (lower rank) people. We did it with various combinations, body sizes, etc. and entering the fray moving into the armed opponent on the unarmed "side" worked about 3x better (very "sorta" measured in how many times shocked silly) than in coming in vs. the armed side. It makes sense, doesn't it. "Stay away from the blade." Well, duh. Much harder to do than to say, but really, really worth the time spent training it, in my opinion.

 

[drop bear]

Well it seem the general trend is to go in from that position.

You are in range you go forwards and clean the guy up. In some fashion.

I was thinking go out. You are in range create space run for the hills. Even if you are chased I think you are better able to defend if they are overextended.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hey Kirk,

You sure about that? Cuz I know lots of folks who train knife and an important part of the training is that they're more than just the knife.

Not to speak for Balrog, but I don't feel that's who he's talking about… most knife assaults aren't by people who train in knife… so while you're absolutely right that those who do tend to have a great understanding that the knife is but one option (and not the real "power"), a mugger/assailant is specifically using a weapon to give themselves an "edge" (ha!)… it becomes almost a talisman… an external "power" that is used to give an advantage over others… which means that yeah, they do tend to get rather overly focused on the knife itself.

Umm... That's the whole point of weapons. They're a "Force Multiplier." Weapons are what lets smaller, weaker, less trained individuals overcome stronger, larger, better trained unarmed individuals. They do more damage than bare hands. It's why they were invented.

Sort of… but you're only looking at part of the story there. As mentioned, it's a talisman in the arms of a mugger… not something necessarily to even to anything more than scare the victim into compliance… or it might be to make up for some perceived weakness… regardless, at this point, we're not looking at tactical advantages of a knife (or other weapon), but psychological advantages.

One thing I point out to my guys fairly regularly is that an attacker is (most often) attacking because they feel they have an advantage… you pretty much never get attacked by someone wanting a "fair fight". Now, that advantage could be real, or perceived… it might be size, strength, experience, confidence (whether internal, or from the added influence of drugs or alcohol… or even social pressures…), numbers advantages (groups), or some form of weapon, whether revealed (threatening) or hidden (ambush). When we take that to the usage of a weapon in an assault, the weapon is used (chosen) for it's inherent ability to put the attacker "above" the victim… if you threaten that weapon, you threaten to take them back down to a level they're not wanting to be at… so yeah, the focus in on the weapon (above and beyond the rest of the body), as the reasons for using them aren't the same as a trained individual's understanding of the tactical advantages of the item itself.

And, by corollary, once you realize you're cut it breaks your focus.

Yep. Of course, how you break focus matters (theirs and yours)… as well as to what level.

So which is it, are weapons not "superior" or are they "deadly force?"

I don't think that's what he was saying… he was saying that the mindset (attitude, psychology) of the attacker is that they are (now) superior (to the victim) as they have a greater power (the weapon)… which represents deadly force. Not that the weapon itself is superior.

I teach "control the weapon bearing limb" instead of "control the weapon."

Yep. The way I teach my guys is that if you're not in control of the weapon (usually by restricting usage of the controlling limb, as well as a few other aspects), then they are. So that has to be a primary tactic in handling a weapon assault.

That's just a matter of training. Most of the knife specific martial arts I've trained with go to great lengths to emphasize that you're more than just the knife. The Dog Brothers (and many others) teach ways to overcome and train out of "Monkey Fist Syndrome" and many FMA arts specifically call the hand without the weapon a "Live Hand" specifically to remind the practitioner that they've got another hand and they should use it.

Sure… but again, you're talking about trained persons… which is not what would be commonly encountered. I mean, you're even addressing (or mentioning how others address) the issue of how untrained persons engage with a knife ("Monkey Fist Syndrome")…

So just because untrained people do one thing doesn't mean that we should expect everyone to do that.

True, but it's also very important to look at (and give your focus to) exactly what the most likely forms of attack would be… training for a highly unlikely possibility due to the idea that "well, you can't expect everyone to do the same thing" is not an overtly realistic training paradigm, honestly… it's like studying Icelandic before a trip to Japan just in case you run into Bjork there… sure, it may happen… but you're better off learning Japanese.

A week into learning knife defence as a kid I gave a sick to a friend and told him to "come at me bro"

He punched me in the face with his free hand. Then stabbed me.

As amusing as that visual is, there are some issues to look at.

As mentioned, the usage of a knife is often a psychological advantage (unless the knife is hidden… in which case it's about assassination… but that's a very different set up)… giving him a stick, he didn't (psychologically) feel he had a knife… so went to what he felt was a powerful attack (in this case, a punch). He would most likely have felt that an attack with a stick isn't that powerful… especially a stabbing action… however, an actual knife would have had him more likely to lead with it.

I personally think the odds of being cut controlling the limb are about the same as just bashing the guy.

For the same set of preconceptions. Either they are fighting their hand free and not stabbing you. Or defending shots and not stabbing you.

Based on what? Your lack of experience?

Here's the thing… if they have a knife, and you're coming in with a barrage of attacks, but not controlling the weapon arm at all, you're likely dealing with defensive flailing… which will, in no uncertain terms, cut you up a hell of a lot. So… you may want to rethink your grasp on the topic.

