machida clip - hypothetical knife question

[yusuf]

hi all

Omar posted this clip ..



in the taiji app thread --. video links

It is a great example of single palm change application but it just occurred to me that, imaine this is a street fight, if the guy in the red shorts had a knife then this is pretty bad. Assuming one isn't interested in training for the ring at all, do you completely eliminate training for that type of entry / app?

cheers

yusuf

[everything]

that is where - getting back to the "standard" slant flying - wouldn't you want to have that wrist and arm control first, plus a nice finish such as immediate wrist break upon takedown?

[middleway]

Similarly if Machida had a knife that would be rather nasty to Mr red shorts. Spike to the throat and thrown down.

On a different note ... but sort of related. I wonder if after a certain amount of time worrying about every conceivable threat in a 'street' environment there would actually be ANY empty hand work left deemed as plausible or useful in self defence ... you would have to go straight to guns or Tazers i guess.

cheers
Chris

[dragontigerpalm]

If this were a street fight and red shorts had a knife you wouldn't, IMO, walk in on him but maintain or increase the distance between the two of you.

[mrtoes]

Providing you realised he had a knife before it was sticking out of you. As Geoff Thompson says "a stabber rarely shows and a shower rarely stabs"

[Chris McKinley]

The simple answer is that no, you would not try to do exactly what black shorts does if red has a knife in his right hand. That doesn't render what he does as an invalid response, it just means that you have to do different things when facing weapons.

[middleway]

i guess the point is that you wouldn't usually see the knife so could end up dead doing this if you didnt. (see ice pick clip Yusuf posted in the other thread).

Bearing that in mind, should you disregard this technique or entry entirely from your training when looking at it from this viewpoint?

Theoretically i would say that this is virtually Always the case, that there is a chance you are going to get spiked or slashed, no matter how you enter. If they are good at concealing, drawing and manipulating a blade there is very little chance for the average jo so to speak.

Personally i think that we are talking about 'levels of risk'. This entry has its time and place, the time and place are dependent on a number of factors like ..... Pre fight build up (if any), location, environment, number of assailants, Number in your group (are you with someone), level of intoxication if any of all parties, position of opponent in relation to you, position of opponents limbs (can he draw from where he is... does he already have the blade), etc etc etc. Even before you use it. We have to be in a receptive state to these things at all times without thinking about any of them ... thats the real skill IMO. Then you do what is required, when required ... If this entry fits you use it ... If it doesnt you dont.

Just my thoughts.

Chris

[Chris McKinley]

There's a place for it, but even keeping the knife out of consideration, it's a risky move trying to counterjab a jab for an entry. Very good chance of either getting your hand buckled/injured or of getting clocked by some or all of the opponent's jab anyway. That's not to say it's so risky you should never do it, just objectively pointing out the risks.

Also, if you'll notice, black shorts seems to outweigh red by about 20-30 lbs. That mass advantage also makes the takedown much easier to do than if they were evenly matched or if the other guy was heavier. Just something to consider.

Chris's 'levels of risk' point is a good one. It also points to a more mature, healthier philosophy of owning your own self-defense. It's your ass on the line; you make the call. Not your instructor, not a bunch of guys online, etc. Work it in training, with and without a training knife, and find out. We need more guys willing to experiment instead of abdicating their common sense and their freewill at the door of their training hall or at the feet of their instructor.

[yusuf]

Chris's point is what i was getting to... I have a friend who has just come back from studying an offshoot of Kogen Itto Ryu.. he is experienced in JSA and JMA, but reckons this system is very interesting because it has been stripped way down and has a 'always against sword' mentality.. I've been contemplating whwther to do this with my own training too..

[Chris McKinley]

A lot (not all) of what I do these days has the assumption of a weapon built-in. Part of that has to do with some of the people I occasionally train, but a good bit to do with my own personal experience. As mrtoes pointed out, you won't always realize a weapon is present from first glance. This can also be true of impact weapons as well if the lighting is poor enough, and it often is.

My thinking is, if there is a weapon, you've just possibly saved your own life by assuming its presence. And if it's just an empty hand strike, you haven't really lost anything anyway. Better to err on the side of caution on this issue, at least initially.

[Royal Dragon]

You know, I originally started the Kuntao Silat becasue it is really old school Chinese Kung Fu preserved in indeonesian, and the teacher I know is an extremely skills player. I figured learning form someone that skilled would be much better than learning from a less skilled Chinese teacher who had all the correct forms.

One of the big things in the Silat systems, is they come from a bladed culture, and allways assume the knife either is in play, or is about to be. Under that assumption, and the fact that the old Chinese stuff(Kune Tao)was highly preserved there, I started to see all of my previous Chinese Kung Fu presented, often exactly as it is in my forms, only with a blade conscious perspective. It eventually dawned on my that even the Chinese empty hand systems, were at one time blade, or at leas at weapons conscious systems. I really feel to a large extent that many of them have lost this in modern times, and thus lost effectiveness as well.

Thinking this way changes the entries a bit, but more and more, you see the exact moves from common forms actually used as they are shown in the form. So from my perspective today, if you are not thinking about swords, knives, Hatchets, or double daggers etc.. then you are not doing the Chinese arts correctly.

[middleway]

how do people think this focus on knife will change/ if at all the effectiveness against the force of strikes rather than knife attacks?

Is there a difference (in terms of force or the force required to check or stop) between a really good punch or round kick to the head and an slash taking the same path with a knife in your opinion?

