Change, Change and More Change

[MJS]

In another thread, Ras made this (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1390163&postcount=102) post. Nice post, as usual, but this part caught my eye, so this is what I wanted to focus this thread on.


I think that Doc or somebody mentioned that GGMEP was considering katas or some form of training regarding firearms.I know Doc mentioned that GGMEP was still developing Kenpo,adding deleting and altering at a very late time in his life (and maybe all the way until his untimely passing).I think very much that we should do the same,and that American Kenpo has PLENTY of space...in fact,IS DESIGNED...to encapsulate and manifest whatever we want to put in it.Doc is a long time trainer of police,former or current Sheriff,knows his way around the pistol and I bet he's used his Kenpo during the line of duty too.He and others here would be good sources to refer to regarding American Kenpo--which is DIFFERENT than ED PARKER'S American Kenpo--and firearms.

Unfortunately, I never met GM Parker, but I do believe that he would have continued to modify, change, etc, the art of Kenpo. I also feel that there're people out there that are doing that. They're making changes, ie: Mills and Speakman. Yes, I know those 2 names always surface, but IMO, they surface because those are 2 of the people who stand out in my mind, with their changes.

So, this begs the next question...anytime people talk about change, 9 times out of 10, the next thing is....Well, how can you make a change, if you dont understand the art?? So...should people not adapt to the current time? What does it mean to "understand the art"?

[LuckyKBoxer]

In another thread, Ras made this (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1390163&postcount=102) post. Nice post, as usual, but this part caught my eye, so this is what I wanted to focus this thread on.



Unfortunately, I never met GM Parker, but I do believe that he would have continued to modify, change, etc, the art of Kenpo. I also feel that there're people out there that are doing that. They're making changes, ie: Mills and Speakman. Yes, I know those 2 names always surface, but IMO, they surface because those are 2 of the people who stand out in my mind, with their changes.

So, this begs the next question...anytime people talk about change, 9 times out of 10, the next thing is....Well, how can you make a change, if you dont understand the art?? So...should people not adapt to the current time? What does it mean to "understand the art"?

I think that change is a great thing, but if you do not know the basic format of the original how would you even know what to change? that is what understand the art means.
I picture it as a great chef having made a 9 course meal, that is full of intricate preparations and flavors mixed together.
There is always room to change and alter that 9 course meal, but if you do not understand what makes that meal great to begin with and you just start tossing hamburger meat and a guppy on a plate and calling it surf and turf your not really changing anything, your making some pile of crap that does nobody but a dog any good.
to be honest I look at Kenpo as a a big blueprint. Once you get through the material, which to be honest is a 3-7 year process on average, then you have the framework to go explore anything else you want in more detail... grappling....firearms....knifes...any weapon..any style, and have a much better point with which to ask the questions that matter. why it works, why it doesnt work.

[LuckyKBoxer]

Maybe a better example would be a person who drives a Ford Expedition and thinks.. hey I can change this and make it a 4x4 by putting 40 inch tires on it and a roll cage, some mud flaps, and replace the hood and fenders with fiberglass and slap some stickers on the bumpers...
it might work, but its not going to be as good an adaption as it could be if that person really understood the vehicle, and the terrain he was going to want to off road in and then changed everything on the Expedition to match the terrain..

[bushidomartialarts]

The most important thing about changing kenpo (I got this from Dave Hebler, with whom I was privileged to study for a while in 03 and 04) is to remember that the techniques aren't really self-defense techniques.

They're lesson plans. Nothing more.

If you understand what they are intended to teach, then adapting them to fit a specific student's needs, or to accommodate for changes in reality -- such as the fact that nobody attacks with that overhand Psycho knife stab anymore -- is pretty simple.

Just my 2 cents.

[Touch Of Death]

The most important thing about changing kenpo (I got this from Dave Hebler, with whom I was privileged to study for a while in 03 and 04) is to remember that the techniques aren't really self-defense techniques.

They're lesson plans. Nothing more.

