pain after getting cut

[lonecoyote]

In the course of my life I've seen some pretty bad cuts, experienced a few, too, on the job or in a shop. Initially there wasn't any pain, only later. I was across the table from a guy chiseled off his finger, didn't realize til he saw the blood spurting. Also seen and experienced some deep cuts, burns, from knife, saw, etc. It seems like initially most of the time, from people I've talked to, there is no pain at first, there is a lag. What are the implications from this for those who use a knife for self defense? What about techniques designed to attack the incoming weapon arm? A guy will probably keep going if he doesn't realize he is cut.

 

[arnisador]

People debate this. It matters! If pain is instantaneous, defanging the snake, as done in so many FMA, may make sense. If it isn't, risking a forearm cut to get a deep stab, as I understand Sayoc Kali advocates against a defang-the-snake opponent, may make sense.

Remember that pain is just part of it. The sight of one's own blood, the fear of being cut, etc., all factor in too. Additionally, while the pain may have been minimal from chiseling off a finger, how did it affect the ability to do fine work, like wield a knife? Muscle and nerve damage may succeed where pain does not.

Yet, someone posted either here or on Eskrima Digest a while back about someone cutting the hand of a partner at a seminar because he brought a live blade onto the practice floor. It was a bad cut. The instructor quickly asked the injured person to grab a pair of sticks and do a sinawali with him, then got him medical help. (I wish I could better remember the details--does someone recall where this was discussed?) The point was, don't count on one cut--even to the hand--taking out your opponent.

This doesn't even take into account those on drugs or drunk. Some people advocate bio-mechanical cutting (i.e., always try to get a tendon severed if you can) for this sort of reason.

Bottom line--I still believe in defanging the snake. Those little cuts will add up. Nickel and dime 'em, I say.

 

[shesulsa]

Although I'm not familiar with Defanging the Snake, I agree with a nickel and dime approach if that's what you need to do.

We like to use a biomechanical approach as well - get them bleeding and drooping - they'll go down eventually.

 

[arnisador]

Although I'm not familiar with Defanging the Snake, I agree with a nickel and dime approach

Defanging the snake refers, basically, to a strategy of damaging their arms with repeated small and safe (for you) cuts, generally from a long-range distance, until they can no longer hold their weapon or defend against yours. It's essentially the nickel-and-dime approach, except that you may well defang them on the first shot and not need to fool around with others.

 

[7starmantis]

Yeah, dont forget there are also connective tissue, tendons and such that once cut can make it very difficult to use the limb at all, let alone effectively.

7sm

 

[lonecoyote]

Great thought provoking replies like always, from great people. Thank you, 7starmantis, arnisador, shesulsa. If a person could take a forearm slash initially, assuming that no tendons were cut,what would that say about using the lead hand to absorb the slash, and or try to trap or grab, and keeping the weapon in the rear hand, Do any FMAs do this, or is it seen as too risky a strategy to try to take any cut, no matter where? I don't know the Sayoc strategy about it. Arnisador, did that happen at a Bram Frank seminar? Seems like I've read about it too. I believe that cutting the muscles or tendons in the forearm would lead to the loss of grip. I don't really know the effects of shock, or what the implications would be for someone fighting for his life. Does shock ameliorate the effects of pain, does it have anything to do with the pain lag we are talking about? Thanks as always, when I saw who had posted on the thread I knew I'd get some great answers.

 

[MA-Caver]

Great thought provoking replies like always, from great people. Thank you, 7starmantis, arnisador, shesulsa. If a person could take a forearm slash initially, assuming that no tendons were cut,what would that say about using the lead hand to absorb the slash, and or try to trap or grab, and keeping the weapon in the rear hand, Do any FMAs do this, or is it seen as too risky a strategy to try to take any cut, no matter where? I don't know the Sayoc strategy about it. Arnisador, did that happen at a Bram Frank seminar? Seems like I've read about it too. I believe that cutting the muscles or tendons in the forearm would lead to the loss of grip. I don't really know the effects of shock, or what the implications would be for someone fighting for his life. Does shock ameliorate the effects of pain, does it have anything to do with the pain lag we are talking about? Thanks as always, when I saw who had posted on the thread I knew I'd get some great answers.

