Combatives

[TimSheetz]

HI all,

The instruction given at the event included some fascinating ideas for training for a fight against an armed opponent...

Matt pointed out that two knife armed fellas circling each other was an extremely rare thing.. or a sight most likely to be seen at a theater. Most guys find out they are in a knife fight after they have been stabbed.

To assist in conditioning folks to treat their opponents as if they were armed, Matt would have the class standing in a circle, facing outwards. He took a 60,000 volt 'hand held stun gun' and would walk around the circle, slipping it into a pocket of one of the students. Now they know that someone in the class is armed... they don't know who... The training intensity sky rocketed... hehheh.

Now the most likely cases of h2h ona battlefield wouldn't be the knife armed guy sneaking up on a guard... why do that with all the silencer technology? Most likely it would occur (as it did recently) with several enemy who seemed to be out of action suddenly attacking an individual.. initiating in a confined space and wrestling for the working firearm...

Again, skill at all ranges is important, and the fact that to stop a TOTALLY COMMITTED attacker with a "well aimed blow" with your bare hands is HIGHLY UNLIKELY I think. You get maybe two chances and then he has grabbed you... and if you are in a confined space.. let's say inside a building... then you are even more likely to be grappling.. whether grounded or not, grappling will play some part in it most likely. I believe that stats do support this...

Stuart, you wrote:
"The fact of the matter is that if two people in a fight with a little training don't want a fight to go to the ground, then it won't."

I think this is absolutely false. Two guys with little training grab each other and try to throw the other on the ground so that they can be stomped upon... they both will probably fall. If they come at each other swinging away.. they will most likely clash and grab.. then most likely fall... the higher the level of training and the better space provided them the less likely they will go down if they don't want to.

Stuart wrote:
"If we start "pulling guard", "achieving a clinch" or taking the mount then we are going to get jacked repeatedly with a blade that we are too close to deal with. As such we have to parry and strike as best we can until the other guy falls over. The same thing applies if the other guy has a bayonet fixed or if we have a bayonet fixed against a knifer. In neither of these cases is closing with our attacker a good idea."

I have a problem with the idea that you can "strike" a knifer to defend yourself as a rule. The reason is if you stay at that range, you are in the knife wielder's OPTIMUM range.. or his "Standoff" range. I would love someone to stay back enough so I can cut them over and over and stab their legs as they kick and such... So I'd only try that if I know I have a buddy 5 feet away around the corner or needed the time to pull out my weapon. In another line you mention facing an 'obviously unarmed" opponent... Now that is the guy I want to pull my knife on or use another weapon... Why close to grapple and nulify all my advantages? Unless he initiates and closes the ranges before I can react... which gets me to my last point.. you mention ground where you can fall without landing on your canteen and hurt your back... You do not get to choose the surroundings in which h2h occurs. That is the nature of things.

H2h only occurs if other things have gone to pieces... Law Enforcement purposes excepted, of course.

I think this is a very interesting discussion that I am enjoying.

Thanks,

Tim

[Mike Cartier]

I agree with Tim here on all his points.
Most expecially ther knife range point, staying at arms length is what i want from an unarmed opponent when i have a knife.
When i am unarmed and the opponent has the knife I am looking for my one safe path into him so i can stifle his weapon threat.
The notion that BJJ skills are about pulling the guard is just plain an exageration, but let me tell you if i dodge your punch and grab you and take you down and I am on top from momentum you better know how to play some guard or you are at a severe disadvantage.
I consider myself a striker first and foremost, good grappling and ground skills are part of being a competent striker.
You have to be able to fight effectively from all ranges
Most martial arts that claim to teach grappling ignore ground fighting in any serious way, its a very important thing to get skills in most especially if you intend to ever try a disarm or a throw.

[Jay Vail]

Matt pointed out that two knife armed fellas circling each other was an extremely rare thing.. or a sight most likely to be seen at a theater. Most guys find out they are in a knife fight after they have been stabbed.

This seems to be quite true. Attacks against unarmed people are the same. The attack is committed and strong, without faking. Also, while I admire the work that the Army folks are doing, going to the ground, especially when there are multiple attackers involved, is not wise, or at least I have serious reservations about it. However, I agree with Mike that you should know what to do at grips range and on the ground because you can certainly end up there.

Here is a true story of an encounter a kenpo friend of mine had in June in a grocery store parking lot.