If you understand what they are intended to teach, then adapting them to fit a specific student's needs, or to accommodate for changes in reality -- such as the fact that nobody attacks with that overhand Psycho knife stab anymore -- is pretty simple.

Just my 2 cents.Check the statistics, and come back with that one.
Sean

[Touch Of Death]

Maybe a better example would be a person who drives a Ford Expedition and thinks.. hey I can change this and make it a 4x4 by putting 40 inch tires on it and a roll cage, some mud flaps, and replace the hood and fenders with fiberglass and slap some stickers on the bumpers...
it might work, but its not going to be as good an adaption as it could be if that person really understood the vehicle, and the terrain he was going to want to off road in and then changed everything on the Expedition to match the terrain..I don't know how that relates to kenpo, but you have given me some excellent ideas on upgrading my Buick Skylark.:mst:
Sean

[Brian R. VanCise]

MJS that vast majority of people always fight change once some thing is established. However, I think you are absolutely right that GM Parker would have continued to change and improve his system incorporating grappling, etc. as the years went on. He was someone who was innovative and wanted to grow. I don't think he would have sat around and said, "this is it and all of it"! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

[bushidomartialarts]

Check the statistics, and come back with that one.
Sean

Which stats? Overhand knife attack?

[Touch Of Death]

Which stats? Overhand knife attack?Yeah, or just watch an old episode of Jerry Springer and then come tell us nobody ever throws over hand attacks.:)
Sean

[bushidomartialarts]

My info's from LEO and military training I've participated in. Mostly anecdotal, but probably accurate. You're much more likely to get lateral slashes, back and forth, with a knife these days. Folks have seen too many movies where the stunt director actually had some training.

Fair enough though that it might happen. But at the ratio our kenpo knife defenses seem to indicate? No, sir.

It gets even worse if you think about what a skilled knife or stick fighter would do. Our kenpo doesn't begin to approach it. Dave was pretty adamant about this....people have gotten more sophisticated about fighting since GGMEP developed the original curriculum. Parker would have changed them to accommodate.

[Blindside]

My info's from LEO and military training I've participated in. Mostly anecdotal, but probably accurate. You're much more likely to get lateral slashes, back and forth, with a knife these days. Folks have seen too many movies where the stunt director actually had some training.

Fair enough though that it might happen. But at the ratio our kenpo knife defenses seem to indicate? No, sir.

It gets even worse if you think about what a skilled knife or stick fighter would do. Our kenpo doesn't begin to approach it. Dave was pretty adamant about this....people have gotten more sophisticated about fighting since GGMEP developed the original curriculum. Parker would have changed them to accommodate.

I'll be the first to say that the standard defenses in Kenpo don't address the "trained attacker" but from every stat that I have seen the two most common attacks are the overhead psycho attack and the straight thrust, though it is more like an uppercut than the common lunging attack you often see in Kenpo. Fortunately for all of us, most people aren't trained.

Edit: And I should point out that my training in Kali involves lots of training in exactly the sort of "Psycho knife stab" that you are saying that nobody does anymore, and that is from the offensive standpoint, not the defensive.

[bushidomartialarts]

I'll be the first to say that the standard defenses in Kenpo don't address the "trained attacker" but from every stat that I have seen the two most common attacks are the overhead psycho attack and the straight thrust, though it is more like an uppercut than a lunging attack. Fortunately for all of us, most people aren't trained.

Edit: And I should point out that my training in Kali involves lots of training in exactly the sort of "Psycho knife stab" that you are saying that nobody does anymore, and that is from the offensive standpoint, not the defensive.

I'd be interested in seeing some of those stats. It's different from what I've been told, but again my info is anecdotal, not statistical.

