Some call it "dueling" and it is a big controversy in some circles. Let's discuss the points and arrive at our own conclusions.
Some trainers do no knife vs. knife because they feel it is unrealistic. They spit out the term "dueling" as if it were a gob of lung mucus. Methinks they just do not fully understand the knife or how its really employed in the real world.
Knife versus knife is important because it saves time and it trains both parties. The lines of attack are the same whether one party is armed with a knife, a stick, a broken bottle, or whatever. Other than bringing training equivalents of everything that is possible out on the street, training knife vs. knife develops the attributes needed to fight those things.
Too many trainers take a "defang the snake" concept to extremes. The knife is NOT A LESS LETHAL TOOL. Cut someone with a knife and the court will look at it as if you'd shot them. If you are not justified in shooting, you are not justified in cutting or stabbing. On the other hand if you face a man much larger and stronger and younger, or multiples, or a weapon, get the knife out and get to slashing. You need disparity of force to go for a weapon. You can't bring a knife out when some one your same size and age wants to punch you in the nose. Since few trainers have been in knife fights...let alone ANY fights, the dynamics of conflict are not understood.
On so-called "dueling". Let me draw a couple of pictures for you.
A thug grabs you in the street from behind. You use combative skills to pull free and notice he has a broken bottle in his hand. You create distance and get your steel out. This is dueling.
Three big guys are trying to beat you up. You click your Cold Steel in place and move out of their grasp. This is dueling.
Dueling is not a sparring match where only the hands are hit, its fighting. Its the force-on-force of the knife world. The man who only trains technical drills and flow drills is like the man who only does dry fire and live fire. He can get pretty good, but he'll never have the full picture.
Will you likely face a close range knife attack? Sure. Should you have something in place for such an eventuality? Abso-freaking-lutely!
Should you linger in the bad breath range when you do not need to, or train only for fighting in this range? Nope. That is like saying "I only shoot my pistol at 50 yards because if I can hit at 50, I can hit at 5", or the other side "I only train point shooting at 3 feet because I will NEVER need to shoot at anyone farther away". The real answer - both are wrong. You DO need both. Whether you have time or not, to have a complete package, you need both sides of the package.
As far as the hand sniping often seen at the initial phases of a knife encounter (regardless of what the other guy has) - Its a tool and nothing more.
It may lead to the BG dropping his weapon, exclaiming "You Cut Me", and running off. It may lead to him now hesitating, thereby allowing you to create space, and eventually disengage. Or with a dedicated man, where the previous options are not possible, get rid of his infantry (hands/knife) so you can attack the throat/body.
Some often heard comments -
Q). The concept of "saving time" in training is a poor one. I doubt it was seen in blade cultures.
A). Actually the FMA systems use blade vs. blade extensively. Same goes for European systems. The concept of training both students together has validity beyond what I can possibly give it, and has been done through the centuries with not only blade but other weapon systems as well.
Q). Saving time leads to corner cutting in the interest of efficiency. We soon end up with pairs of training partners circling a common center. There is no context to the attack, no need to access the weapon in a reactive mode. This of course means that there is no integration of combatives.
A). Not exactly. Again, I submit that drills like the flow drills used in FMA, and the limited sparring as used in some European systems, and other similar methods serve to develop attributes of the fighter. All of them are knife vs, knife by the way. The training intent and the curriculum will keep it from degenerating just as it does in keeping a force on force session from turning into a game.
Q). It falls short of scenario based instruction. And knife use in the real world does include environmental factors, surprise, reactionary gap and the like.
A). True, but where do you begin? Grab a day one student, stick a knife in his belt and send Mongo over to kick his a**?, or do you develop the skills first before going into scenario-based training? And then, what sort of scenario. Will it be a scenario set-up by an instructor to prove his favorite point, or will it be a fight that actually took place and is being replicated in training? Is the scenario based on liability-fearing academy nonsense, or on a civilian trying to escape a thug?
