Evasive Skills

Training
41

[quote]
Tyranator wrote:
interesting, and in a streetfight this would probable work very well, however in mma, especially UFC style, not quite as well. The main reason, in mma fight most people wont leave their elbows exposed. If you are on the ground, your trying to stay as tight a possible, rolling around or pushing off, anything you can do.

Also if you are in a position where your in full guard, your not going to cover up like in the video (elbows exposed). You would want as little space between you and the opponent as possible, so they cant use any of those techniques or rain down punches on you. And if there is that much seperation, you might have to take a punch or two till you could grap and secure an arm, then you would only have to block one aarm plus the person is more likely to drop his head down closer, in which case, try to pull the head in.

Im no professional, but this is my opinion.[/quote]

I’m not sure why you think it would work better in a street fight than an MMA match. If you’re basing that on a person in a street fight not knowing what they’re doing in terms of tying you up, then by that logic they’re probably not going to put you in full guard either, or know how to breakfall for that matter.

Also, in an MMA fight your hands are wrapped and you are wearing gloves (albeit small ones) which are going to protect your hands while striking; you don’t have to worry about other opponents running up behind you and bashing you over the head with a bar stool so you can afford to just sit in his guard and pound away at the guy; you are usually only wearing shorts/briefs thus making it harder to hold onto you and tie you up; you don’t have to worry about up-kicks to the head (since you are on your knees); your lack of control over him doesn’t give him increased ability to access weapons to use against you (rocks, sticks, beer bottles, etc… laying around; edged weapons which they might have stashed on their body; handfulls of sand which they can throw in your eyes; etc…). In other words you are in a more controlled environment with rules attached which make certain tactics safer.

That’s not to say that there aren’t also advantages to be had in a real fight (you have more targets available to you, you can make use of weapons, no “illegal” techniques, they have less mobility on the ground, etc…). But I wouldn’t say that it’s necessarily going to be more effective in either situation as a whole.

Also, it doesn’t necessarily have to finish the fight or you don’t have to just sit there like he did in the video. You could use it to just get in a few good shots from time to time whenever you were able to get a little space to wear the opponent down (in an MMA fight), or to give you the opportunity to land a shot to a vital target (groin is WIDE open from that position) and proceed to disengage and flee/pass the guard and continue your assault from a more superior position/access your own weapon to finish the fight (in a real fight).

Remember that these are just tactics/tools to add to your tool box. There is no “ultimate technique”; everything is appropriate at times, and inappropriate at others. It’s the individual fighter and how they utilize what tools they have which determines who wins, not the techniques themselves.

42

Was going to make a new post on head movement, but fuck it, I’ll just revive this thread instead.

What are your thoughts on active head movement vs reactive head movement.

To give an example of what I’m talking about, active head movement would be someone like Mike Tyson or randy couture, they are already moving their head BEFORE the punches start coming in

Reactive head movement would be waiting until a punch has started to slip your head just enough out of the way to counter. Commonly seen in kickboxers like Masato:

Having played around with both, in boxing, I feel active head movement is superior if you are fighting a fast puncher, but that said, I can see how in a kickboxing context, you don’t want to create opportunities where your opponent times you and bam, you’ve just leaned into their headkick (Couture - Gonzaga anyone? Randy was lucky he was still awake).

43

Sentoguy, do you have a video of that “Shield” method you mentioned earlier? It caught my interest.

44

[quote]grayman19 wrote:
Sentoguy, do you have a video of that “Shield” method you mentioned earlier? It caught my interest. [/quote]

If you go to this site there is a sample video which should pop up on the main page. I can’t link it directly otherwise I would put it up here. Hopefully posting a MA site is ok with the mods, if not I’ll just pm it to you.

45

Thanks, it looks like a particularly versatile system. It looks like they have different seminars for different styles, with unarmed, unarmed vs weapon, and grappling defense all rolled into the same system.

46

maybe some one can enlighten me ive seen alot of knives that are all curvy and short and hooked but ive never really understood why like i get for like in close slashing but for the relatively untrained or even more realistic situation wouldnt the versatility of something like my romanian ak47 bayonet ( just a 7 inch bowie knife ) have far greater utility in combat especially for range and lethal power?

mind you i have 0 experience with this just wondering

haha sory il take it to the edge weapon thread btw kfm seems to me like it would be highly successful against untrained or drunken frat boys and for a shorter aggressive fighter for closing distance

47

[quote]grayman19 wrote:
Thanks, it looks like a particularly versatile system. It looks like they have different seminars for different styles, with unarmed, unarmed vs weapon, and grappling defense all rolled into the same system. [/quote]

Yeah, it is a very versatile system. It’s also one of the most no nonsense, comprehensive, and realistic systems out there. Rich is also a great teacher who is not only amazingly skilled, but also great at teaching his art to others.