[Touch Of Death]

I'd be interested in seeing some of those stats. It's different from what I've been told, but again my info is anecdotal, not statistical.
Exactly!:)

[LuckyKBoxer]

MJS that vast majority of people always fight change once some thing is established. However, I think you are absolutely right that GM Parker would have continued to change and improve his system incorporating grappling, etc. as the years went on. He was someone who was innovative and wanted to grow. I don't think he would have sat around and said, "this is it and all of it"! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

I don't know if he wanted to incorporate grappling, as opposed to being anti grappling.
he has a plenty of trianing in Judo and Jiu Jitsu, and had plenty of grappling experience and knowledge. I think he created Kenpo to be a street specific art that could defeat a grappler.
Do not get me wrong I love grappling, I have been training in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for years now, I just think that with his early training in arts that had heavy grappling components, and the fact that he did not put much in the way of ground work in the system would suggest he was going a different way entirely, not that he couldn't, jsut that he chose not to partake in the grappling aspects.
Talking to several people who knew him personally, and trained with him at his house(I did not start training Kenpo until after the man had passed) they have all said he had folders with massive amounts of information on grappling, and ideas on grappling in file cabinets that he kept with other information as well. I have heard some state that he was working on grappling curriculums, it would be interesting to see what he would have come up with, or did come up with but never released for mass consumption, but who knows. Unfortunately unless his family releases some of his notes, and work on grappling at some point we have nothing to do but guess.

[bushidomartialarts]

Grappling as a kenpoist is fighting the other guy's kind of fight.

But, kenpo should incorporate some training in how to get out of a grapple.

[LuckyKBoxer]

My info's from LEO and military training I've participated in. Mostly anecdotal, but probably accurate. You're much more likely to get lateral slashes, back and forth, with a knife these days. Folks have seen too many movies where the stunt director actually had some training.

Fair enough though that it might happen. But at the ratio our kenpo knife defenses seem to indicate? No, sir.

It gets even worse if you think about what a skilled knife or stick fighter would do. Our kenpo doesn't begin to approach it. Dave was pretty adamant about this....people have gotten more sophisticated about fighting since GGMEP developed the original curriculum. Parker would have changed them to accommodate.

Changed what to accomodate? the skeletal groundwork, or framework is there, all that you have to do is drill it.
I think the system is a base.. a couple years(2-7 depending on how often and how serious you train) to get the basic material down(black belt) then you can start working the advanced stuff with a solid base... at leas thats how I look at it.. none of the stuff we do up to and including black belt is super advanced, its basic, its learning how and why to move, and what directions you can move. Once you get that down you are ready to work on that advanced material, ready to explore how to deal with trained opponents.. I mean really how much training do you think you need to deal with a trained opponent... assuming a trained opponent has spent 2-7 years getting trained.. do you not think you would need more training then that to deal with them?

[LuckyKBoxer]

Grappling as a kenpoist is fighting the other guy's kind of fight.

But, kenpo should incorporate some training in how to get out of a grapple.

oh I agree.. I think the avoidance is there in the system to be worked... grip fighting, fighting against the front and rear bearhug, or against the tackle.... what other ways are there really to get into a "grapple" what is not really there is what to do once you are on the ground... I absolutely agree with that, at least how it related to positioning, and advancement or escape from positioning, submissions and protections from those submissions...
to bad we don't have him around to see how he would have addressed things like sports fighting, the different venues, or if he would have ignored them all together and worked on something different. I think that spending more then a few minutes thinking about it is a waste of time though, and would be better spent asking the masters of today what they are doing on it.

[LuckyKBoxer]

I don't know how that relates to kenpo, but you have given me some excellent ideas on upgrading my Buick Skylark.:mst:
Sean

if you do all of that to a buick Skylark, I will send you a tenth degree black belt in Ghetto offroading. complete with certificate!