Carl (not his real name) was attacked by two armed men in a grocery store parking lot. The attack occurred about 2 a.m. He was wheeling his shopping cart out to his car when he saw two men trying to break into it. When he reached the car, one of the men lunged at him and tried to stab him with a screw driver (rather like a rondel thrust, don't you think?). The attacker launched the attack when Carl was about 8 feet away. The attack was made on the pass, right hand holding the weapon, right leg leading at the culmination of the blow. The target was the abdomen.

Carl responded by stepping slightly to the left and parrying to the right with the back of his right hand. He then grasped the attacker’s wrist and struck the attacker on the elbow with his left palm heel. The blow bent the attacker’s arm sharply at an unnatural angle. Carl then kicked him in the groin. The attacker went immediately to the ground.

In the meantime, the other man came around the first attacker and launched an attack of his own, an overhand clubbing attack. Carl met this attack with a right rising block/parry and a right front kick to the ribs. This attacker also fell immediately, incapacitated. That was the end of the encounter.

Carl’s comment to me was that during the first attack he thought, “This is just like in class.”

Both techniques were drawn from pairs routines taught in Parker kenpo and were executed exactly as taught, although quite a number of follow up moves were left out. In the first attack that was because there wasn’t time for them, since the second man was already on the move, nor in fact were they necessary. In the second case, there was no need for them since the second attacker collapsed after the kick.

One interesting point here is that these responses are not practiced in sparing because of the obvious danger involved to the participants. They were/are both practiced in paired partner drills. These drills start slow as the participants become familiar with the technique, but can be quite hard and fast as they gain experience. Despite lack of sparing experience with these techniques, Carl was able to use them in combat when he needed them. (I don't mean to suggest that sparring is not useful.)

[TimSheetz]

Hi Jay,

Right.. Going to ground IS NOT a desired goal.. I think it is covered in the instruction first because it is easier to teach the novice than other types of fighting. With limited time you need to stick to things that can be learned rapidly and expanded upon later.

Interesting story! I guess it is lucky it happend so fast.. no time to think and worry about it, just execute the conditioned reflexive responses to great affect. Awesome. Most importantly, I am glad your friend is OK.

Tim

[Casper Bradak]

How many army h to h manuals are there? I remember my infantry hand to hand training. I don't think it was bad at all, at least not for trying to teach 500guys at once in a 2 week span.
It actually had a lot from the fenceing manuals, whether they knew it or not. Over the shoulder arm breaks, hip throws, basic kicks/punches.
The knife fighting was pretty much [censored] though. There were a lot of ineffective slashing techniques.
I never disagreed with any of the sentry removal techniques either.
Anyone know who ever did that survey everyone quotes? "X% of all fights go to the ground." I think it was someone selling a ground fighting art. I've seen a lot of fights, skilled and otherwise, and while a LOT of them went to the ground, I'd say more than half did not. Definitely good stuff to know, but definitely the last resort. Unless you're just playing, then it might be your first.

[Joachim Nilsson]

"I have a problem with the idea that you can "strike" a knifer to defend yourself as a rule. The reason is if you stay at that range, you are in the knife wielder's OPTIMUM range.. or his "Standoff" range. I would love someone to stay back enough so I can cut them over and over and stab their legs as they kick and such... So I'd only try that if I know I have a buddy 5 feet away around the corner or needed the time to pull out my weapon. In another line you mention facing an 'obviously unarmed" opponent... Now that is the guy I want to pull my knife on or use another weapon... Why close to grapple and nulify all my advantages? Unless he initiates and closes the ranges before I can react... which gets me to my last point.. you mention ground where you can fall without landing on your canteen and hurt your back... You do not get to choose the surroundings in which h2h occurs."

"Right.. Going to ground IS NOT a desired goal.."

Some two weeks ago I trained with Hans and Nils-Erik from ARMA Falun and we did a very interesting exercise/drill, where when guy would have a rapier and the other guy would be unarmed. The sole purpose of the unarmed guy would be to close the distance and disarm, grapple or in any other way mark an attack on the opponant. In a lot of the cases the guy with the rapier would hold his ground and the attacker would recieve a poke. Or two. Or three... But in some other cases the unarmed fellow did close the distance. The usual follow-up to the "closing of distance" would be a light slap on the head or something equal to that, but sometimes things escalated to grappling. And being grappled and thrown to the ground, unarmed or with a rapier, was not really a very desired position to end up in. But it was a very good drill thyat taught me a lot. It was even good for learning to thrust well with the rapier. And for training of footwork, judging of distance and so forth.