Q). The lines of attack are not the same with street improvised weapons, against which we might be using a knife, deal with far more arcing/slashing type motions and fewer stabs than we see in knife vs knife training.
I disagree. Actually I've seen both. I've seen a box cutter slash a throat "ear to ear", and I've seen a broken bottle almost remove a man's ear - both arcing attacks. I've also seen a screwdriver to the butt (resulting in death), and a spyderco military to the throat...both thrusts. I hate to generalize my adversary's likely attack. That is a shortcut that truly leads to disaster.
Other than developing a cadre of specialized trainers (one who always attacks with prison combatives, one who has mastered the street baseball bat, one who is a beer bottle wiz, etc.), the best way to develop skill, IMHO, is with weapon vs weapon training (that is knife vs knife). Then, if you've a mind, throw in a stick, a flex weapon, or even multiple bad guys coming at you.
In a close range knife attack (or bottle attack, or whatever) the dynamics will be surprise. If you saw it coming it would not likely be a close range attack and you'd have your weapon in hand. In a true surprise ambush up close, your initial response will probably be with combatives and not to immediately access your blade (or gun). After this -
You will either have created some distance to access the blade - in which case you are now, as some call it, "dueling" with the bottle wielder, or
You will not have been able to create space in which case you will be trading blow for blow (hopefully only yours are sticking). This is not a place I care to be.
Should you linger in the bad breath range when you do not need to, or train only for fighting in this range? Again, I don't think so. I think that anyone can get lucky up close, and because blood carries a lot more than stains these days, I want to create distance as soon as tactically possible. Same goes for ground fighting. I want to get up and move ASAP.
When you do this the BG will either quit or stay. If he stays with his broken bottle or tire chain, and you have your Spyderco, what will the dynamics of the fight be like? You probably will want to keep your distance. And since no bat, or tire iron, or chain or whatever moves as quick as a knife, the attributes you developed will stand you pretty well.
Gabe Suarez
One Source Tactical
Suarez International USA
Christian Warrior Ministries
Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to
send peace on earth: I came not to send peace,
but a sword.
Some trainers do no knife vs. knife because they feel it is unrealistic. They spit out the term "dueling" as if it were a gob of lung mucus. Methinks they just do not fully understand the knife or how its really employed in the real world.
Knife versus knife is important because it saves time and it trains both parties. The lines of attack are the same whether one party is armed with a knife, a stick, a broken bottle, or whatever. Other than bringing training equivalents of everything that is possible out on the street, training knife vs. knife develops the attributes needed to fight those things.
Too many trainers take a "defang the snake" concept to extremes. The knife is NOT A LESS LETHAL TOOL. Cut someone with a knife and the court will look at it as if you'd shot them. If you are not justified in shooting, you are not justified in cutting or stabbing. On the other hand if you face a man much larger and stronger and younger, or multiples, or a weapon, get the knife out and get to slashing. You need disparity of force to go for a weapon. You can't bring a knife out when some one your same size and age wants to punch you in the nose. Since few trainers have been in knife fights...let alone ANY fights, the dynamics of conflict are not understood.
On so-called "dueling". Let me draw a couple of pictures for you.
A thug grabs you in the street from behind. You use combative skills to pull free and notice he has a broken bottle in his hand. You create distance and get your steel out. This is dueling.
Three big guys are trying to beat you up. You click your Cold Steel in place and move out of their grasp. This is dueling.
Dueling is not a sparring match where only the hands are hit, its fighting. Its the force-on-force of the knife world. The man who only trains technical drills and flow drills is like the man who only does dry fire and live fire. He can get pretty good, but he'll never have the full picture.
Will you likely face a close range knife attack? Sure. Should you have something in place for such an eventuality? Abso-freaking-lutely!
Should you linger in the bad breath range when you do not need to, or train only for fighting in this range? Nope. That is like saying "I only shoot my pistol at 50 yards because if I can hit at 50, I can hit at 5", or the other side "I only train point shooting at 3 feet because I will NEVER need to shoot at anyone farther away". The real answer - both are wrong. You DO need both. Whether you have time or not, to have a complete package, you need both sides of the package.