[MJS]

I think that change is a great thing, but if you do not know the basic format of the original how would you even know what to change? that is what understand the art means.
I picture it as a great chef having made a 9 course meal, that is full of intricate preparations and flavors mixed together.
There is always room to change and alter that 9 course meal, but if you do not understand what makes that meal great to begin with and you just start tossing hamburger meat and a guppy on a plate and calling it surf and turf your not really changing anything, your making some pile of crap that does nobody but a dog any good.
to be honest I look at Kenpo as a a big blueprint. Once you get through the material, which to be honest is a 3-7 year process on average, then you have the framework to go explore anything else you want in more detail... grappling....firearms....knifes...any weapon..any style, and have a much better point with which to ask the questions that matter. why it works, why it doesnt work.

Good points and I couldnt agree more. But, while I dont disagree with your timeframe that you propose, I think that some others may disagree. I mean, I've seen people tell others, who have more time in that that, that they dont understand the system, if they need to make changes.

Frankly I disagree....if someone can't grasp something after 7yrs, well....

[MJS]

Maybe a better example would be a person who drives a Ford Expedition and thinks.. hey I can change this and make it a 4x4 by putting 40 inch tires on it and a roll cage, some mud flaps, and replace the hood and fenders with fiberglass and slap some stickers on the bumpers...
it might work, but its not going to be as good an adaption as it could be if that person really understood the vehicle, and the terrain he was going to want to off road in and then changed everything on the Expedition to match the terrain..

LOL, funny you use that analogy. I've said the same thing when the topic was on the use of the knife in Kenpo. If you dont understand the blade, how're you going to adapt it to Kenpo? I used a Honda and a Ferrari though....no matter how much time and effort is put into the little Honda, it'll never be a Ferrari. :D

[MJS]

The most important thing about changing kenpo (I got this from Dave Hebler, with whom I was privileged to study for a while in 03 and 04) is to remember that the techniques aren't really self-defense techniques.

They're lesson plans. Nothing more.

If you understand what they are intended to teach, then adapting them to fit a specific student's needs, or to accommodate for changes in reality -- such as the fact that nobody attacks with that overhand Psycho knife stab anymore -- is pretty simple.

Just my 2 cents.

Yet interestingly enough, people will say that the 'stats' show that that is exactly how people will attack...the overhead and the straight thrust. Personally I think it'd be wise to train for that, and a slash, a rapid fire pumping action of the knife such as we'd see in a prison knife attack, as well as stationary knife attacks, ie: having the blade held to your throat.

[MJS]

MJS that vast majority of people always fight change once some thing is established. However, I think you are absolutely right that GM Parker would have continued to change and improve his system incorporating grappling, etc. as the years went on. He was someone who was innovative and wanted to grow. I don't think he would have sat around and said, "this is it and all of it"! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

Agreed Brian. But while this is true, I've seen the following asked as well: If Mr. Parker made changes, why do people frown on others that make changes? Was Mr. Parker the only one capable of making a change?

[MJS]

I don't know if he wanted to incorporate grappling, as opposed to being anti grappling.
he has a plenty of trianing in Judo and Jiu Jitsu, and had plenty of grappling experience and knowledge. I think he created Kenpo to be a street specific art that could defeat a grappler.
Do not get me wrong I love grappling, I have been training in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for years now, I just think that with his early training in arts that had heavy grappling components, and the fact that he did not put much in the way of ground work in the system would suggest he was going a different way entirely, not that he couldn't, jsut that he chose not to partake in the grappling aspects.
Talking to several people who knew him personally, and trained with him at his house(I did not start training Kenpo until after the man had passed) they have all said he had folders with massive amounts of information on grappling, and ideas on grappling in file cabinets that he kept with other information as well. I have heard some state that he was working on grappling curriculums, it would be interesting to see what he would have come up with, or did come up with but never released for mass consumption, but who knows. Unfortunately unless his family releases some of his notes, and work on grappling at some point we have nothing to do but guess.


I for one, would be interested in seeing the notes. Everyone that I've asked about grappling, says that its groundfighting, not grappling. I'd be interested in knowing exactly what it consisted of.

[MJS]

Grappling as a kenpoist is fighting the other guy's kind of fight.

But, kenpo should incorporate some training in how to get out of a grapple.

