Knife wounds - thrust vs. cut?

[brownie0486]

COHIBA:

The hardest principle to learn is to wait for the opponent to reach for you and not extend into their range.

The theory is that the more they reach in [ and you wait ]the less strength they have when they get near you.

Most want to reach out to keep the offending arm from getting to them [ natural reaction by most ]. They open themslves up when they do. We want the opponent to open up while he attacks and we wait protecting the "body core".

They learn quickly in class as when they extend to defend I get them where they opened up. We drill until the wait for me to get there. The techniques work better and are more reliable. You have all your strength when meeting their actions at the same time.

The principle is seen this way. If you need to pick up a gallon of paint, you do not extend your arm to full length to lift it as you have less strength when extended. The more you extend your arms away from the body the less strength you have.

We keep our strength by waiting and covering the core which makes them extend further into my inner circle. When they actually get there, they have little power left to avoid deflection.

BTW--Training gets you to not react normally to a threat by throwing up an arm to block the attack.
If you block in a knife fight thats where I cut you. Your block extends to me and that becomes the target. Makes my job easier to get the perp if he does that. I don't want to see defensive wounds on my students by their reacting to the threat of being cut in a normal manner.

It takes about 5-7000 repetitions to break the human reaction to block the attack in an attempt to keep the threat away from us as much as possible.

You block, you get cut on the arms. You have given me a target thats closer by extending in such a manner.

Brownie

 

[JohnKSa]

In my experience, it's almost impossible to reach the body of an aware opponent with a knife without being cut badly yourself.

If you can't reach their body, then thrusting doesn't make much sense.

Cut what's closest to you. Don't go for the big one--even a small cut counts. People don't like to bleed, and even a small cut from a sharp knife will bleed a lot.

BTW, what's closest is often their head. People tend to lean in more than they realize. Foreheads are great slashing targets and you get a big secondary benefit from having a person bleed down into his eyes.

The other easy target is hands and arms. When a person attacks, they must extend their hands toward you. That makes them good targets.

I agree with brownie--your goal shouldn't be to kill the person, it should be to convince them their time is better spent doing something other than jacking you up.

Of course, all this assumes a street encounter. I suppose in the military it's a different story.

BTW, has anyone here heard of a guy named Murray who spent some time in Southeast Asia entertaining himself and others with a knife?

 

[cratz2]

I must say, even being a gun forum, I've found this thread to be very informative.

A sincere thanks to those that have contributed.

 

[Charles S]

Gentleman,

Thanks for the information. I have learned a lot from this thread. My own training in the art of the knife is quite limited, but I am working on that. If you gentleman have any further recommendations for reading, videos and training please feel free to make suggestions.

Charles

 

[Melvin-Purvis]

JohnKSa pretty much nailed it...IMNSHO

Everyone has a personal theory, or form, or style, or has read something written by someone, somewhere...so far from me to suggest otherwise...

Agreeing in principle here; the idea is to 'defend' yourself by helping the BG change his mind, or at least his intent...and as such, we're not talking about 'killing', we're talking about a cessation of hostilities.

From what I've read by those that 'teach' knife fighting, folks such as Kevin McClung and Jim Keating, keeping your adversary at distance (pointy end out), and taking advantage of opportunities as they present themselves...(hands, forearms, foreheads, leading legs, etc), makes pretty good sense from a defensive standpoint. I believe these guys, and feel that they know of what they speak.

From what I've seen, felt, and trained with (on a most cursory level), what they speak of rings true...'thank you' takes on a whole new meaning when an adversary presents a ready target such as fingers...'Mad Dog' refers to a reverse grip using opponant as 'vienna sausages' on the hoof...

Nonetheless, the original question was, paraphrased "Which method is more effective, thrust or slash?"...which begs the question, 'More effective at what?'

Killing, wounding, defending, offending, or just saving your own bacon? With a wild animal or dog, I'd suggest holding on tight and use multiple deep thrusts until something vital gets hit....with a human, I'd think that deep long cuts with fast follow ups would change that persons 'wicked ways', without putting yourself at undue risk...(If you get wrapped up, or go to ground, all bets are off...bite, stab, squeeze, do whatever it takes to survive)

If you can manage to keep the BG at bay with your defensive posture, then just keep 'nicking' the heck out of him until he stops being a BG...then go file a police report ASAP, you may need that report someday...like when he bleeds out later that night

YMMV

Mel

 

[Jim March]

There's always going to be this ongoing debate between what I call "the outsiders" and "the insiders", the guys that hang back on the outside and nail incoming opportunities, and the guys that like to get aggressively inside. Bob Taylor and his "Hobbit/Warrior" series pieces are classic "insider" reverse-grgip blades, whereas the big light-handling Bowie-oids of Bill Bagwell (Keating influences) and McClung's Panther are classic "outside blades" used tip-forward. The heavy-smash Khukuris are a different type of "outside piece".

I fall into the "outside camp", myself. But I've seen too many fast crazy little "insiders" do demos to take them lightly!

 

[Melvin-Purvis]

Jim, miss ya bud!

We should ping on SH a bit and do another 'Vito's' pizza run....bring the swords again (the ultimate 'outside' weapon)...

The thing of it is, when you're grappling, and a blade is involved; one of just a few things are going to happen...you'll get cut (or stabbed, repeat verse), he'll get cut, you'll both get cut, or you'll lose the blade in the tussle...

