Knife Myths

[RTKDCMB]

'Cause that seems pertinent to the thread....

Sorry should have replied with a quote. See posts #3,5,6 and 7.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Don't remember the last time I was attacked with a Claymore sword.

Then you're just not hanging out with the right people...

 

[Mark Jacobs]

Sorry to revive an old thread but just came across this posting by accident and thought to jump in since I wrote the story under discussion.

First of all, I appreciate MJS just reading my column in Black Belt, it’s nice to know someone actually does. But it can always be problematical to an author when things he writes are paraphrased or taken as excerpts rather than the whole work so I just thought I’d clarify a few points.

As to my not identifying my source, I admit this is less than ideal. But I also point out in the original story that the so-called “expert” is a professional in the medical industry and it would probably not help his standing there to be seen giving out advice on knife fighting so the only way he would agree to be interviewed was if I did not use his name. I can only say he is very knowledgeable in both bladed martial arts and the medical field and because of this duel expertise, he takes more than a passing interest in the medical side of knife wounds. As a journalist, I’ll also say that any time a writer uses an anonymous source, you can only judge its merit on the past history of the writer. If their past work has proven factual and reliable, you can give the claims of their anonymous sources more credence. Don’t know how reliable I’ve proven over the years but I do tend to double check most information I get and have conducted extensive interviews with multiple medical experts in the course of writing a book on martial arts. Though that was a book on unarmed combat, I couldn’t help straying into asking a few of them about weaponry and most of what my “expert” on this story told me jibed with what others had said, as well as with my own knowledge from training with bladed weapons over the years. While I definitely do not consider myself an expert with knives, I have trained off and on with weapons for many years including a number of occasions with Bill McGrath, who was mentioned above, and quite a bit with various other senior instructors of pekiti tirsia as well as instructors in other Filipino and non-Filipino knife techniques. Also acquainted with Michael Janich from a video project we worked on together some years back and having interviewed him for other blade-related stories and, as someone else mentioned, he’s a good guy.

To address the specific “myths” from the story (I believe I only use that word once, in passing):

1. About killing people quickly and easily with a blade, the exact quote that I originally wrote (and the editors do sometimes make changes to the final version which I have no control over) was: “...according to The Expert, ‘There are very few places you can put a knife in someone where they will drop instantly.’
Though pain or shock may make many people immediately stop fighting when cut by a knife, The Expert points out to me that people under the influence of drugs, in a psychotic state, or just very strong and determined, may be able to keep fighting for some time despite suffering lethal wounds from a knife.”

Several people have already commented on the veracity of this and I was simply pointing out that, while you might be able to deliver a lethal wound with a knife, that will not always mean a “quick kill.”

2. About targets, the size of the blade and defanging the snake: I never actually use the term “defanging the snake” though some of what I address is related to that concept. Also, here I was primarily talking about the use of smaller blades (four inches or less) and cutting with the edge rather than stabbing. However, simple math should tell you that stabs with a short blade can be less effective. If you have a folding knife less than three inches (all that’s legal where I live) the maximum you can penetrate is a little less than three inches in depth. When you consider that you can’t count on driving the knife up to its hilt, you may have to go through several layers of clothing, and you might even be fighting someone with a lot of fat or muscle on their body, such a blade may, effectively, only penetrate 2 inches or less. Though still potentially very dangerous, obviously this is less than ideal.

3. About the consequences of cuts to the inside of the arm, the exact original quote was: “Such techniques are sometimes taught as a means of disarming an attacker by cutting their weapon arm. But again, these sort of techniques frequently appear as if they’re meant to be done with a very large blade. It’s questionable how much damage can be done to an attacker’s arm merely by cutting and slashing at it with a smaller knife.”

Again, was talking specifically about cutting with the edge and using a small blade. I was not saying it’s impossible to do damage this way, just that it’s probably less likely than what is generally taught in many Filipino schools if you’re using a small blade, especially if your opponent is wearing some heavy clothing. I also did address the type of damage that can be caused there, which would include severing the tendons on the inside of the wrist, which I’m told control your ability to close the hand and is thus obviously important to holding a weapon.