Where do you live in Mass? I can pm you the next time he’ll be in the Springfield area to teach a seminar if you’re interested.

48

[quote]westdale warrior wrote:
maybe some one can enlighten me ive seen alot of knives that are all curvy and short and hooked but ive never really understood why like i get for like in close slashing but for the relatively untrained or even more realistic situation wouldnt the versatility of something like my romanian ak47 bayonet ( just a 7 inch bowie knife ) have far greater utility in combat especially for range and lethal power?

mind you i have 0 experience with this just wondering

haha sory il take it to the edge weapon thread btw kfm seems to me like it would be highly successful against untrained or drunken frat boys and for a shorter aggressive fighter for closing distance[/quote]

Yes, you’ll have longer reach with a 7 inch blade (like a bayonet or bowie), but in actuality it only requires about 4 inches of penetration to hit vital organs, so the extra 3 inches will not really do you much good (unless perhaps the attacker is wearing body armor or very thick protective clothing) and will only slow you down.

I know some of the design concept behind Rich’s Talon knife (because he has explained it to us) but can’t necessarily speak for the other design reasons.

First off the Talon is pre-articulated, so you do not have to articulate your wrist for the blade to be the first thing that hits the target. With a regular straight blade (like a bayonet), the wrist must be articulated in order for the blade to be the first thing that hits the target during a slash (or punching motion for that matter). This places the wrist in a stronger position and also means that very little (if any) alterations need to be made to your regular striking mechanics to be able to use the blade effectively.

Second, since most lethal attacks with blades are stabs and not slashes, the Talon is still an effective stabbing blade.

Third, the fact that the blade is lower than the knuckles as well as the large thumb brace on the top and finger brace underneath make the likelihood of hitting a hard object (bone for example) and winding up cutting off your own fingers very low (something which can easily happen with a blade without a decent pommel or some form of brace/blade stop).

Forth, it’s a folding blade, making carrying much safer/easier, but also has an opening/closing design different from most other folders which makes it easier to open and safer to close.

Here are the specs if you’re interested:
http://raptorknives.com/specs.html

49

[quote]westdale warrior wrote:
maybe some one can enlighten me ive seen alot of knives that are all curvy and short and hooked but ive never really understood why like i get for like in close slashing but for the relatively untrained or even more realistic situation wouldnt the versatility of something like my romanian ak47 bayonet ( just a 7 inch bowie knife ) have far greater utility in combat especially for range and lethal power?

mind you i have 0 experience with this just wondering

haha sory il take it to the edge weapon thread btw kfm seems to me like it would be highly successful against untrained or drunken frat boys and for a shorter aggressive fighter for closing distance[/quote]

If I am reading this correctly you are asking about why the hype for shorter cut/slash centric weapons as opposed to larger ones. You are not missing anything and are asking a very good question that has at least two answers. The first is marketing, so curved, wicked looking, new, proprietary designs always garner attention from the collectors who buy custom designs. The second is getting the most effective use for a given size.

The design and size of the blade directly determines what structures can be injured. The average depth, front to back, of the human torso is about 9.5 inches or 24 cm. I am going from memory on these figures but on a relatively lean person the heart is about 3.5-4 inches (10 cm) in. The lungs and liver are accessible immediately after the rib cage is penetrated (call it 1-3 inches/3-7cm depending on body fat). The carotid, sublcavian, brachial, and femoral arteries are all manually palpable (you can feel them) and are less than 3 inches in. These numbers seem small, but in all likelihood a direct route will not be available (so you may need to come in a bit to the side and go 6 inches to get to the heart or liver).

Using a knife is considered �¢??lethal force�¢?? legally and morally, so I am going to assume that if you or anyone reading this is considering using a knife they are morally and legally justified and are only using a blade because they don�¢??t have a bigger/better weapon available.

There is only one way to instantly incapacitate someone (i.e. stop the guy from being able to kill you), that is to destroy/disable the central nervous system (brain and spinal cord). There are edged weapons that are capable of doing this, but they are heavy tend to ruin the lines of a good suit (e.g. axes, swords, pole-arms are all capable of dismemberment and decapitation). The next way to quickly incapacitate is to cause hypovolemic (blood loss) shock. In order to do this you are going to have to poke a hole, bigger is preferred, or holes (An old saying goes �¢??Anyone worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap, your life is expensive.�¢?? Well, knives are a one-time, not per use, cost item so more holes = better) into the circulatory system (heart, arteries, veins) or a highly vascularized (lots of blood runs through it) organ, e.g. lungs, spleen, liver.