Say, here's a good article that covers many ideas that I'm talking about here. It's specifically about knife against knife, but also deals with unarmed against knife… anyway, have a read. It's rather accurate. Lies about knife fighting

Yeah i got some aluminium knives i will give it a go with those.

(i mean i would love some shock knives. They are just a bit costy. )

You won't necessarily know where you're "touched/cut" with the aluminium knives… which is why Kirk suggested marked trainers (lipstick on the edge of a rubber training knife is good…) or shock knives.

In some play with the shock knives we learned (really quick, I might add) that going in on the knife-hand side (the armed side) is kind of a losing endeavor, for both trained and non-trained (lower rank) people. We did it with various combinations, body sizes, etc. and entering the fray moving into the armed opponent on the unarmed "side" worked about 3x better (very "sorta" measured in how many times shocked silly) than in coming in vs. the armed side. It makes sense, doesn't it. "Stay away from the blade." Well, duh. Much harder to do than to say, but really, really worth the time spent training it, in my opinion.

Hi JP,

Out of interest, how much time is spent in your dojo dealing with knife response? And how much in knife training?

Thing is, "stay away from the blade", unless you manage to create quite a bit of distance (to escape) is really a short-term defence… and gets overwhelmed pretty quickly. You can only avoid for so long… eventually (pretty soon, really) you'll get caught… and then, well, it's the beginning of the end…

Well it seem the general trend is to go in from that position.

You are in range you go forwards and clean the guy up. In some fashion.

I was thinking go out. You are in range create space run for the hills. Even if you are chased I think you are better able to defend if they are overextended.

Ah, Peter… he's got some good stuff, but a lot that I'm less fond of… some overly complicated, and technical responses which have little chance of working, but look great demo'd against training partners half his size standing still…

That said, the reason "go in and control" is the go-to for the vast majority of knife defence methodologies is because, well, it is your best chance at survival. Sure, if you get the opportunity, create distance (a lot of distance!), escape, and get out of there… but, if you can't do that, your best option is to engage, which will mean going in hard, fast, and with a focus on controlling the opponent's weapon arm first. The issue with your idea of "even if you are chased I think you are better able to defend if they are overextended" has some basic logic to it (more time, more leverage, greater range to see what is coming), but sadly, reality isn't so nice as to follow that form of logic. If you are being chased, that's when the non-weapon arm will come into it, by reaching out and catching you. And, if your back is to them, all they really need is a fingertip on you to unbalance you, at which point you're stabbed when you try to turn or maintain balance… so being chased is not good. If you turn to face before they get that close, you're back at the same starting point that we were at before the chase… and now you still have to cover a large range of distance to get in past the weapon arm in order to defend successfully.

So, while it can make some clean logic devoid of the realities of life, in the real world it's a bit different.

 

[drop bear]

Based on what? Your lack of experience?

Here's the thing… if they have a knife, and you're coming in with a barrage of attacks, but not controlling the weapon arm at all, you're likely dealing with defensive flailing… which will, in no uncertain terms, cut you up a hell of a lot. So… you may want to rethink your grasp on the topic.

Say, here's a good article that covers many ideas that I'm talking about here. It's specifically about knife against knife, but also deals with unarmed against knife… anyway, have a read. It's rather accurate. Lies about knife fighting

 

[Chris Parker]

So… your argument about when you're likely to not get stabbed is that you've been stabbed, so you don't know how to avoid it?

You do realise that this picture tells us absolutely nothing, other than that you don't wax, yeah? That's with the assumption it actually is you, of course…

 

[drop bear]

So… your argument about when you're likely to not get stabbed is that you've been stabbed, so you don't know how to avoid it?

You do realise that this picture tells us absolutely nothing, other than that you don't wax, yeah? That's with the assumption it actually is you, of course…

My lack of experience was brought into question. I suppose I will now have to bring up yours. Realities of the real world and all that.

Actually that wasn't me. It was a mate of mine. But any of us could have been stabbed in that fight.

 

[Chris Parker]

So… not even your experience. Okay. Are you actually going to attempt to answer the question, then? Or post pictures of other people as if it answers something?

 

[drop bear]

So… not even your experience. Okay. Are you actually going to attempt to answer the question, then? Or post pictures of other people as if it answers something?

My experience I just didn't get stabbed. Mate got stabbed and we jumped on the guy.

So again your real world experience is? Seeing as we are bringing this into question.

 

[RTKDCMB]

so being chased is not good. If you turn to face before they get that close, you're back at the same starting point that we were at before the chase…

Only a lot more tired.

 

[drop bear]

I think people forget that we are dealing with a method that probably won't work. Which sucks. I know I would not like to train for years and still be a very small chance of winning an unarmed against knife. But it is what it is.

 

[Chris Parker]

Sigh… read the Marc MacYoung link I provided. Then tell me we're forgetting such things.

 

[drop bear]

Sigh… read the Marc MacYoung link I provided. Then tell me we're forgetting such things.

Read it. You are forgetting such things.