Defense against weapons tests

[Aikicomp]

This was originally a reply to a thread in the armoury and it was suggested I make a thread of it. So here goes.

Our style of Ju-Jitsu has a test in which the person giving the test (a person who has passed our knife fighting test) attacks the person for all intensive purposes trying to "kill" them. Nobody can pass the test if they are cut more than three times in a non vital area and if you are cut in a vital area you fail the test instantly. BTW, we use a hard rubber or wood knife coated with chalk or other "tell tale" substance and is one of the tests required for Shodan.
We also have a test for Shodan in which you are attacked by three people with weapons, any combination of knife, gun and stick stationary or moving. They are purely spontanious attacks where the person taking the test has no idea what or from what direction the attacks are coming.

Is our standard too high? Perhaps.....but, in relationship to what is at stake I would say no.

What do you all think? What are your weapons defense tests like? How are they conducted? I welcome any input you may have. Thanks in advance.

Michael

 

[sgtmac_46]

This was originally a reply to a thread in the armoury and it was suggested I make a thread of it. So here goes.

Our style of Ju-Jitsu has a test in which the person giving the test (a person who has passed our knife fighting test) attacks the person for all intensive purposes trying to "kill" them. Nobody can pass the test if they are cut more than three times in a non vital area and if you are cut in a vital area you fail the test instantly. BTW, we use a hard rubber or wood knife coated with chalk or other "tell tale" substance and is one of the tests required for Shodan.
We also have a test for Shodan in which you are attacked by three people with weapons, any combination of knife, gun and stick stationary or moving. They are purely spontanious attacks where the person taking the test has no idea what or from what direction the attacks are coming.

Is our standard too high? Perhaps.....but, in relationship to what is at stake I would say no.

What do you all think? What are your weapons defense tests like? How are they conducted? I welcome any input you may have. Thanks in advance.

Michael

How is the attack conducted.......using some 'method' of knife attack, or using the standard, and extremely effective, 'pump' attack so popular in prisons......I guess the question i'm asking is whether there is a pre-arranged type of attack to use, or if it's just potluck attackers choice?

As to your standard, I don't think it's remotely too high given, as you say, what is at stake.

 

[Blindside]

We also have a test for Shodan in which you are attacked by three people with weapons, any combination of knife, gun and stick stationary or moving. They are purely spontanious attacks where the person taking the test has no idea what or from what direction the attacks are coming.

How are the knife attacks are conducted. Is the fully dedicated, step through thrusting or slashing motion, or is the person using broken attacks, rapidly retracting and thrusting again? I'm just curious because coming from a weapon based art, when we run scenario or self-defense training against the "skilled" attacker, "mortality" of the defender is pretty high.

 

[MJS]

This was originally a reply to a thread in the armoury and it was suggested I make a thread of it. So here goes.

Our style of Ju-Jitsu has a test in which the person giving the test (a person who has passed our knife fighting test) attacks the person for all intensive purposes trying to "kill" them. Nobody can pass the test if they are cut more than three times in a non vital area and if you are cut in a vital area you fail the test instantly. BTW, we use a hard rubber or wood knife coated with chalk or other "tell tale" substance and is one of the tests required for Shodan.
We also have a test for Shodan in which you are attacked by three people with weapons, any combination of knife, gun and stick stationary or moving. They are purely spontanious attacks where the person taking the test has no idea what or from what direction the attacks are coming.

Is our standard too high? Perhaps.....but, in relationship to what is at stake I would say no.

What do you all think? What are your weapons defense tests like? How are they conducted? I welcome any input you may have. Thanks in advance.

Michael

I'm going to assume that the bold part means that the attacker is really going all out, giving a realistic feel to the attack? If so, then IMHO, I think that you have a good set up going.

The weapons tests that I've taken...Kenpo and Arnis, have been good. All of the attacks were hard and fast, and yes, there were times when I ate a shot, but for the most part, I feel that I lived.

 

[searcher]

If it is random, be glad that a Sayoc Kali guy is not the one attacking.

I would say that what you have is a pretty good setup for testing ones abilities against a knife. You can't make the guy on the street slow down.

 

[still learning]

Hello, Every test has to have it goals and limits on what is require to pass... All of us want to know? will we be successful in real life.


In real life...NOT knowing NOT expecting,adrenline fear, in the dark, on the streets/sidewalks.....NOT prepare for any attack....unexpected....THIS IS THE REAL TEST....

for those who fail in class....on the streets....they, the fail students will remember their lessons....more.....

Survival instincts.....even when cut many times....is the real test.

Aloha, (real test answer- in any knife attack....is to escape at every chance- meaning runnning away..not fighting back...first.)

 

[Deaf Smith]

Any test made has to be uniform or else some may have easy test others hard ones.