During that same weekend I also did some rapier vs. rapier sparring with Nils-Erik. During one session he suddenly closed on me, I grabbed his rapier, he grabbed mine and before I knew it, he let go of both weapons and like a pesky ferret came around me and grabbed my throat from behind. With a really stifling grip I might add. And Nils-Erik is a fairly big guy, weighing around uhm... maybe 100kg (sorry for dabbling with the metric system...). Anyway, when he started clinging to my back, choking off my air-supply, we both toppled over... and the fight went to the ground. I grabbed one of his fingers and started bending it in the wrong way, but since I really couldn't use this technique to the fullest without actually breaking his finger, he simply continued putting preassure to my throat. Now, I'm not the one who gives up in the first place, and in any other situation than sparring I would have continued "to the end", doing whatever was called for to get out of his grip. But since it was sparring (and the fact that I really was getting short on air) I had to tap the mat.

Some time ago a couple of friends of mine ended up in a bar brawl with a huge Norwegian guy who quite obviously was nothing short of a cowardly opportunist. He grabbed two chairs which he intended to hit them over their heads with while they were looking the other way. Fortunately I was sober and a bit more alert and noticed this just in time. I quickly closed the distance, parried the chairs (his arms actually) with my arms, got to grappling, put his head in a tight grip and with a throw took him to the ground (using techniques from the medieval & renaissance manuals). I also made sure I ended up on top of him, securely locking any flailing limbs and incapacitating him. And in the process telling him that he "just made the biggest mistake of his life". Would he have been any smaller he could have gotten seriously injured by my throw, but I took care not to hurt him too much. And after all, in this particular instance, I was the small guy.

Now you're probably all scratching your heads and thinking: "What's this crazy Swede going on about?" Well, my point is: I agree with what's been said: going to the ground -Not good. It may happen, but it's not really desirable. And when it do happen, one better be prepared and know what to do.

I hope I'm not to late in joining in this conversation and I hope I've made my mark on it. In some wierd way anyway... <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Regards,

[Guest]

My oppinion is that groundfigthing is someting that is hard to train because the easyiest things ar the difficualist (hardest) to train. Because if the fight is a mather of life and death the easyest thing when you ar so close to your opponent as in groundfigthing is biting, poking his eyes out or pulling his hair or other places <img src="/forum/images/icons/shocked.gif" alt="" /> . (There is a reason why this is not allowed in shootfighting for example) Often tekniks ar complicated because you can not do this thing in training senarios and there for it is a tendensy towards grappling tekniks. When you train grapling it can block you from doing the easy things in a fight. But all fights ar not for life and death, and I guess a good grapler is hard to bite.
<img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />
(exause my english, but i hope you all understand what im trying to write <img src="/forum/images/icons/tongue.gif" alt="" /> )

The importens of distance can be understand better when you ar the attacker and not the defender. To fool the opponent that you ar in a distance that ar safe for him. ex Make him belive that you can´t not hit him with your fist from this range when you accualy having a big stick behind your back. This I belive you can see in manual conserning rapir fighting were they have lovley pitures with lines drawn all over. If you look at these I believe that most of these ar trying to show how to hold the rapir towards your opponent so that he will having difficulites judging the range to the tip of your rapirs edge. ex 180degree angel infront of his eye
I don´t know if this has to do with the dicussion but this is my contribution of knowlege <img src="/forum/images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" />

[Jay Vail]

Some time ago a couple of friends of mine ended up in a bar brawl with a huge Norwegian guy who quite obviously was nothing short of a cowardly opportunist. He grabbed two chairs which he intended to hit them over their heads with while they were looking the other way. Fortunately I was sober and a bit more alert and noticed this just in time. I quickly closed the distance, parried the chairs (his arms actually) with my arms, got to grappling, put his head in a tight grip and with a throw took him to the ground (using techniques from the medieval &amp; renaissance manuals).

Well done. What technique did you use?

[Jay Vail]

"I have a problem with the idea that you can "strike" a knifer to defend yourself as a rule. The reason is if you stay at that range, you are in the knife wielder's OPTIMUM range.. or his "Standoff" range. I would love someone to stay back enough so I can cut them over and over and stab their legs as they kick and such

Couple of points here. First, few if any knifers stand off and slice at their opponents, a nick here, a nick there, feint, feint, feint, thrust and kill. In all the knife attacks I have studied, every one involved a powerful committed blow, followed immediately by another, often ending with the victim suffering as many as 40 wounds. Once a knifer makes up his mind to kill the victim, he launches with full commitment, no holding back.