I still bear the (faint) scar of a (inner) forearm slash from one fight years and years ago. As I recall I knew I got cut but ignored it in the heat of the moment. I was able to get inside (my opponent's defenses) becuase of it and managed to slash his neck.
Later there was pain later of course, more of a burning sensation as the cut was shallow (about 2-3 skin layers deep) as I saw the slash but wasn't quick enough to evade it completely.
My cut on him however got him was just as shallow but made him stop what he was doing (shock) and afforded me the opportunity to resolve the volitle situation. Dunno how he was feeling at the time and frankly didn't care.
I prefer not to have my blade visable until the last possible second for psychological reasons. A person seeing a blade (in my experience) gets (more) extreme (fear, anger, whatever!) than what they would normally be feeling when the confrontation gets physical.
Shock value works if one knows how to take advantage of it. Trick is to stay much cooler than your opponent. Being actually cut makes your antagonist much more unpredictable unless you know them well enough to guage their reaction.
Cutting someone? Better be totally committed.

 

[Cruentus]

Hi loneoyote... long time no post from me, eh?

A couple of things to think about:

Pain compliance, as well as "fear compliance" (Shock and awe effect, sight of own blood, etc.) is unreliable in a fight. So cutting someone and hoping that he will feel pain or see his own blood and stop fighting is a losing proposition. Generally speaking, it takes a fair amount of time for people to realize when they are cut anyhow.

I can't speak to all of FMA, and I don't want to be critical of other methods or instructors so I won't speak to them. I can say what we do, though (we being those involved with TULISAN Combat Systems). We realize that because pain compliance and fear compliance is unreliable in a fight, we aim to create as much trauma as quickly as possible, especially when knives are concerned. And, you create that truama until the threat has "stopped."

Now, as far as trauma potential is concerned, the predictability of truama potential is also unreliable. So, the idea that "If I cut his bicep, he won't be able to bend his arm a certian way," or "if I cut his hand he will have to let go of the weapon," generally is not something that can be relied on in a fight. Under stress and in the confusion of a fight, you don't know specifically if your cut was deep enough or accurate to sever the tendon, for example.

So, your main job if you are using a knife for defense is to take the fight to the threat and create as much trauma as quickly as possible until the threat has ceased. Cuts to the limbs are done because they are available, and because they open up a center mass attack to vital areas; where truama is created more quickly. Your focus is on creating trauma on the threat while taking into account the tool of the threat to minimize personal damage or injury. But, your focus is not the tool itself. And you keep creating trauma until the threat has stopped.

So, if you cut someone in the forearm and they scream and drop their weapon and stop attacking you, then fine. You stop because the threat has stopped. But, you aren't relying on that as the response, because you can't. You assume, when you are training, that the threat won't stop until he stops breathing. You assume this because if you are using a knife then that means that lethal force is justified, and that person is prepared to kill you; so you have to assume that they won't stop until they have achieved that goal. You can't afford to hope for a better ending. But, if the attacker gives you a better ending (ie. stops before he is killed), then that is a bonus.

This is just our approach, which at this point is proprietary which is why if you noticed I post a lot less then I used too. However, I don't mind giving away tips if I think it'll benefit someone...

Hope that helps,

Paul

 

[MA-Caver]

Hi loneoyote... long time no post from me, eh?

A couple of things to think about:
<snip>
So, if you cut someone in the forearm and they scream and drop their weapon and stop attacking you, then fine. You stop because the threat has stopped. But, you aren't relying on that as the response, because you can't. You assume, when you are training, that the threat won't stop until he stops breathing. You assume this because if you are using a knife then that means that lethal force is justified, and that person is prepared to kill you; so you have to assume that they won't stop until they have achieved that goal. You can't afford to hope for a better ending. But, if the attacker gives you a better ending (ie. stops before he is killed), then that is a bonus.

This is just our approach, which at this point is proprietary which is why if you noticed I post a lot less then I used too. However, I don't mind giving away tips if I think it'll benefit someone...