4. About a knife cutting through clothing, the original quote was: “Such cuts, and even thrusts to vital targets, are also often greatly mitigated by an opponent’s clothing, particularly something like a heavy winter coat. This is not to say if you’re the one facing a knife you should take a cavalier approach to defending yourself since, again, any serious knife wound can eventually prove fatal.”

Yes, heavy clothing is no assurance against being injured by even a small knife but it would also seem obvious that it can often mitigate the results of a knife attack, something that does not get talked about often enough in many schools that teach such things.

Though I may have generalized what I said in the story (which is hard not to do when they only give you 1000 words for a column) I tried not to make anything I said completely definitive since there are always a million variables that go into combat. And this was written for a general martial arts reading audience, many of whom likely have little or no experience with bladed weapons. Further, I was not looking to encourage anyone to knife fight or trying to provide them with information on how best to stab people. Simply trying to point out some fallacies in some of the information out there.

As for the experience of knife fighting “masters” again I’ll point out most people teaching this stuff have never used or defended against a knife for real and many of them were taught by people with a similar lack of real experience. And even one or two real world confrontations is not really enough to make hard, empirical judgements on what works. Though someone in the lineage of these styles may have had a lot of real world experience, unless you are doing it for real yourself, or at least witnessing it being done for real, I find that such knowledge tends to very quickly stray from the practical into the realm of the wholly theoretical.

Finally, for anyone interested, I’ve got a column on the aforementioned Bill McGrath that should be coming out in Black Belt in the next month or two and another column featuring Bill’s former teacher, Leo Gaje, which should appear in the next 3-6 months (never know exactly when with their production schedule).

 

[Dirty Dog]

2. About targets, the size of the blade and defanging the snake: I never actually use the term “defanging the snake” though some of what I address is related to that concept. Also, here I was primarily talking about the use of smaller blades (four inches or less) and cutting with the edge rather than stabbing. However, simple math should tell you that stabs with a short blade can be less effective. If you have a folding knife less than three inches (all that’s legal where I live) the maximum you can penetrate is a little less than three inches in depth. When you consider that you can’t count on driving the knife up to its hilt, you may have to go through several layers of clothing, and you might even be fighting someone with a lot of fat or muscle on their body, such a blade may, effectively, only penetrate 2 inches or less. Though still potentially very dangerous, obviously this is less than ideal.

Welcome to MT.
I'm in agreement with most of what you just posted, but this one thing I disagree with, in a minor way.
If you limit your statement to cuts, then yes, the blade will penetrate to a maximum of slightly less than its length (and usually significantly less than its length). However, when used as a stabbing weapon, blades will penetrate well beyond their length. The human body is quite smooshy, and will compress when stabbed. I've seen many stab wounds over the years that were as much as twice the length of the blade and occassionally even more. The specific target of the knife will have the greatest impact on this,m obviously. A stab wound to the chest will not penetrate as far beyond the length of the blade as one to the abdomen.

 

[chinto]

OK folks, here is my 2 cents worth. I am an X EMT, and I have Friends in the Prison industry... First of all, with a blade, there are good and better targets, NO BAD TARGETS! ( ask any Prison Guard about edged weapons, or better yet their medical staff!!) next, people with blades tend to make sure your dead if homicide was the object of the exercise! next, at least in the western world so called Knife Fights are NOT duels! they are Ambushes! and usually the first thing the one being ambushed by a knife knows about that knife being involved they have been cut or stabbed!.. All that said, yes heavy clothing can give some protection. yes you can survive being cut, and even stabbed depending one where. ( but ask any prison nurse about how many die with knife wounds in prisons, and people with blades tend to cut and stab a lot of times!! NOT JUST ONCE!) So the answer is folks, a blade is present, brake contact and run if you can, if not get very serious about KILLING that attacker fast! It is with OUT QUESTION a DEADLY FORCE encounter!!!

Oh and on the above, the Romans did a real careful research project way way back, and they found that 2 inches of blade in the body can kill very efficiently. stab hard with a 2 inch blade and you may get as much as 3 or even 4 inches penitration depending on where you stabbed! Steel does damage every where it cuts or stabs! Good Targets and BETTER TARGETS are all that exist for that blade.