As long as the attacker uses different types of attacks without telegraphing beforehand, and as long as they are uniformly agressive, then I would consider them a valid test.

Yes, the street has many variables and it's a very unpredictable place, but short of the actual street, well this is about as best as can be done yet still be a unform test all students have to go through.

Deaf

 

[Aikicomp]

Thanks for the replies so far.

How is the attack conducted.......using some 'method' of knife attack, or using the standard, and extremely effective, 'pump' attack so popular in prisons......I guess the question i'm asking is whether there is a pre-arranged type of attack to use, or if it's just potluck attackers choice?

As to your standard, I don't think it's remotely too high given, as you say, what is at stake.

Attacker's choice.

How are the knife attacks are conducted. Is the fully dedicated, step through thrusting or slashing motion, or is the person using broken attacks, rapidly retracting and thrusting again? I'm just curious because coming from a weapon based art, when we run scenario or self-defense training against the "skilled" attacker, "mortality" of the defender is pretty high.

All of the above, as I said we make it "realistic". When I give the test I try to cut the person to ribbons. Legs, arms, torso, hands, head and neck by using thrusts and slashes, combinations of the two, no set attacks, no rhyme or reason.

I'm going to assume that the bold part means that the attacker is really going all out, giving a realistic feel to the attack? If so, then IMHO, I think that you have a good set up going.

The weapons tests that I've taken...Kenpo and Arnis, have been good. All of the attacks were hard and fast, and yes, there were times when I ate a shot, but for the most part, I feel that I lived.

Absolutely correct. Thanks

If it is random, be glad that a Sayoc Kali guy is not the one attacking.
I would say that what you have is a pretty good setup for testing ones abilities against a knife. You can't make the guy on the street slow down.

It is random and I understand about the Kali, had some un-official training in Kali and Silat which I incorporated into our testing. The co-worker of mine showed me a little bit of their knifework and it was amazing.

Hello, Every test has to have it goals and limits on what is require to pass... All of us want to know? will we be successful in real life.

In real life...NOT knowing NOT expecting,adrenline fear, in the dark, on the streets/sidewalks.....NOT prepare for any attack....unexpected....THIS IS THE REAL TEST....

for those who fail in class....on the streets....they, the fail students will remember their lessons....more.....

Survival instincts.....even when cut many times....is the real test.

Aloha, (real test answer- in any knife attack....is to escape at every chance- meaning runnning away..not fighting back...first.)

Yes, that is why we teach on the first day a student starts practicing for any test. "He who fights and runs away" eh? Always know who is and what is going on around you at all times, for what you do not see or hear or notice will injure or kill you.

Any test made has to be uniform or else some may have easy test others hard ones.

As long as the attacker uses different types of attacks without telegraphing beforehand, and as long as they are uniformly agressive, then I would consider them a valid test.

Yes, the street has many variables and it's a very unpredictable place, but short of the actual street, well this is about as best as can be done yet still be a unform test all students have to go through.

Deaf

Agreed, that is why we make it very difficult to pass the test because on the street it will be harder.

Again thank you all for your input and responses.

Michael

 

[Aiki Lee]

My dojo does the exact same thing. It's not "too much", the more realistic your training the better your chances for survival I think.

 

[DavidCC]

We also have a test for Shodan in which you are attacked by three people with weapons, any combination of knife, gun and stick stationary or moving. They are purely spontanious attacks where the person taking the test has no idea what or from what direction the attacks are coming.

so how often does the guy with the gun stand 15 feet away and just shoot the testee while he is engaged with the knife and/or stick guys? I would think that if the attackers were _really_ going all out to kill him, they could do it every time...

 

[Aikicomp]

so how often does the guy with the gun stand 15 feet away and just shoot the testee while he is engaged with the knife and/or stick guys? I would think that if the attackers were _really_ going all out to kill him, they could do it every time...

We do address your scenario, although, it becomes a little more complicated. I guess it would depend upon how bad he wants to chance shooting one of his friends.

Your thinking is correct and true, albeit somewhat simplistic and obvious and not conductive to learning the skills needed for a very serious and life threatening self defense situation.

Thanks for your input

Michael

 

[Aiki Lee]

so how often does the guy with the gun stand 15 feet away and just shoot the testee while he is engaged with the knife and/or stick guys? I would think that if the attackers were _really_ going all out to kill him, they could do it every time...

In my dojo this scenerios is avoided by using human shields and making your way to an exit. As martial artists we know we aren't invincible; we can be killed by some lucky punch or a knife wound or a gun shot, but the important thing is we are making it harder for them to hit us or hit us fataly if a shot lands.

 

[still learning]

Hello, Test is just a measurment of what you remember of what you learn in class and how well you perform it...in a safe, unharmful situtions...because you know it is a practice knife/weapons and NO one in class is really going to stab/slice you.