Agreed! I've been preaching this since I joined this forum, but sadly, I think my posts were misunderstood. I was not suggesting then, nor now, that we abandon Kenpo and take up (insert any grappling art here) but instead to learn how to best get out of the potential positions, and get back up.

[Twin Fist]

well, we know for a fact that there was jujitsu in the kenpo that SGM Parker learned from Prof Chow.

can everyone agree on that?

the only question then is :
"would it violate SGM Parker's vision of Kenpo to add the grappling back into it"?

[bushidomartialarts]

well, we know for a fact that there was jujitsu in the kenpo that SGM Parker learned from Prof Chow.

can everyone agree on that?

the only question then is :
"would it violate SGM Parker's vision of Kenpo to add the grappling back into it"?

There is nothing effective that would violate SGM Parker's vision. Unless (sadly) it was unprofitable.

[bushidomartialarts]

Yet interestingly enough, people will say that the 'stats' show that that is exactly how people will attack...the overhead and the straight thrust. Personally I think it'd be wise to train for that, and a slash, a rapid fire pumping action of the knife such as we'd see in a prison knife attack, as well as stationary knife attacks, ie: having the blade held to your throat.

Still waiting on those stats. My evidence (as mentioned earlier) contradicts that, but is anecdotal....if I see contradictory data, I'll change my tune.

Totally agree that we should have techniques against many kinds of knife attacks -- the downward stab is overrepresented, to say the least.

[Brian R. VanCise]

The big thing I see is that he was not someone to say, "this is it" no I think he would have continued making improvements and become better in every area. When I think of GM Ed Parker I do not think of a great grappler. I am sure he had some training and probably was decent but that obviously was not his strength or it probably would have shown through. However, if he had been alive to see the revolution in the Martial Sciences when the Gracies began in the UFC I think you may have seen him progress and change and adapt more grappling into Kenpo and I do not mean anti-grappling. No, I think you would have seen more grappling oriented material coming out by him. However, that is all pure speculation on my part based on his make up! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

[Touch Of Death]

Agreed Brian. But while this is true, I've seen the following asked as well: If Mr. Parker made changes, why do people frown on others that make changes? Was Mr. Parker the only one capable of making a change?Nobody cares about the changes, its the part where you still call it Ed Parker's kenpo and teach it to other's.:mst:
Sean

[bushidomartialarts]

How many kenpo seniors does it take to change a lightbulb?

[MJS]

Nobody cares about the changes, its the part where you still call it Ed Parker's kenpo and teach it to other's.:mst:
Sean

Ford has the Mustang, Escape, Fusion, Explorer and Expedition. All different vehicles, yet they're all produced by the same company...Ford. Mills has his version, Speakman, Pick, you, me and everyone else has theirs. Like Ford, all the Kenpo still comes from the same source.

I see what you're saying though.


How many kenpo seniors does it take to change a lightbulb?

:lol:

[bushidomartialarts]

Eleven. One to change it, and ten to say "that's not how GM Parker showed me"

[Brian R. VanCise]

Change is usually fought against but a lot of times change is for the better. I think those Kenpoist's that step out and learn more then bring it back to the system deserve a lot of credit! As long as they stay within the core fundamental principles then why not go out and learn more! I do not think that GM Ed Parker would tell people not to learn more as that would go against what he himself was doing on his martial path! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

The problem is when someone says "this is it" or "we always had that"! They have kind've shut off their mind and become close minded. If you become close minded as a martial practitioner you might as well do some thing else with your time! I know way to many people that have became close minded through the years and well they really never improved much while training anymore! Instead always be a student and try and learn more! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif I honestly think GM Ed Parker would tell his people still training in Kenpo to go out and learn more! Bring it back and lets train!

[Josh Oakley]

Here are some statistics or research I found on knife attacks:

http://www.lwcbooks.com/articles/edgedweapons.html
This one is a secondary source, but it would seem from reading it that the greatest danger is multiple stab wounds and not being able to recognize you're being attacked with a knife, even though you've seen it.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/Search/Abstracts.aspx?id=206343
This is just an abstract, and again, a secondary source, but it suggests nothing about an overhead attack.