This approach has both strengths and vulnerabilities. The strength is that the attack is normally overwhelming. The victim, who is usually un- or inadequately trained, cannot respond to the first few attacks successfully and so eventually dies.

Second the committed attack offers opportunities, however, to the trained or determined victim. The commitment of the blow offers the chance to catch the hand/arm holding the knife. Once you do that, the attacker's arm is highly vulnerable, especially the elbow. There is a good reason that Fiore's techiques against the dagger work almost always against the elbow. When you get hold of the guy's arm with two of your hands against one of his, you have the advantage, regardless of the presence of the weapon. You will also note that ALL of Fiore's defenses (Talhoffer's and the other manuals too) start dagger/knife defense with a grab to the dagger arm.

Interestingly, Fiore's knife defense is very much like that once taught in the US Army. I have no idea what they do now, but in FM 21-150, June1954, you can find several anti-knife techniques that are very Fiore-like, including the use of the two hand grab against the straight thrust.

If you practice the Fiore approach I think you will find that it is very effective. I personally believe that training in the Fiore method provides the best foundation for knife defense available.

[Jake_Norwood]

We found that when dagger sparring out here in Provo that techniques weren't happening, but rather a snip-snip style of fighting. Then we tried a "bull in the ring" style game, where one guy stood unarmed in the middle of a circle of other students and one of the circle's names would be called out. Usually the guy behind the bull in the ring. That circle guy would then make a commited attack, often from behind or some other inconvenient location.

While the bull in the ring clearly lost most of the time, we saw "technique" starting to happen...forearm stops, disarms, throws, etc. The stuff in the manauls is for a commited and sudden attack. Practice it that way.

Thanks to Stu McDermaid for pointing out that the old football drill "bull in the ring" could be a usefull dolchfechten training tool.

Jake

[Joachim Nilsson]

Well done. What technique did you use?

Good question. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

Several techniques actually. Not sure I can give you any names or manuals but I'll give it a try.
We'll start at my parry:
When I stepped in and parried I basically used the regular defense that's used against an dagger attack that's coming in from above. I came in from the "outside", took control of the chairs with my right hand and lower arm and parried the rest of the blow with my left. I guess most medieval masters like Fiore, Talhoffer etc etc show this technique. Although it usually ends with the defender breaking the attackers elbow.

The throw:
I then stepped in behind him with my right leg and threw my right arm around his neck and closed my left hand around my right wrist. I then -since he was about 8" taller than me- had to kind of jump up so that I could bring down his neck and head to a good a proper throwing height <img src="/forum/images/icons/blush.gif" alt="" /> . A split second after my low jump I twisted my body to the left and used my hip to bring him down. This is again something that's shown in most medieval manuals. But I'm pretty sure you already know that. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

On the ground:
The second he hit the floor I followed after, making sure that I had my knees against his arm, and my right forearm against his throat. Enemy subdued.

The stuff in the manauls is for a commited and sudden attack. Practice it that way.

Which is also the way I used in this particular situation. I really hope I answered your question Jay. Especially since I might not be the best guy at analysing what happend since it all happened as a pure instinct reaction, comming directly from the spine. Which is excactly the way it should be

Regards,

[TimSheetz]

Jay,

You are probably right that few knifers stand off and slice their opponents... I think this is even more typical behavior the shorter the knife is.. Through habit I was looking at this with a large knife in mind. My preferred is a large bowie and it is great at a longer range as it is heavy enough to cut fingers and hands off.

That being said, I still think that my statement you quoted is still relevant: "I have a problem with the idea that you can "strike" a knifer to defend yourself as a rule."

I think that capturing the offending limb and rendering the knife ineffective is the best course of action if you are stuck in a hand vs the knife situation.

Best,

Tim

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Jake,

I'm glad someone is getting something out of my little drill. Our version goes down exactly the way yours does. One thing I have found though is that you can't always expect the technique to go down as it does in the book. Sometimes you will miss a grab and end up with a parry. From here a good knowlege of blows, grips and throws is required to finish the job.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Tim,
I think this is a great situation if you can get it. I think an arm parry followed by incapacitating hand and boot attacks is better and more likely. I find when training hands vs the knife that a quick finger flick on the fencing mask (read eye jab) is a great way to ensure that your followup will work whether it be a strike, kick or throw.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Jay Vail]

Joachim: I understand. I can visualize it without any trouble. Thanks. Very well done indeed. JV