All schools need to give some kind of test....and it should not be easy!

Is this question a test? A. Yes, B. Maybe, C, Could be, D. All of the above.

Aloha, ......learn running away...and fast too!

 

[DavidCC]

We do address your scenario, although, it becomes a little more complicated. I guess it would depend upon how bad he wants to chance shooting one of his friends.

Your thinking is correct and true, albeit somewhat simplistic and obvious and not conductive to learning the skills needed for a very serious and life threatening self defense situation.

Thanks for your input

Michael

"Simplistic, obvious and not conducive to learning" to think that the guy with the gun might not stand within arm's reach? OK I admit it IS obvious. But far from simple and offers a lot to learn IMHO.

But anyway I think the level of realism in your test can be measured by one statistic - how often does the testee "survive" that 3-on-1 scenario?

 

[Brad Dunne]

I've struggled, thinking how to word my response as to not offend, but I lost the struggle. What follows, will surely get some folks nickers in a twist, but here goes. There is no way to offer "Realistic Training", when dealing with weapons, when the attacker is offering/allowed to "attack with all intensive purposes, trying to (kill) them" and the defender in reality must restrain certain defenses. Why?...........because neither party wishes to hurt or be hurt in the process. Regardless of how one trains in whatever style, the main point of dealing against a weapon is to stop the attacker ASAP. This means to me, at least, that I will do any and everything possible to achieve this goal. In real life, that means either seriously hurting or even killing the attacker. On a good day, the vast majority of people who find themselves is such a situation, will have at best, just one chance of pulling off a successful defense. Now this one chance, had better be the end all be all of all the training they have ever had, cause there will likely be no tomorrow, if they fail and this unto itself negates the majority of applicable defenses practiced. Now how in the world can anyone bring forth, not only this mindset, but the physical application needed with this mindset in a training/testing venue? We like to fool ourselves, with the notion that yes we can effectively simulate this training, but in all honestly we really know better. Now I will offer, that certain elements of weapons defense can be accomplished, but they are structured differently. I call these passive weapon defenses, being that the weapon is being used as an intimidation tool and you have time and space to render a defensive application, but as for the "full out attack mode" swinging and slashing and stabbing repeatedly, see the above.

Now on to the multiple attacker with weapons....................bottom line here is.....................your SOL if you even think about standing and defending.

 

[DavidCC]

I've struggled, thinking how to word my response as to not offend, but I lost the struggle. What follows, will surely get some folks nickers in a twist, but here goes. There is no way to offer "Realistic Training", when dealing with weapons, when the attacker is offering/allowed to "attack with all intensive purposes, trying to (kill) them" and the defender in reality must restrain certain defenses. Why?...........because neither party wishes to hurt or be hurt in the process. Regardless of how one trains in whatever style, the main point of dealing against a weapon is to stop the attacker ASAP. This means to me, at least, that I will do any and everything possible to achieve this goal. In real life, that means either seriously hurting or even killing the attacker. On a good day, the vast majority of people who find themselves is such a situation, will have at best, just one chance of pulling off a successful defense. Now this one chance, had better be the end all be all of all the training they have ever had, cause there will likely be no tomorrow, if they fail and this unto itself negates the majority of applicable defenses practiced. Now how in the world can anyone bring forth, not only this mindset, but the physical application needed with this mindset in a training/testing venue? We like to fool ourselves, with the notion that yes we can effectively simulate this training, but in all honestly we really know better. Now I will offer, that certain elements of weapons defense can be accomplished, but they are structured differently. I call these passive weapon defenses, being that the weapon is being used as an intimidation tool and you have time and space to render a defensive application, but as for the "full out attack mode" swinging and slashing and stabbing repeatedly, see the above.

Now on to the multiple attacker with weapons....................bottom line here is.....................your SOL if you even think about standing and defending.

I'm not offended by that, and I pretty much agree

 

[Aikicomp]

In my dojo this scenerios is avoided by using human shields and making your way to an exit. As martial artists we know we aren't invincible; we can be killed by some lucky punch or a knife wound or a gun shot, but the important thing is we are making it harder for them to hit us or hit us fataly if a shot lands.

That's how we address the situation as well. We assume we will be injured in some way, but as you said, not fataly and to escape at the first chance possible all the while making it as difficult as possible for them to get to you.

"Simplistic, obvious and not conducive to learning" to think that the guy with the gun might not stand within arm's reach? OK I admit it IS obvious. But far from simple and offers a lot to learn IMHO.
But anyway I think the level of realism in your test can be measured by one statistic - how often does the testee "survive" that 3-on-1 scenario?