The other abstracts I read all read pretty much the same: sneak attack, multiple stab and slash attacks, failure to recognize that you're being attacked with a knife, etc., but nothing supporting the statement that overhead knife attacks are common.

Since you've read the statististics, could you please provide them? I'm trying, I promise, but I'm not finding anything that could back up your claim.

[bushidomartialarts]

That's more in line with what I've been told, as well.

On the other hand, Blindside has the knowledge of a great many things. I'm inclined to take anything he says about sticks and knives and put a great big exclamation point at the end.

[Josh Oakley]

Change is usually fought against but a lot of times change is for the better. I think those Kenpoist's that step out and learn more then bring it back to the system deserve a lot of credit! As long as they stay within the core fundamental principles then why not go out and learn more! I do not think that GM Ed Parker would tell people not to learn more as that would go against what he himself was doing on his martial path! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.gif

The problem is when someone says "this is it" or "we always had that"! They have kind've shut off their mind and become close minded. If you become close minded as a martial practitioner you might as well do some thing else with your time! I know way to many people that have became close minded through the years and well they really never improved much while training anymore! Instead always be a student and try and learn more! http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif I honestly think GM Ed Parker would tell his people still training in Kenpo to go out and learn more! Bring it back and lets train!

You'd get a kick out of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn.

[OKenpo942]

In another thread, Ras made this (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1390163&postcount=102) post. Nice post, as usual, but this part caught my eye, so this is what I wanted to focus this thread on.



Unfortunately, I never met GM Parker, but I do believe that he would have continued to modify, change, etc, the art of Kenpo. I also feel that there're people out there that are doing that. They're making changes, ie: Mills and Speakman. Yes, I know those 2 names always surface, but IMO, they surface because those are 2 of the people who stand out in my mind, with their changes.

So, this begs the next question...anytime people talk about change, 9 times out of 10, the next thing is....Well, how can you make a change, if you dont understand the art?? So...should people not adapt to the current time? What does it mean to "understand the art"?

I have never met either Mr. Speakman nor Mr. Mills, but I have seen them in some video clips and heard a lot about them. We are clearly talking about two very accomplished kenpoists who trained directly under Mr. Parker. The two of them, without question, have, what is discussed in another thread, a true "understanding" of the art (which I feel can be relative to each individual) as taught to them by Mr. Parker himself.

Both of the men you reference have amazing skill and teaching ability. If you were to study their teachings independently, I think you would find that both of them are consistent in teaching the underlying principles of EPAK. They have made it their own, but it is not so different from what Mr. Parker taught.

It is well documented that the accumulative journal was created so that the "Ed Parker" schools would have a consistent curriculum to follow so that you could train at any given school and not be lost. The terminology would be the same, the principles would be the same, the school rules would be the same, etc.

Since Mr. Parker is not with us anymore to implement his own changes (which I strongly believe would be the case), We must rely, as they do in nearly every other art, on the definition of our "elders" perspectives on what they were taught and trust that they know what the heck they are talking about.

Are they teaching the EPAK system...? No, but I believe that they are teaching from the base concepts and what they know of what they were taught and that it is EPAK, just not the system as Mr. Parker put on paper.

I think we are foolish to not listen to what each and every one of these first and second generation guys have to teach as they are our living resource into the mind of the late great Mr. Parker whom I did have the opportunity of training with, albeit as a kid, on a couple occasions. He was an amazing mind.

As far as not looking outside of Kenpo? I think we are foolish there again if we don't. EPAK is a system built upon aspects of other arts. Mr. Parker himself wanted the art to be tailored to each individual. I think that this means as far as ones physical makeup goes as well as to each persons experiences (life on the street or other martial arts). I think it is our duty to both preserve what Mr. Parker taught as well as to continue the evolution of this beautiful and effective art.