The �¢??ideal�¢?? stabbing/thrusting blade would have a fine point, high sectional density (mass directly behind the point), and be strong enough not to snap when it encounters resistance such as bone (this is often accomplished by having a relatively narrow, yet thick blade with triangular or spike/cylindrical/needle profile being extreme examples. An ice-pick or spike style bayonet is a great example. Designs like stilettos or the Fairburn/Sykes personify this Stabbing/penetrating works better against less mobile targets as opposed to vasculature (arteries and veins), which tend to roll around in tissue. So, length is important with a stabbing blade because it allows enough penetration to reach the vitals with prime targets being heart (quick hypovolemic event), aorta (vascular but firmly adhered in place), spleen, liver, and lungs. It should be noted that simply poking a hole through muscle tissue is not all that debilitating.

Fairburn-sykeshttp:
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn-Sykes_Fighting_Knife

An ideal cutting blade would be thin and sharp. Slashing blades would also be curved with a large belly (forward curvature). This design allows for a very acute/fine edge with very little resistance when being drawn or pulled through tissue. A scalpels or Liston knives are extreme examples of slicers. Blades designed for chopping as opposed to slicing or draw cuts tend to be quite a bit thicker so that more mass is behind the edge. Cutting works very well on mobile structures such as arteries. Cutting muscle tissue essentially renders the cut fibers useless, so even non-lethal cuts to muscle groups can greatly reduce effectiveness. Depth is the issue with cutting, so the deeper the structure, the more difficult it is to get to. It is difficult to access the heart, lungs, or any other thoracic structure with one cut unless a very large blade (big sword) is used. On the other hand cutting can produce big, gaping, is comparatively shallow wounds so it does not take a very large blade to get through the abdominal wall or any other superficial structure.

I wrote all of that to explain why smaller (let�¢??s say less than 4 inches) blades tend to emphasize cutting. Once you go below a certain length it becomes far less likely that you can reach a vital/incapacitating target with a stab or thrust, so maximizing cutting and slicing seems pretty reasonable. In some cases this leads to some exotic looking and usually curved blade shapes, especially when extreme limitations are placed on size. Your 7 inch bayonet is long enough that thrusting is quite viable; it was designed after all to turn a rifle into a spear. The classic Bowie is a clip point design that allows for cutting, slashing, chopping, and thrusting. However, it doesn�¢??t fit in a pocket.
/Edit to add: Kidneys are vulnerable to both deep cuts and stabs

50

Sentoguy,

That blade looks like a very well-reasoned design given its diminutive size. Itâ??s a prime example of an “exotic” design that has a purpose. Thank you for posting it.

51

wow all i can say is thanks for clearing that up for me guys! and im continually impressed with the amount of knowledge people here posses!!

52

[quote]Robert A wrote:

The �?�¢??ideal�?�¢?? stabbing/thrusting blade would have a fine point, high sectional density (mass directly behind the point), and be strong enough not to snap when it encounters resistance such as bone (this is often accomplished by having a relatively narrow, yet thick blade with triangular or spike/cylindrical/needle profile being extreme examples. An ice-pick or spike style bayonet is a great example. Designs like stilettos or the Fairburn/Sykes personify this Stabbing/penetrating works better against less mobile targets as opposed to vasculature (arteries and veins), which tend to roll around in tissue. So, length is important with a stabbing blade because it allows enough penetration to reach the vitals with prime targets being heart (quick hypovolemic event), aorta (vascular but firmly adhered in place), spleen, liver, and lungs. It should be noted that simply poking a hole through muscle tissue is not all that debilitating.

Fairburn-sykeshttp:
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn-Sykes_Fighting_Knife

[/quote]

While I don’t disagree, I’ve read that troops hated that knife and thought it was useless, and often used the entrenching tool instead during battles requiring CQC.

I myself hold the Ka-bar marine knife in high regard. Stabs, slashes, opens cans, doesn’t break… one of the finest.

And as for the knife that Sento posted, it seems to me that it’s just another one of those futuristic looking “tactical” knives meant more to intimidate than anything else.

53

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I myself hold the Ka-bar marine knife in high regard. Stabs, slashes, opens cans, doesn’t break… one of the finest.

[/quote]

irish,

Gerber blades and the army combatives program have designed a new combat knife as well as a retention system specifically for CQB. Blade was built off the highly regarded ka-bar design

LHR Combat Knife.

54

I’ve seen the knife. I have no respect for gerber though. Their products are chinese shit.

Maybe that knife is better, who knows. I hope so, for your sake.

55

that would be fantastic Sentoguy. I actually live within 30mins of Springfield. I just hope he would be around when I’m out of school.