 

[Cyriacus]

4. About a knife cutting through clothing, the original quote was: “Such cuts, and even thrusts to vital targets, are also often greatly mitigated by an opponent’s clothing, particularly something like a heavy winter coat. This is not to say if you’re the one facing a knife you should take a cavalier approach to defending yourself since, again, any serious knife wound can eventually prove fatal.”

Yes, heavy clothing is no assurance against being injured by even a small knife but it would also seem obvious that it can often mitigate the results of a knife attack, something that does not get talked about often enough in many schools that teach such things.

Id like to add that a heavy winter coat doesnt cover your eyes, and may not cover your neck.

 

[MJS]

Sorry to revive an old thread but just came across this posting by accident and thought to jump in since I wrote the story under discussion.

First of all, I appreciate MJS just reading my column in Black Belt, it’s nice to know someone actually does. But it can always be problematical to an author when things he writes are paraphrased or taken as excerpts rather than the whole work so I just thought I’d clarify a few points.

Welcome to MT Mark. I've been a subscriber of BB for a while, so when I saw this article, I thought it was discussion worthy. Furthermore, as a student of the FMAs, I enjoy blade articles. As for the rest...I couldn't find an exact link to the article, and forum policy states that snippits of articles may be posted, not entire articles, thus my taking from the article and condensing here. I apologize if things were lost by doing that.

As to my not identifying my source, I admit this is less than ideal. But I also point out in the original story that the so-called “expert” is a professional in the medical industry and it would probably not help his standing there to be seen giving out advice on knife fighting so the only way he would agree to be interviewed was if I did not use his name. I can only say he is very knowledgeable in both bladed martial arts and the medical field and because of this duel expertise, he takes more than a passing interest in the medical side of knife wounds. As a journalist, I’ll also say that any time a writer uses an anonymous source, you can only judge its merit on the past history of the writer. If their past work has proven factual and reliable, you can give the claims of their anonymous sources more credence. Don’t know how reliable I’ve proven over the years but I do tend to double check most information I get and have conducted extensive interviews with multiple medical experts in the course of writing a book on martial arts. Though that was a book on unarmed combat, I couldn’t help straying into asking a few of them about weaponry and most of what my “expert” on this story told me jibed with what others had said, as well as with my own knowledge from training with bladed weapons over the years. While I definitely do not consider myself an expert with knives, I have trained off and on with weapons for many years including a number of occasions with Bill McGrath, who was mentioned above, and quite a bit with various other senior instructors of pekiti tirsia as well as instructors in other Filipino and non-Filipino knife techniques. Also acquainted with Michael Janich from a video project we worked on together some years back and having interviewed him for other blade-related stories and, as someone else mentioned, he’s a good guy.

Points taken. I"ll have to take your word on this, as I don't know the person in question.

To address the specific “myths” from the story (I believe I only use that word once, in passing):

1. About killing people quickly and easily with a blade, the exact quote that I originally wrote (and the editors do sometimes make changes to the final version which I have no control over) was: “...according to The Expert, ‘There are very few places you can put a knife in someone where they will drop instantly.’
Though pain or shock may make many people immediately stop fighting when cut by a knife, The Expert points out to me that people under the influence of drugs, in a psychotic state, or just very strong and determined, may be able to keep fighting for some time despite suffering lethal wounds from a knife.”

Several people have already commented on the veracity of this and I was simply pointing out that, while you might be able to deliver a lethal wound with a knife, that will not always mean a “quick kill.”

Agreed.

2. About targets, the size of the blade and defanging the snake: I never actually use the term “defanging the snake” though some of what I address is related to that concept. Also, here I was primarily talking about the use of smaller blades (four inches or less) and cutting with the edge rather than stabbing. However, simple math should tell you that stabs with a short blade can be less effective. If you have a folding knife less than three inches (all that’s legal where I live) the maximum you can penetrate is a little less than three inches in depth. When you consider that you can’t count on driving the knife up to its hilt, you may have to go through several layers of clothing, and you might even be fighting someone with a lot of fat or muscle on their body, such a blade may, effectively, only penetrate 2 inches or less. Though still potentially very dangerous, obviously this is less than ideal.