Hope I answered your questions you asked me from the other thread. I tend to ramble a bit.

God bless and stay safe,

James

[Blindside]

Sorry guys, I managed to forget about this thread, but I went back into my notes and did a bit of googling.


Here are some statistics or research I found on knife attacks:

http://www.lwcbooks.com/articles/edgedweapons.html
This one is a secondary source, but it would seem from reading it that the greatest danger is multiple stab wounds and not being able to recognize you're being attacked with a knife, even though you've seen it.

In terms of anecdotal information, from that same document this quote appears by the author Darren Laur. (And it should be noted that this is one of the better compilations of data that I have been able to find.)



I have personally gathered research form around the world on edged weapon assaults and the following facts emerged during my research:



The most popular assault technique utilized by the attacker was found to be the hammer strike — either straight down or diagonally

The victim tends to squat in an effort to take a path which offers perceived escape

Many people seldom saw the edged weapon that penetrated their body. They failed to recognize the danger cues due to faulty perception

Knife attacks were found to be exceptionally accurate, to penetrate deeper that some bullets, creating remarkable permanent cavities and rip through numerous organs in one stroke

In reality, within their respective ranges, knives are superior to firearms as far as lethality is concerned



http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/Search/Abstracts.aspx?id=206343
This is just an abstract, and again, a secondary source, but it suggests nothing about an overhead attack.

The other abstracts I read all read pretty much the same: sneak attack, multiple stab and slash attacks, failure to recognize that you're being attacked with a knife, etc., but nothing supporting the statement that overhead knife attacks are common.

Since you've read the statististics, could you please provide them? I'm trying, I promise, but I'm not finding anything that could back up your claim.

Knife attacks are a bit odd, there are several studies that look at mortalities related to knife attacks, those are from forensic reports as those locations are well documented. The sample is biased because the stabbings tend to be more fatal than the slash wounds. The majority of fatal knife wounds involve wounds to the torso, often multiple wounds, but that doesn't really tell the whole story about knife attacks.

This article may have a cultural bias that is different than the US (or UK) because it is involving a rural agricultural culture and items such as machetes are more common than most of our Western cultures. But it shows a tendency toward head and neck injuries.



The pattern of homicidal slash/chop injuries: a 10 year retrospective study in University Hospital Kuala Lumpur.
by: B. B. Ong (http://www.citeulike.org/user/brian/author/Ong:BB)
J Clin Forensic Med, Vol. 6, No. 1. (March 1999), pp. 24-29. Key: citeulike:1013515
Abstract
Homicides as a result of slash/chop injuries are not commonly reported in forensic literature. A 10 year retrospective study from 1987 to 1996 was performed on the pattern of homicidal slash/chop injuries in University Hospital, Kuala Lumpur. A total of 37 cases were analysed. The ages ranged from 17 to 85 years. The victims consisted of Indonesian (37.8%), Chinese (27.0%), Indian (24.3%) and Malay (8.1%) ethnic groups; 2.7% of the cases were not identified. Most of the cases were due to intentional violence (n = 27), while the rest consisted of domestic violence (n = 2), robbery (n = 2), psychiatric homicide (n = 1), accident (n = 2) and unclassified (n = 3). In the intentional violence group, the majority of the victims (n = 16) had more than five wounds. In contrast, the victims in other categories had less than five wounds each, with the exception of a single case in the psychiatric-homicide group. In homicide victims with a single wound, the most common site of injury was the neck. In those with multiple wounds, the common sites were the head and neck. Sixteen cases showed defence injuries, all of them belonging to the intentional-violence group. The reasons for the high incidence of homicidal slash/chop wounds are discussed, as well as the difficulties associated with interpretation of such wounds.