Would a knife only based system or training mindset take that difference in force into consideration and train with it?

Are you loosing effectiveness against large volumes of power by focusing purely on skills against knife?

Interested in your opinions.

Thanks

Chris

[Chris McKinley]

Chris,

RE: "Is there a difference (in terms of force or the force required to check or stop) between a really good punch or round kick to the head and an slash taking the same path with a knife in your opinion?". My work in blending Baguazhang with Kali for a number of years leads me to a similar place. I'm not entirely sure that CMA were initially designed to be used that way, but I certainly know that Bagua lends itself to it in frighteningly effective ways. However, your question makes the assumption that empty handed IMA are going to be concerned with taking the force of a punch or round kick "head on", so to speak. While that is sometimes unavoidably necessary, that's certainly not going to be the preferred intended tactic.

RE: "Would a knife only based system or training mindset take that difference in force into consideration and train with it?". Not speaking for Royal Dragon's Kuntao, but my approach isn't "knife only". However, the training mindset can definitely have an effect. When you realize that, on the street, a knife wielder's weapon may not be apparent even when striking you, it raises an awareness that we cannot necessarily assume that just because we don't think we saw a weapon, that incoming strike is only a punch. In fact, a blade can sometimes go unnoticed until after an altercation and after you have been stabbed, since the stab often feels like nothing more than receiving a punch.

What a weapons-based mindset does is to modernize your awareness that, in real life-threatening encounters (as opposed to the power jockeying that can happen in clubs, for instance), a weapon will be involved more often than not. Like I wrote in my previous post, if you assume a weapon's presence and your gamble is correct, you may have just saved your own life. If you make that assumption and you are wrong, you haven't lost anything since the tactics will still work against an empty-handed assault.

RE: "Are you loosing effectiveness against large volumes of power by focusing purely on skills against knife?". Not in the slightest. Power training is in stucture and whole-body coordination, and is generally reserved for offense. We don't train in IMA to withstand huge incoming forces like a bulwark. We still advocate not meeting force with force, even though we build up some very strong structure. Realistically, yes....it's still nice to have that structure when you are absolutely forced to take incoming force directly, but the real sweetness is in being able to use it to issue your own power offensively.

[mrtoes]

What a weapons-based mindset does is to modernize your awareness that, in real life-threatening encounters (as opposed to the power jockeying that can happen in clubs, for instance), a weapon will be involved more often than not. Like I wrote in my previous post, if you assume a weapon's presence and your gamble is correct, you may have just saved your own life. If you make that assumption and you are wrong, you haven't lost anything since the tactics will still work against an empty-handed assault.

I went to a Krav Maga seminar last year and although it wasn't for me I really liked this "assume a knife" approach they had. I think it makes perfect sense. I don't train in a RBSD way, but it was very clear to me that if I was to follow this approach then it would significantly affect my choice of fighting strategy. With hsing i, you would have to be careful not to just smash in and not worrying too much about being hit as long as you've taken most of the opponents force out of their attack, because that small amount of force may still be enough to drive a knife right into you. I can see how the evasiveness and redirection of bagua would suit this better. I'm sure there's no rule or dogma that "takes care" of these issues, and quite frankly I have no idea whatsoever what to do about knives. My self defence plan in general to avoid trouble wherever possible, run given the option, and if I have to fight follow the Geoff Thompson approach of see it coming, hit first, hit hard, run like hell. Knives? No idea!

I console myself with the knowledge that the nature on my lifestyle is such that my main physical danger is probably cycling to work rather than the streets...

[middleway]

I am playing devils advocate here a little as i am all for weapon awareness to be honest. But i think the idea of training ONLY for defence against an armed attacker is interesting.

However, your question makes the assumption that empty handed IMA are going to be concerned with taking the force of a punch or round kick "head on", so to speak. While that is sometimes unavoidably necessary, that's certainly not going to be the preferred intended tactic.

Certainly that wasn't my intention. I simply asked if there was a difference in terms of how the force is presented, therefor how you deal with that force. or can the same principles used against a knife attack be used against a hard empty hand or blunt attack ... say from a Muay Thai guy or a boxer? I knife only has to touch on the way past or back to have a serious effect.

We still advocate not meeting force with force, even though we build up some very strong structure. Realistically, yes....it's still nice to have that structure when you are absolutely forced to take incoming force directly, but the real sweetness is in being able to use it to issue your own power offensively.

Agreed ... Like i say i am playing devils advocate somewhat here cause i think its an interesting idea.

However, much of the knife work i have been exposed too has been to 'check' the knife arm. Not to let is continue on a path where it can change angle and cut you, or cut you on its current line, etc. That Check is often essentially about stopping the limb or line in some way, or at least redirecting it while keeping it away from the body. Where as with a punch you can even let it move close to your body (even onto your body!) and use it or subtley re-direct it, with a knife you cant afford to do this. If a punch just grazes your neck .. no problem .. if a knife does .. big problem.

So with this in mind how does the use of line in your knife work differ from your H2H stuff. Does the consideration drastically change?

Personally i have faced knives in real encounters a maybe 3 times in a large amount of encounters, both in professional work and on 'the street'. One incidence i would be dead if i had tried to take the punch (which turned out to be a stab). So i really do recognize the consideration. What i do think however is that there are certain attributes in knife work that are unique to knife work and that are not present in H2H work.

Thanks for the responce Chris.

Cheers