Points taken, however, if we look at the average prison shank, we'll usually see smaller tools, rather than anything large. Their goal is to have an effective killing weapon, but small enough to easily conceal.

3. About the consequences of cuts to the inside of the arm, the exact original quote was: “Such techniques are sometimes taught as a means of disarming an attacker by cutting their weapon arm. But again, these sort of techniques frequently appear as if they’re meant to be done with a very large blade. It’s questionable how much damage can be done to an attacker’s arm merely by cutting and slashing at it with a smaller knife.”

I can agree with that, and I'd also say this pertains to disarms as well. Look at the typical knife training blade and we'll see a larger weapon, rather than the smaller pocket knife size trainers that're out there. I have changed over to the smaller trainers, as once you do this, you'll see how difficult some things can be. I feel that it also depends on how the cut is applied. Personally, I tend to not fall into the 1 shot, 1 kill crowd, so sure, I may not get the same results as if I was using a butcher knife, but those small cuts here and there, do add up, and do buy time to allow the person to follow up with other things.

Again, was talking specifically about cutting with the edge and using a small blade. I was not saying it’s impossible to do damage this way, just that it’s probably less likely than what is generally taught in many Filipino schools if you’re using a small blade, especially if your opponent is wearing some heavy clothing. I also did address the type of damage that can be caused there, which would include severing the tendons on the inside of the wrist, which I’m told control your ability to close the hand and is thus obviously important to holding a weapon.

Yup.

4. About a knife cutting through clothing, the original quote was: “Such cuts, and even thrusts to vital targets, are also often greatly mitigated by an opponent’s clothing, particularly something like a heavy winter coat. This is not to say if you’re the one facing a knife you should take a cavalier approach to defending yourself since, again, any serious knife wound can eventually prove fatal.”

True. Of course, in that case, I'd imagine the person would just go for targets that're less protected.

Though I may have generalized what I said in the story (which is hard not to do when they only give you 1000 words for a column) I tried not to make anything I said completely definitive since there are always a million variables that go into combat. And this was written for a general martial arts reading audience, many of whom likely have little or no experience with bladed weapons. Further, I was not looking to encourage anyone to knife fight or trying to provide them with information on how best to stab people. Simply trying to point out some fallacies in some of the information out there.

As for the experience of knife fighting “masters” again I’ll point out most people teaching this stuff have never used or defended against a knife for real and many of them were taught by people with a similar lack of real experience. And even one or two real world confrontations is not really enough to make hard, empirical judgements on what works. Though someone in the lineage of these styles may have had a lot of real world experience, unless you are doing it for real yourself, or at least witnessing it being done for real, I find that such knowledge tends to very quickly stray from the practical into the realm of the wholly theoretical.

Finally, for anyone interested, I’ve got a column on the aforementioned Bill McGrath that should be coming out in Black Belt in the next month or two and another column featuring Bill’s former teacher, Leo Gaje, which should appear in the next 3-6 months (never know exactly when with their production schedule).

Good points, and I'd say that what you said really applies to any aspect of fighting. Until we're literally under the gun, so to speak, the best we can do is learn quality, effective techniques, and train as realistic as possible. Yes, I know we can't replicate things 100%, but with the right mindset and training, we can get pretty close.

Again, welcome to the forum, and I look forward to more of your contribution.

Mike

 

[Tez3]

Dirty Dog...smooshy?

Interesting discussion though. I do know that often editors change and cut articles to suit themselves so it's good to have it from the horse's mouth as it were.

 

[Carol]

No he's not...

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Mark Jacobs]

Welcome to MT Mark. I've been a subscriber of BB for a while,

So you’re the one!

so when I saw this article, I thought it was discussion worthy. Furthermore, as a student of the FMAs, I enjoy blade articles. As for the rest...I couldn't find an exact link to the article, and forum policy states that snippits of articles may be posted, not entire articles, thus my taking from the article and condensing here. I apologize if things were lost by doing that.