As far as the hand sniping often seen at the initial phases of a knife encounter (regardless of what the other guy has) - Its a tool and nothing more.
It may lead to the BG dropping his weapon, exclaiming "You Cut Me", and running off. It may lead to him now hesitating, thereby allowing you to create space, and eventually disengage. Or with a dedicated man, where the previous options are not possible, get rid of his infantry (hands/knife) so you can attack the throat/body.
Some often heard comments -
Q). The concept of "saving time" in training is a poor one. I doubt it was seen in blade cultures.
A). Actually the FMA systems use blade vs. blade extensively. Same goes for European systems. The concept of training both students together has validity beyond what I can possibly give it, and has been done through the centuries with not only blade but other weapon systems as well.
Q). Saving time leads to corner cutting in the interest of efficiency. We soon end up with pairs of training partners circling a common center. There is no context to the attack, no need to access the weapon in a reactive mode. This of course means that there is no integration of combatives.
A). Not exactly. Again, I submit that drills like the flow drills used in FMA, and the limited sparring as used in some European systems, and other similar methods serve to develop attributes of the fighter. All of them are knife vs, knife by the way. The training intent and the curriculum will keep it from degenerating just as it does in keeping a force on force session from turning into a game.
Q). It falls short of scenario based instruction. And knife use in the real world does include environmental factors, surprise, reactionary gap and the like.
A). True, but where do you begin? Grab a day one student, stick a knife in his belt and send Mongo over to kick his a**?, or do you develop the skills first before going into scenario-based training? And then, what sort of scenario. Will it be a scenario set-up by an instructor to prove his favorite point, or will it be a fight that actually took place and is being replicated in training? Is the scenario based on liability-fearing academy nonsense, or on a civilian trying to escape a thug?
Q). The lines of attack are not the same with street improvised weapons, against which we might be using a knife, deal with far more arcing/slashing type motions and fewer stabs than we see in knife vs knife training.
I disagree. Actually I've seen both. I've seen a box cutter slash a throat "ear to ear", and I've seen a broken bottle almost remove a man's ear - both arcing attacks. I've also seen a screwdriver to the butt (resulting in death), and a spyderco military to the throat...both thrusts. I hate to generalize my adversary's likely attack. That is a shortcut that truly leads to disaster.
Other than developing a cadre of specialized trainers (one who always attacks with prison combatives, one who has mastered the street baseball bat, one who is a beer bottle wiz, etc.), the best way to develop skill, IMHO, is with weapon vs weapon training (that is knife vs knife). Then, if you've a mind, throw in a stick, a flex weapon, or even multiple bad guys coming at you.
In a close range knife attack (or bottle attack, or whatever) the dynamics will be surprise. If you saw it coming it would not likely be a close range attack and you'd have your weapon in hand. In a true surprise ambush up close, your initial response will probably be with combatives and not to immediately access your blade (or gun). After this -
You will either have created some distance to access the blade - in which case you are now, as some call it, "dueling" with the bottle wielder, or
You will not have been able to create space in which case you will be trading blow for blow (hopefully only yours are sticking). This is not a place I care to be.
Should you linger in the bad breath range when you do not need to, or train only for fighting in this range? Again, I don't think so. I think that anyone can get lucky up close, and because blood carries a lot more than stains these days, I want to create distance as soon as tactically possible. Same goes for ground fighting. I want to get up and move ASAP.
When you do this the BG will either quit or stay. If he stays with his broken bottle or tire chain, and you have your Spyderco, what will the dynamics of the fight be like? You probably will want to keep your distance. And since no bat, or tire iron, or chain or whatever moves as quick as a knife, the attributes you developed will stand you pretty well.
Gabe Suarez
One Source Tactical
Suarez International USA
Christian Warrior Ministries
Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to
send peace on earth: I came not to send peace,
but a sword.
No comments:
Post a Comment