Hope that helps,

Paul

This sounds like the "oath of peace" (see my sig... no, not the cannibal one... the one above it! :uhyeah: ).
It would be tragic if a fight/confrontation got to the point of death but if it's unavoidable then it's unavoidable, especially if you're the one being attacked. But IMO a good MA should know when to quit and when their "opponent" is no longer capable of hurting you or yours.
Yet I've seen Kenpo moves/techs where the "knife" is taken away and then used against the (original) weilder. This still makes me twitch because once you've removed the weapon then it shouldn't be used against them. I can see where it may be necessary but then again it goes to what I said about being able to know when to stop.
A person may use a knife to boost their courage, once that is taken away from them then usually they're cowards because they no longer have the capablity of hurting you the only way they (usually). Still this is by no means a guarantee. They may fight harder to regain the knife, and thusly the need to use their own weapon against them.

 

[Jerry]

I think that looking for a pain response from a knife is a mistake.

If I leave out the psycological, a knife fight is won in one of two ways. You either bleed out the opponent, or you mechanically disable him. In theory, you could do something like destroy partof the nervous system (shove the blade between vertibra), but I think I'm gnerous in calling that "low percentage".

"Defanging the snake" is the concept of destroying an opponent's weapons. I think it's a mistake to take specific examples, rather than ther principle. A cut to the outer forearm is not likely to disarm an opponent (though it does start that bleeding process a bit); but a strike to the bac of the hand is reasonably likely to create a "let go" reaction, and a slice to the inner forearm may remove the ability to close the hand.

Recall also, that FMA practice is built with sticks and swords as much as knives. Sticks break bones and swords sever limbs; it's not hard to imagine why an attack to the arm is adventageous there.

Peronally, I try not to look in such isolation. A strike to a limb is also a grapple of the limb is also a deflection is alo an entry. The same action which attempts to remove the weapon (defang the snake), cuts my opponent, and moves hiss attack away from me, and positions his arm, and gives me a bridge to move in across.

 

[tshadowchaser]

As others have said unless you disable the arm or leg by cutting nerves and tendons most people can still use that part of the body. A cut muscle can sometimes stop a person from useing a limb but it takes a wicked cut.
Pain is different in the way it is rsponded to by all of us, thusely it will effect our psychological nature differently. Unless the limb is distroyd to the point of being nonfuntional it is hard to say what a person can do when stabed or cut

 

[arnisador]

Pain compliance, as well as "fear compliance" (Shock and awe effect, sight of own blood, etc.) is unreliable in a fight. So cutting someone and hoping that he will feel pain or see his own blood and stop fighting is a losing proposition.

I agree with your first statement. But, I'm not sure I'd call it a losing proposition. Fear of the knife, pain, loss of heart at seeing one's own blood, the realization that a cut received has changed one's odds of winning, shock, etc., absolutely cannot be relied upon. Yet...they work reasonably often. So, rather than saying it as you did, I'd rather say that my first hope is that I can get a cut in and one of these effects will work. If the situation allowed, I'd nickel-and-dime with a bunch of cuts, and verbally say "You've been cut! You're bleeding!" to get his mind working against him. It's (generally) safer for me out at nick-the-forearm range.

If this is not working, it's time to get down to business and cut something that will either make it mechanically impossible for him to continue the fight, or will cause such damage to an organ or artery that the fight will be ended. That means getting in closer, where his weapon better comes into play, or he can grab my knife arm, and so on. It's more of a risk.

As always, so much depends on the scenario. As I read this question I am imagining a one-on-one knife duel, and that it's not a case where I must defeat the opponent (as a soldier might be obliged to kill his opponent in war) but just a case of saving myself. If my opponent is obviously drunk or high, it changes things. If there are multiple opponents, it changes things. If he has a different type of weapon (or none), it changes things. If my back is to the wall somehow, it changes things. If I'm trying to escape from a house and several people are guarding it and I know that a single call for help will bring reinforcements to my opponent, it changes things. If I'm protecting others, it changes things.

 

[arnisador]

If a person could take a forearm slash initially, assuming that no tendons were cut,what would that say about using the lead hand to absorb the slash, and or try to trap or grab, and keeping the weapon in the rear hand

This is an approach used in some prison fights, I understand--use the front arm to ward off attacks, then launch a huge stab from the rear hand. Bear in mind that a prison-made weapon may only be a stabbing weapon that lacks an edge with which to cut. It's a bit of a sacrifice technique, but can make that stab hard to avoid.