No because that can/could/does very well happen. What I was calling Simplistic, obvious and not conducive to learning was the notion since there is a guy with a gun standing 15 ft away there is no way to survive it. Sorry for the misunderstanding. How many people survived the 3-1 test? All who took it passed it. Now before anyone raises the BS flag, when we take the test we are attacked in 10 different 3 man scenarios. Do we get shot, stabbed/slashed and hit with the stick ...absolutely and positively yes after all nobody is perfect. However of the 10 times attacked our survival rate is around 1 in 3 with non life threatening injuries. Depending of course on the weapons used and where the attackers are. That is not too terrible IMO and well within acceptable limits for such a difficult test.

Michael

 

[Aikicomp]

I've struggled, thinking how to word my response as to not offend, but I lost the struggle. What follows, will surely get some folks nickers in a twist, but here goes. There is no way to offer "Realistic Training", when dealing with weapons, when the attacker is offering/allowed to "attack with all intensive purposes, trying to (kill) them" and the defender in reality must restrain certain defenses. Why?...........because neither party wishes to hurt or be hurt in the process. Regardless of how one trains in whatever style, the main point of dealing against a weapon is to stop the attacker ASAP. This means to me, at least, that I will do any and everything possible to achieve this goal. In real life, that means either seriously hurting or even killing the attacker. On a good day, the vast majority of people who find themselves is such a situation, will have at best, just one chance of pulling off a successful defense. Now this one chance, had better be the end all be all of all the training they have ever had, cause there will likely be no tomorrow, if they fail and this unto itself negates the majority of applicable defenses practiced. Now how in the world can anyone bring forth, not only this mindset, but the physical application needed with this mindset in a training/testing venue? We like to fool ourselves, with the notion that yes we can effectively simulate this training, but in all honestly we really know better. Now I will offer, that certain elements of weapons defense can be accomplished, but they are structured differently. I call these passive weapon defenses, being that the weapon is being used as an intimidation tool and you have time and space to render a defensive application, but as for the "full out attack mode" swinging and slashing and stabbing repeatedly, see the above.

Now on to the multiple attacker with weapons....................bottom line here is.....................your SOL if you even think about standing and defending.

Hmm....some interesting theories. Thanks

Michael

 

[MJS]

I've struggled, thinking how to word my response as to not offend, but I lost the struggle. What follows, will surely get some folks nickers in a twist, but here goes. There is no way to offer "Realistic Training", when dealing with weapons, when the attacker is offering/allowed to "attack with all intensive purposes, trying to (kill) them" and the defender in reality must restrain certain defenses. Why?...........because neither party wishes to hurt or be hurt in the process. Regardless of how one trains in whatever style, the main point of dealing against a weapon is to stop the attacker ASAP. This means to me, at least, that I will do any and everything possible to achieve this goal. In real life, that means either seriously hurting or even killing the attacker. On a good day, the vast majority of people who find themselves is such a situation, will have at best, just one chance of pulling off a successful defense. Now this one chance, had better be the end all be all of all the training they have ever had, cause there will likely be no tomorrow, if they fail and this unto itself negates the majority of applicable defenses practiced. Now how in the world can anyone bring forth, not only this mindset, but the physical application needed with this mindset in a training/testing venue? We like to fool ourselves, with the notion that yes we can effectively simulate this training, but in all honestly we really know better. Now I will offer, that certain elements of weapons defense can be accomplished, but they are structured differently. I call these passive weapon defenses, being that the weapon is being used as an intimidation tool and you have time and space to render a defensive application, but as for the "full out attack mode" swinging and slashing and stabbing repeatedly, see the above.

While I will agree that you don't have time to play games when dealing with an armed attacker, I can't help but get the feeling that you're hinting that its next to impossible to win. Sure, our first option, if possible, is to get the hell out of there. If thats not possible, grabbing something to use as an equalizer, would be the next best thing, and of course, dealing with the threat empty hand is our last choice. If this wasnt possible, then all it would take for anyone to win against a martial artist, is to get a weapon, and the MAist just cumbles and dies. Sorry, I dont buy it.

As for the mindset...again, its not impossible. Sure, no matter what we train in, there is that safety element, but think about it...people train BJJ, and do chokes, locks, etc. all the time, yet they create an alive feel, and they dont choke out or break limbs every time they roll.

So, I suppose the Military and Law Enforcement world is kidding themselves when they scenario train as well? After all, by your line of thinking, they're not doing things in training that they probably would in real life.

So, again, with the mindset, while we keep safety in mind, and the fact that we're not really going to kill each other, it is still possible to do. If you cant find ways to do that, or if your training lacks that, dont assume that nobody else cant find ways.

Now on to the multiple attacker with weapons....................bottom line here is.....................your SOL if you even think about standing and defending.

This I pretty much agree with. I might say that if the defender had a gun, which was already drawn, he may stand a chance, but I'm not putting all my money on survival at that point.