One from the UK, one done on survivors of edged weapon attacks:




Sharp force injuries in clinical forensic medicine--findings in victims and perpetrators.
by: U. Schmidt, S. Pollak
Forensic Sci Int, Vol. 159, No. 2-3. (2 June 2006), pp. 113-118. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.07.003 Key: citeulike:1013525
Abstract

The injury findings in 58 perpetrators and 158 victims surviving bodily injuries due to sharp force are presented here. Defence injuries were found in 45.9% of the victims without any significant differences between males and females. There was no clear predominance of defence injuries on the left forearm and hand, as is known from autopsy studies; the right and the left hands were affected with an almost identical frequency. Regarding other parts of the victims' bodies, the topographic distribution of injuries showed a marked concentration on the left side (63.7%). The thorax, head and neck were frequently affected (45.9%, 15.3% and 15.3%, respectively), and less often the abdomen (11.1%), the lumbar and gluteal region (6.3%) and the lower extremities (6.1%). In surviving victims with only one singular stab apart from the upper limbs, the incidence of additional defence injuries on the hands and/or forearms was significantly higher (28.3%) than in fatalities. When the perpetrators had unintentionally cut their own hands, the frequency of these injuries on the right and left hands was almost equal.
Head and neck injuries are 30% of the wounded locations
Finally, this looks at all cases of edged weapon attacks at Glasgow Royal Infirmary over a 4 year period, I have gone into the rather lengthy abstract and removed the Phase 1 material and added one of the pertinent charts from the main article that wasn't included. The formatting of the chart is all screwed up so I tried to simplify it

Wounding patterns and human performance in knife attacks: optimising the protection provided by knife-resistant body armour
J Clin Forensic Med. 2003 Dec;10(4):243-8.
A. Bleetman, , a, C. H. Watsonb, I. Horsfalla, b and S. M. Championa, b
Abstract
Background:
Stab attacks generate high loads,[1] and to defeat them, armour needs to be of a certain thickness and stiffness. [2 and 3] Slash attacks produce much lower loads and armour designed to defeat them can be far lighter and more flexible.
Methods and subjects:
..................
Phase 2: Clinical experience with edged weapon attacks: The location and severity of all penetrating injuries in patients attending the Glasgow Royal Infirmary between 1993 and 1996 were charted on anatomical figures.
Results
...............
Phase 2: 431 of the 500 patients had been wounded with edged weapons. The average number of wounds sustained by victims in knife assaults was 2.4. The distribution of wounds by frequency and severity are presented.
Body Region
% of all wounds
Distribution of wounds by body region
Head (face and scalp) 22.3
Neck 6.5
Shoulders 2.7
Left chest 14.4
Right chest 7.9
Right abdomen 6.4
Left abdomen 6.0
Right groin 0.5
Left groin 0.5
Thighs 7.9
Buttocks 4.9
Right arm 9.8
Left arm 10.1


So those are the better edged weapon stats that I have been able to dig up, it might make its own thread, but would be happy to discuss the potential fallacies in the stats.
"There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies, and statistics." ~Mark Twain

[Inkspill]

from what I've reviewed, living in the US, the most likely attack is a 'prison style' knife attack, a flurry of quick stabs aimed at the body, from the front, side, or rear; as many stabs as can be executed as quickly as possible.

generally, most martial arts I've come across defend against a single thrust or a double slash, with a large commitment behind it. this doesn't seem realistic.

[Blindside]

from what I've reviewed, living in the US, the most likely attack is a 'prison style' knife attack, a flurry of quick stabs aimed at the body, from the front, side, or rear; as many stabs as can be executed as quickly as possible.

generally, most martial arts I've come across defend against a single thrust or a double slash, with a large commitment behind it. this doesn't seem realistic.

As just a quick bit of anecdotal research, I did a google search for "knife attacks," running through the first 10 pages I came up with 11 news articles that were good enough mention "slash" or "stab" or something similar, 5 were slashes, 6 were stabs. My group is now a primarily kali based group and we spend alot of time defending just the sort of attack you are talking about, so I am certainly not discounting the validity of the statement, but I am not sure that "most likely" is the right term. Maybe "most dangerous."