Arnisador, did that happen at a Bram Frank seminar?

Maybe...that sounds right now that you mention it, but I can't remember for sure! Mr. Hartman will recall who it was. I'll ask him.

Does shock ameliorate the effects of pain, does it have anything to do with the pain lag we are talking about?

I'm no expert, but my understanding is that shock pretty well shuts you down. It's an automatic response that, among other things, tries to slow the loss of blood. If you're in shock, you're probably not continuing to fight.

 

[James Patrick]

I agree with your first statement. But, I'm not sure I'd call it a losing proposition.

I understand what you are saying, and although it seems logical, you can't make the distinctions that you are proposing in a fight. By attacking until the threat ceases, you are not trying to determine trauma potential or assess the attackers shock or emotional response, your just looking for him to stop fighting. This is a much simpler approach, and far more effective, I think.

James

 

[bignick]

It's just like Wiley Coyote walking on thin air...everything's fine until you look down...

 

[arnisador]

I understand what you are saying, and although it seems logical, you can't make the distinctions that you are proposing in a fight.

I can't?

By attacking until the threat ceases, you are not trying to determine trauma potential or assess the attackers shock or emotional response, your just looking for him to stop fighting. This is a much simpler approach, and far more effective, I think.

Well...everything is effective if it works. I'd say that staying on the edge and nickel-and-diming is a safe strategy. At that range, I know from sparring experience that I can get in the occasional minor cut and draw back to safe range to avoid a counter, then circle while looking for my next opening. If the situation changes while that happens, great; if after a few such cuts the opponent is still going strong, I may change tactics.

If by "attacking until the threat ceases" you mean getting in closer so that you can deliver a flurry of cuts/stabs, doesn't the close range carry its own risks of being countered by a knife attack fro your opponent, or a disarm?

 

[James Patrick]

I may have misunderstood you. If your talking about range, keeping distance, and nickle and diming, I would say that is a good strategy, if the situation will allow for it. A lot of times it won't, though, because many knife encounters involve being taken by suprise (spontanious), where the attacker gets close before the defender can react.

I was thinking you were saying to yourself, "I am only going to cut his hand and arms, and if that doesn't work, then I will graduate to cutting more vital areas." That is a distinction that I don't think one can make in a fight. I think that under the stress of a knife lethal force encounter, you will only have time to cut what is available until the attacker stops. If that is the limbs, then great. If it is something else, then fine also. Just as long as he stops. If your attacking limbs as a result of range, then I see this as a good strategy, if you can maintain that range.

So, if I understand what your saying, then it seems fine. I am not an expert, though, this is just what I was told and taught.

James

 

[arnisador]

I think we're largely in agreement. I mean to stay at longer range and cut whatever comes near me--which will almost certainly be arms and hands. If it turns out that, after I get in several cuts, he's unaffected, I may decide to change strategies and move in close rather than stay far out.

I absolutely agree that, as a practical matter, these encounters most often start at very close range and by surprise. Often a person has a knife on them but doesn't have time to draw it when attacked!

 

[Cthulhu]

Tuhon Dionaldo has a video demonstrating a gunting motion with the point of the knife rather than a slash, from the idea that a quick slash with a sharp knife may not be felt, but a stab/sungkit motion will most likely hurt like all hell. I'm not entirely sure if this is a Sayoc thing, or from Tuhon's own theory.

Either way, if I have the misfortune of needing to use a knife, I'd want the bad guy to know he was cut...primarily in hope that the realization that he's wounded will take the fight out of him.

Cthulhu

 

[arnisador]

Either way, if I have the misfortune of needing to use a knife, I'd want the bad guy to know he was cut...primarily in hope that the realization that he's wounded will take the fight out of him.

Yeah, for rational people, this is a big deterrent. Rational people aren't a huge percentage of the butcases who'll attack you, but it can happen!

Do you mean a tip cut that slices through, or a stab that interrupts the motion of the gunting (scissors motion of the hands for those of you who don't do FMA).