No problem with reposting snippets of what I write and most of your questions and comments were perfectly valid. And, to be honest, I don’t know if I even have a copy of that issue of the magazine so I’m not sure what the final version said. I was referencing it off what I had on my computer so what appeared in Black Belt may well be a little different from what I wrote. As Tez3 says below, if there are doubts, it’s good to get confirmation from the author.

I can agree with that, and I'd also say this pertains to disarms as well. Look at the typical knife training blade and we'll see a larger weapon, rather than the smaller pocket knife size trainers that're out there. I have changed over to the smaller trainers, as once you do this, you'll see how difficult some things can be. I feel that it also depends on how the cut is applied. Personally, I tend to not fall into the 1 shot, 1 kill crowd, so sure, I may not get the same results as if I was using a butcher knife, but those small cuts here and there, do add up, and do buy time to allow the person to follow up with other things.

A couple of other things we could toss out there are the differences between using a knife against an unarmed opponent (which is usually very inadvisable for legal reasons but I bring it up simply as part of a technical discussion) and using a knife against someone else who is wielding a knife. In the former case, using the knife to inflict less lethal cuts is certainly viable, if for no other reason than to make the opponent back off so you can flee. But against another armed opponent who’s truly determined to do you severe harm, particularly if fleeing is not a readily available option, it would be more likely you’d want to simply end the fight as quickly as possible, which would mean a “quick kill.” Though one of the main points of my story was that these quick kills are not always that easy to effect, especially with a small knife, they are possible, as is disabling somebody with a single thrust, such as a jab to the eye. Of course, this is the ideal and in a real knife vs. knife fight (which, to be honest, almost never happens in modern western society) you can’t necessarily count on it.

The way I always look at it is from the dual perspective of a person wielding a knife in self-defense and a person defending against a knife. If you are facing a knife, your mind set should be this is a tremendously deadly weapon you’re up against and any little cut can be fatal to you (not saying you shouldn’t expect to get cut, just that you have to treat it that seriously and carefully). On the other hand, if you’re the one wielding the knife in self-defense, you should look at it as if it is a tool which can aid you and give you a small advantage in a battle but NOT as if it is something which will insure a quick victory or provide you that huge an advantage.

Good points, and I'd say that what you said really applies to any aspect of fighting. Until we're literally under the gun, so to speak, the best we can do is learn quality, effective techniques, and train as realistic as possible. Yes, I know we can't replicate things 100%, but with the right mindset and training, we can get pretty close.

Agreed, though the one key difference between knife fighting and fighting with empty hands is that there are people around who have been in literally dozens, if not hundreds, of real life confrontations involving empty hand combat and we can draw on their experiences. I know of no one currently around who can make similar claims about bladed combat (I’m talking about fighting against a blade, either unarmed or with a blade of your own, not in simply murdering an unarmed person with your blade). In addition, even though it’s sporting combat, we can watch or participate in MMA or other competitions and see if a punch, choke or block actually works the way it is supposed to by going full out, with minimal protection, against an opponent who’s resisting full out. Obviously, you just can’t do this in any sort of realistic way with a knife. So, no matter how hard someone trains in knife techniques, it will always contain a greater theoretical element than unarmed combat and be subject to a lot more question about what really works.

Again, welcome to the forum, and I look forward to more of your contribution.

Thanks again for reading and for the welcomes from you and Dirty Dog.

 

[MJS]

So you’re the one!

LOL...guilty as charged! Sorry for the delay in replying to this.

No problem with reposting snippets of what I write and most of your questions and comments were perfectly valid. And, to be honest, I don’t know if I even have a copy of that issue of the magazine so I’m not sure what the final version said. I was referencing it off what I had on my computer so what appeared in Black Belt may well be a little different from what I wrote. As Tez3 says below, if there are doubts, it’s good to get confirmation from the author.

No problem.

