Combatives

[Jay Vail]

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.

The tendency to snip, snip, snip with the dagger/knife in class is a universal problem. It arises from the sparring mentality and the training partners conviction that he has to “win” the encounter. I’ve fallen victim to it myself.

The mindset, as you note, leads to the use of unrealistic attacks. I think we agree that the committed attack is the one students will most generally face in the true fight, and there is no question that the techniques are meant for dealing with that situation.

I personally am of the opinion that because of this mindset, sparring with daggers/knives, especially against the unarmed partner, is poor preparation.

The drill you have described is a good one, but I would not recommend dropping pairs drills altogether. (I don’t assume you meant to say you’ve done that.)

[Jay Vail]

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."

Wasn't disagreeing with this notion. Actually I agree with it myself. The fact that Fiore uses grabs exclusively as the initial response to dagger should tell us something important. This was a man who had been on combat, after all. He was not some theory spinner making up techniques just because he thought they looked cool or might work. To me it says that controlling the dagger arm is the priority. Once you have it, never let it go until the man is disarmed or neutralized. Fiore's preference clearly is to damage the elbow or take the dagger. However, nothing in his method precludes blows after the initial grab. (Hochheim and Quinn recommend blows following the grab.) So I would not rule out blows, but I would mark them as a secondary response after the arm has been secured, and depending on the situation. I suspect we are not far apart on that.

Just my thoughts.

[Jake_Norwood]

The drill you have described is a good one, but I would not recommend dropping pairs drills altogether. (I don’t assume you meant to say you’ve done that.)

And you assume rightly. We still work in pair drills, to learn the techniques, and we focus on our one-on-one sparring with as much intent as possible...lots of bruises, eh.

That being said, the immediacy and the desire to stab a guy in the back before he gets to you is very helpful in imitating the right amount of intent and commitment. It's also a very abusive drill, with a lot of "dirty" fighting...I couldn't do it every practice, or I'd probably die.

Jake

[Stuart McDermid]

ROFLOL @ Jake.

Hardcore isn't it? I feel your pain mate. I have a slightly mishappen nose from being hit by an axehand that juuust missed the pad. *g*

We bear our scars with pride so we can forget for a moment how stupid we are. <img src="/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

I think we may have a little bit of a terminology difference here in terms of grappling. I haven't been considering grabbing the knife arm as grappling as often I will secure a hold and use it to pull the knifer into a strike and then lock him down. Grappling to me conjures pics of double leg takedowns, hip throws ie situations where falling over is likely and represents a mindset and range as much as a method of fighting.
Cheers,
Stu.

[TimSheetz]

HI Jay,

You wrote: "Wasn't disagreeing with this notion. Actually I agree with it myself."

Right-O! I wanted to emphasize that point since we all were having cross discussions over various parts of the topic!

Thanks,

Tim Sheetz

[Stuart McDermid]

Stew,

This is precisely my point. From now on I will use the German Terminology when trying to explain myself.

My points of contention are.

1. Parrying or grabbing the dagger arm the greatest distance away from your body possible to cut down the angles of attack is a good idea.

2. From here, IMHO the next thing to attempt is a disabling strike which should at the very least either disable the blade arm (if aimed there) or engage a flinch reflex (if aimed at the face) to make subsequent incapacitation of the knifer more secure from counterattack.

3. From here, further blows can be employed or a takedown can be effected depending on the relative positions of the combatants and the nature of the fight.
Takedowns/controls that emphasise keeping hold of the weapon arm (if you have it) are best, especially if they can be done from a position where the enemy's off hand is not usuable and/or he can be used to shield you from multiple attackers. Moving in for a body to body throw is sometimes feasible but is less desirable than finishing at or close to a full arms reach.

4. If a parry has been employed then further strikes, a capture of the limb or a direct body to body throw are best employed. Often a parry is a more instinctive (and therefore realistic) response than a grab and should be given plenty of training time.

Does anyone disagree with any of the above?
Cheers,
Stu.

[Jay Vail]

Stu: I would answer your question with a question. Why do the fechtbuchen not show parries in unarmed defense against the dagger? Why is the initial move always a grab to secure the weapon arm before any countermove?

The ancient masters knew how to parry. Parries are shown in dagger vs. dagger work, yet they are not shown in the unarmed material (or at least I do not remember seeing them).

Since this work is by men who have combat experience, we should think deeply on why this is so.