That knife looks none too impressive. Relatively cheap steel, especially for a combat-level knife at that price point.

56

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Robert A wrote:

The �??�?�¢??ideal�??�?�¢?? stabbing/thrusting blade would have a fine point, high sectional density (mass directly behind the point), and be strong enough not to snap when it encounters resistance such as bone (this is often accomplished by having a relatively narrow, yet thick blade with triangular or spike/cylindrical/needle profile being extreme examples. An ice-pick or spike style bayonet is a great example. Designs like stilettos or the Fairburn/Sykes personify this Stabbing/penetrating works better against less mobile targets as opposed to vasculature (arteries and veins), which tend to roll around in tissue. So, length is important with a stabbing blade because it allows enough penetration to reach the vitals with prime targets being heart (quick hypovolemic event), aorta (vascular but firmly adhered in place), spleen, liver, and lungs. It should be noted that simply poking a hole through muscle tissue is not all that debilitating.

Fairburn-sykeshttp:
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairbairn-Sykes_Fighting_Knife

[/quote]

While I don’t disagree, I’ve read that troops hated that knife and thought it was useless, and often used the entrenching tool instead during battles requiring CQC.

I myself hold the Ka-bar marine knife in high regard. Stabs, slashes, opens cans, doesn’t break… one of the finest.

And as for the knife that Sento posted, it seems to me that it’s just another one of those futuristic looking “tactical” knives meant more to intimidate than anything else.
[/quote]

Irish,

Yes there were a lot of problems with the original Fairburn-Sykes design. Some had to do with execution, i.e. materials and build quality, and other issues stemmed from the design itself, such as point fragility and a shape that was not conducive to taking an edge. My favorite issue was that the point was so sharp that the blade could be buried in bone and become stuck, prompting some end-users to purposely blunt it.

The Applegate-Fairburn design is broader, sturdier, and allows for cutting/slashing/snap-cuts and is usually considered an all and all improvement. I am right there with you on the Ka-Bar and the versatility of a clip point design.

I disagree in part about the knife Sento posted, since he could explain why the departure from more standard designs. However, I have carried a knife since the end of 5th grade, and I skipped 4th. My preference has always been for a sturdy, utilitarian tool as opposed to a uni-tasker/dedicated weapon. I want a strong locking mechanism, one handed opening (more for when I am holding something than some quick draw shit), good steel, and plenty of belly for practical use. If I am going to lug around something that is obviously and primarily a weapon, I want it to go bang. So, I don’t disagree with you in general about all the tacticool shit people buy and carry. You also get a huge thank you for posting MacYoung.

HolyMacoroni,

If you could, I would be interested in more info about the new Gerber.

Everyone,

I am going to post this video in this thread since we have sort of veered onto the subject, and have been way to serious.

Regards,

Robert A

57

What is that thing in the video Robert? It looks suspiciously like a ninja star. its called the "death Dealer 2000)

lol “this thing is like a ferris wheel of death”

“Glad this branch is here, its sort of like an ambush situation”

“The problem there that time was I had the blades the wrong way, thats the problem with these things”

“Imagine, this is stuck in your ass”

“John, you can look at my ass”

Grand video. Laughed my ass off the entire time.

58

[quote]grayman19 wrote:
that would be fantastic Sentoguy. I actually live within 30mins of Springfield. I just hope he would be around when I’m out of school.
[/quote]

Well I know for a fact that he’ll be in the area in August, so you should be out of school then I would think. If I find out he’ll be in the area before that I’ll let you know.

[quote]
That knife looks none too impressive. Relatively cheap steel, especially for a combat-level knife at that price point.[/quote]

Honestly, you kind of have to hold one and try some stuff out with it to really appreciate it. Yeah, I realize that it looks exotic, but every part of the design is functional as well as visually appealing.

Also, remember that it’s a tactical folder. I challenge you to find a more functionally designed (combative oriented) tactical folder out there.

As far as the blade composition, from what I know about CPM S30V, it sounds like the perfect steel for a combat-level knife (corrosion resistant, holds a very sharp and durable edge). What type of steel do you think would be a better fit?

59

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

And as for the knife that Sento posted, it seems to me that it’s just another one of those futuristic looking “tactical” knives meant more to intimidate than anything else.
[/quote]

Then I guess things aren’t as they seem. It’s very functionally designed, and although it does looke pretty futuristic/cool, every part of the design has a specific combat oriented function to it.

60

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’ve seen the knife. I have no respect for gerber though. Their products are chinese shit.

Maybe that knife is better, who knows. I hope so, for your sake.[/quote]

lolz.

you may not like their products. to call them chinese shit is a little excessive.