A couple of other things we could toss out there are the differences between using a knife against an unarmed opponent (which is usually very inadvisable for legal reasons but I bring it up simply as part of a technical discussion) and using a knife against someone else who is wielding a knife. In the former case, using the knife to inflict less lethal cuts is certainly viable, if for no other reason than to make the opponent back off so you can flee. But against another armed opponent who’s truly determined to do you severe harm, particularly if fleeing is not a readily available option, it would be more likely you’d want to simply end the fight as quickly as possible, which would mean a “quick kill.” Though one of the main points of my story was that these quick kills are not always that easy to effect, especially with a small knife, they are possible, as is disabling somebody with a single thrust, such as a jab to the eye. Of course, this is the ideal and in a real knife vs. knife fight (which, to be honest, almost never happens in modern western society) you can’t necessarily count on it.

The way I always look at it is from the dual perspective of a person wielding a knife in self-defense and a person defending against a knife. If you are facing a knife, your mind set should be this is a tremendously deadly weapon you’re up against and any little cut can be fatal to you (not saying you shouldn’t expect to get cut, just that you have to treat it that seriously and carefully). On the other hand, if you’re the one wielding the knife in self-defense, you should look at it as if it is a tool which can aid you and give you a small advantage in a battle but NOT as if it is something which will insure a quick victory or provide you that huge an advantage.

Agreed. We've had many good debates on this forum, regarding the use of a weapon vs. unarmed attacker. Of course it's probably going to look bad, especially to a potential untrained witness watching from across the street. on the flip side, I could justify the use of a weapon vs. unarmed attacker in certain situations. A smaller person vs a larger attacker, ie: smaller female/large male attacker. Male is in the process of trying to cause severe harm and/or death, yeah, I could justify the female using a knife, gun, or pencil...whatever they can get their hands on, to aid in their defense.

Knife vs. knife....personally, while I would agree the knife is a good tool, if I had the option of grabbing something else, perhaps something to create distance, I'd rather do that, than work in the close quarters with a blade. I'm not ruling that out, just that I'd put that as a plan B, so to speak.

Agreed, though the one key difference between knife fighting and fighting with empty hands is that there are people around who have been in literally dozens, if not hundreds, of real life confrontations involving empty hand combat and we can draw on their experiences. I know of no one currently around who can make similar claims about bladed combat (I’m talking about fighting against a blade, either unarmed or with a blade of your own, not in simply murdering an unarmed person with your blade). In addition, even though it’s sporting combat, we can watch or participate in MMA or other competitions and see if a punch, choke or block actually works the way it is supposed to by going full out, with minimal protection, against an opponent who’s resisting full out. Obviously, you just can’t do this in any sort of realistic way with a knife. So, no matter how hard someone trains in knife techniques, it will always contain a greater theoretical element than unarmed combat and be subject to a lot more question about what really works.

A guy like Marc Macyoung who claims to have a very in depth knowledge of real life street fights, could possibly be one person. Some of the old Filipino guys who live in the PI, I'd say could be another. I'm sure there could possibly be some out there, ie: military, LEO, COs, folks who work in potentially violent situations daily.

Thanks again for reading and for the welcomes from you and Dirty Dog.

You're welcome and I look forward to reading future articles from you, as well as your forum contributions.

Mike

 

[lklawson]

<sigh> Here I am, late to the party, as always.

In general, I'd have to mostly agree with what Mr. Jacobs has said. I've written several screeds which cover much of the same ground such as "The 4 ways to stop an opponent by using a knife," and "Dying ain't dead." There's a lot of evidence for dual-death, mutual kills, etc. never mind the cuts that would seem lethal (or stops) but may not be. Another thing I've said before and will say again: The martial arts & RBSD community in general, and knife & weapons in particular, can take a lot of instruction from the firearms community on everything from stops, use of force, and stress & adrenaline dumps.

Here's a couple of articles looking at the subject from a Western Martial Arts & Fencing tradition:
The Dubious Quick Kill (Part I) by Maestro Frank Lurz
The Dubious Quick Kill (Part II) by Maestro Frank Lurz

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[chinto]

ok one other myth that seems to be thought to be true... Boys and girls Knife fights at least in the USA, are not duels! They are AMBUSHES! Often if you are a law enforcement officer, or you are civilian or a prisoner in a penitentiary, its and ambush and the first thing you know about a blade being involved you have been CUT OR STABBED!! So if you think you are going to know that the attacker has a blade, well I would say not provable. that said assume that any attacker on the street is armed and wants to TAKE YOUR LIFE!! So my advice is evade, talk your way out, run, or what have you if you can! if not then GO FOR BROKE and assume you are in a DEADLY FORCE SITUATION until PROVEN other wise!