My interpretation is that securing the arm is the first priortity to prevent the possibility of a second blow with the blade before making any countermove. If you want to deliver a blow as the first countermove once the arm is secured, that is your choice, and I would not quarrel with it.

I would add that virtually all the successful knife defenses I have heard or read about involved securing the arm first, although there are some that did not. See my post in this forum about real knife fight stories.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Jay,

You said

Stu: I would answer your question with a question. Why do the fechtbuchen not show parries in unarmed defense against the dagger? Why is the initial move always a grab to secure the weapon arm before any countermove?

Which is a very good question indeed.
Since I will presenting on this very topic in October at the Australian Fencing Conference, I have been doing some pretty hardcore testing and a whole bunch of research.

The short answer is that it is down to a difference between medieval daggers and footwork and modern daggers and footwork.

I'll give you guys the short answer and then extrapolate if you need me to.

The first reason why is that medieval daggers are longer than your forearm. If you block a downward thrust with your left forearm then you may be hit in the face anyway if you don't get the angle exactly right. This is one reason why when defending with the left hand, a grab is better than a parry. In addition, because of the passing footwork found in medieval martial arts, an undercut is possible even with a dagger. If I am in distance to bear a blow on my left forearm then my attacker can fall under it during his strike and hit me in the side. If I make for a stiff armed grab then even if I miss I am out of distance for this falling under.

The same thing doesn't quite apply to right arm parries which can work well, especially against hard attacks. If someone stabs from above and I move to the left in order to bear the blow on my right arm then then the chance of being "fallen under" is reduced as this is difficult for the attacker to do on his left.(Almost impossible if you trap his wrist with a dagger hook of your own). (Of course when armed in forward grip you just single time them in the face as you parry)

OK now we skip forwards to modern methods. These methods do not often involve passing steps which cuts down the angles of attack that can be used dramatically. Because the weapon often starts close to the centreline, tracking it to grab it is often difficult which is why arm parries are most often used. Most modern daggers are not long enough to hit the face even if the left arm is bent at 90% for a parry. As such moves like X blocks and full arm parries are the best way to deal as you can move late enough in the action not to be tricked by a killing thrust that turns into a harrasing cut. This is what people don't get about the proper execution of the X block btw. It isn't passive, it's active. Do it in the Karate fashion and you may well have your forearms cut to ribbons. Anyway, the proper execution: The forearms are shot out at the last possible moment to impact as strongly as possible on the incoming knife arm. If facing a right hander, the right arm is extended slightly further than the left in order to get to the outside of the attacker. If possible, a movement off the line to the left should be incorporated although this method works without it.

Does this cover things Jay?
Cheers,
Stu.

[Stuart McDermid]

Hi Stew,

I agree that moving off the line is preferable however even in sparring it is sometimes difficult to do this as your body will sometimes react in a flinching fashion whether you want it to or not. Sometimes you will find yourself rooted to the spot and only think about what you have done after the knife has been parried away.
I have "sparred" empty handed against a live blade wielded by my Kali instructor and found the above to be doubly true.

Often all your body is capable of is moving backwards whilst you try and protect your centreline against a stab.

I find that when I wish to grab the knife rather than parry it, that moving straight backwards means I can actually make the catch. Moving off the line and trying to make a catch against a reverse grip stab from above is in my experience a pretty tall order.

Is your experience different?
Cheers,
Stu.

I agree though that this can be done against a stab from below.
Cheers,
Stu.

[Jay Vail]

OK now we skip forwards to modern methods. These methods do not often involve passing steps which cuts down the angles of attack that can be used dramatically. Because the weapon often starts close to the centreline, tracking it to grab it is often difficult which is why arm parries are most often used.

May I ask, is this comment based on a study of real knife attacks, or on dojo work?

[Jay Vail]

I have a quick question. Have you ever tried to grab a full speed strike out of the air? It's hard.

As a matter of fact, yes, and when those blows were delivered by unfriendly people trying to make a statement with their fists, too.

I suggest you try a similar exercise in the form of a parry that rolls into a grab or trap.

I think that Fiore's "inside" (left handed) and "outside" (right handed) responses to the overhead attack are just this (and I can think of at least two in which he instructs not to grab at all but move directly into another technique after the set aside, a lock in one instance and a throw in another, which Joachim described and performed in combat to perfection). An absetsen with the hand that mutates into a grasp, rather like the crane style.

Not so for his response to the straight thrust, however.

I would point out that two teachers with street experience who have faced live blades before both advocate the grab against the modern knife as the initial response, Hockheim and Quinn.