 

[lklawson]

ok one other myth that seems to be thought to be true... Boys and girls Knife fights at least in the USA, are not duels!

Not usually, no.

They are AMBUSHES!

Sometimes they are and sometimes they're not. What they seldom are is a symmetrically armed confrontation. One participant has a knife and the other usually doesn't. Sometimes that other is unarmed. Sometimes it turns out that other has a club, firearm, or some other weapon.

I agree that few knife encounters are duels.

That said, I usually teach dueling and make no excuses for it. It's more historic and I teach mostly historic application. In Bartitsu, we sometimes explore other elements but it's still usually from an in period perspective. Every so often we stray into Neo-Bartitsu but I don't really enjoy that as it's sort of like reinventing RBSD or JKD. There are already fine systems for that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Cyriacus]

Not usually, no.

[/FONT][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]Sometimes they are and sometimes they're not. What they seldom are is a symmetrically armed confrontation. One participant has a knife and the other usually doesn't. Sometimes that other is unarmed. Sometimes it turns out that other has a club, firearm, or some other weapon.

I agree that few knife encounters are duels.

That said, I usually teach dueling and make no excuses for it. It's more historic and I teach mostly historic application. In Bartitsu, we sometimes explore other elements but it's still usually from an in period perspective. Every so often we stray into Neo-Bartitsu but I don't really enjoy that as it's sort of like reinventing RBSD or JKD. There are already fine systems for that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

To be fair, even if its without the element of being an ambush, being rushed with a knife whilst unarmed usually doesnt end well for the defender.

 

[chinto]

Not usually, no.

[/FONT][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]Sometimes they are and sometimes they're not. What they seldom are is a symmetrically armed confrontation. One participant has a knife and the other usually doesn't. Sometimes that other is unarmed. Sometimes it turns out that other has a club, firearm, or some other weapon.

I agree that few knife encounters are duels.

That said, I usually teach dueling and make no excuses for it. It's more historic and I teach mostly historic application. In Bartitsu, we sometimes explore other elements but it's still usually from an in period perspective. Every so often we stray into Neo-Bartitsu but I don't really enjoy that as it's sort of like reinventing RBSD or JKD. There are already fine systems for that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them!
Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible. that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.

 

[lklawson]

I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them!
Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible. that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.

There's an old saying in the knife fighting community, "Cutters don't show and show-ers don't cut."

But, like I said, I pretty much teach dueling in it's historic context.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[WingChunIan]

You beat me to it. Really, how many people out there have extensive hands-on experience with this, at least in American society? It's just not that common, and to expect an extensive amount of experience would mean the guy is a downright felon who ought to be in prison for life.

The nature of society in modern America is such that the vast majority of those teaching any weapon are going to have little or no real-life experience with it. They are teaching from theory.

Now someone coming from some war torn region of Africa, for example, might have more of that experience. And I'd bet they have a very small number of techniques, which are all very simple and straight forward. Nothing fancy or complicated.

nope they just have lots of scars and normally fewer limbs.....

 

[WingChunIan]

I am not saying that training with your knife as if the other had one is invalid, my point was usually the first thing the person attacked knows of the knife is it has cut or stabbed them!
Most knife attackers do not stand there and show you they have a blade! they hide it and then use it, and make it as much an ambush as possible. that is the myth I was addressing, the idea that you would know the knife was involved from the start.

This is exactly why i don't teach knife defence. In Wing Chun we just defend the space in front of the body (some people like to call them gates) anything entering that space is dealt with in the same way whether its a grab, a punch or a hand holding a knife.

 

[chinto]

This is exactly why i don't teach knife defence. In Wing Chun we just defend the space in front of the body (some people like to call them gates) anything entering that space is dealt with in the same way whether its a grab, a punch or a hand holding a knife.

yes there is a reason why Okinawan Karate teaches most blocks with a trap and control with it. you have to assume that a blade or other weapon may be involved.!!