And you're right, there is no 'right vs. wrong', but there is distance...and distance is your friend in a knife fight, particularly a defensive scenario...at least, that's what I think.

So sure, I agree, learn both methods, but the final key is to keep the BG 'out there'...

Back to the original question as to what works better, thrust or slash?...Big, deep slashes have a psychological effect for sure, but more importantly is the physiological end result of the disruption of laminar blood flow...that being, blood flowing out of a severed artery can't reach the brain or heart...slowing the adversary over time...this is where conditioning on our part comes in...being able to 'nick and wait'...lol

A puncture on the other hand, albeit painful and life threatening, will immediately start to close up on itself...regardless of how ultimately unsuccessful it may be, the process of clotting will begin almost immediately...

Anyhoo, what works for one may not for another, but I like the way you think...pointy end out

Mel

p.s. Pizza!

 

[Byron Quick]

I see a fair amount of this in the emergency room. We also have a state prison a couple of miles down the road. Overall, I am not impressed with thrusting or slashing. But it's more from a lack of anatomical ignorance as well as an inability to target precisely.

Many of the slash wounds I've seen would have been quickly fatal in the right place. Very few of the stab wounds would have been quickly fatal. It is difficult to obtain a truly devastating thrust wound with the size of knife it is practical to carry in today's society.

Severing tendons is usually a fight stopper.

I carry a knife. I have no intention of attempting to fight someone knife to knife. I'd rather fight someone who jumped me barehanded with it. Fits my strategic thought better...opponent has a pistol...give me a rifle. He has a AR15...I want my PSS and eight hundred yards, etc.

If attacked by a knife wielding assailant and I'm embarassed by the lack of a pistol, hopefully there's things like garden rakes, pipes, brooms, bricks, and such lying around. Maybe a container of battery acid.

 

[Jim March]

You know, there's a LOT of truth to the idea that your odds of needing to go up against another knifer is remote.

In my personal experience, I've been threatened by "short club-oids" (hammers, wrench) twice now. When the club is approximately a foot long, if you're VERY careful you can stay with an "outside" gameplan but it's damned tricky. Once you get an opponent with a friggin' baseball bat (or worse, golf clubs, those are NASTY) you better either get into very cramped quarters where he can't load up or or get inside on him, in a hurry.

The good news is, there ARE "close-range tricks" for the forward grip. They're not as intuitive as those in reverse, you need more training there and the need for "constant motion and footwork" cannot possibly be overemphasized.

(Re: using tight quarters to negate a range advantage: this is exactly what ferrets do to cats . Lure it into a crawl space and then just jump all over it. And the dumb cats never did figure out NOT to chase a ferret under the bed or whatever .)

PS: Melvin: PIZZA!!!

 

[bad_dad_brad]

I am no expert, but cut seems more effective than thrust, in writings and in my experience.

I have a lot of knives. I play with them, until they wound me, then I put them in a drawer - bad boy!

I find the slashing cut makes me bleed a whole lot more than a poke.

 

[Harold Mayo]

Edge out works to some extent, I wont say it doesnt... but you cannot get the depth with edge out slashes

I beg to differ. Edge out slashes can reach to incredible depths. It just depends on the angle of attack, sharpness of the blade, and the force behind the blow.

This sounds a little disgusting (and...well...it is) but it will show you a lot about what works with a knife and what doesn't, at least in regard to methods of attack.

OK...you take a dead deer or hog and string it up from a tree or overhead beam (this is after you've already dissected it to determine what kind of wound channel the bullet you killed it with left behind). You then proceed to push it and let it swing while you slash and stab and thrust with various blades. Observe the wounds and what works on the moving carcass.

You will find that a thrust (straight in with the blade in a sabre grip) will not penetrate as well as you might think unless you have a lot of "uumph" and catch the carcass well. There are some areas that are NOT covered with muscle in which a thrust will penetrate fairly easily, however.

You will find that a slash (sabre grip w/edge outward) will make nice, long cuts that are, if you catch the carcass right, quite deep. They will literally lay the skin and muscle open and you will slash all the way to the bone. Even if you don't catch it good, a slash will still open up more area, affect more nerves, and cause more bleeding than will a thrust or stab that isn't well-executed.

You will find that a stab (whether a "Mexican feed" from a sabre or hammer grip or an overhand stab) will generally penetrate quite well if you connect BUT you have to be in very close for it to do so. The Mexican feed is an excellent and swift stab that works best for the soft areas of the face and neck on a human target and quite well on the soft abdomen of a swinging deer carcass. An overhand stab with the blade out will penetrate but is not the best of attacks since you are in close AND have your own body more open. In addition, if you have a single edge facing outward from you, you lose the option of using the extreme leverage and strength afforded by an overhand rip and might not be able to damage your opponent if things turn badly. On the other hand, using a double-edged blade or a single edge turned inward, you CAN do what another poster was talking about in terms of a ripping attack which, if properly executed, can be a deep stab followed by slashing damage as you withdraw the blade while making a new (slashing) wound channel rather than withdrawing it from the wound that it just made. The big disadvantage of closing for these attacks is that you are in close enough that you CANNOT defend effectively against his attacks.

Action is faster than reaction and a knife fight is over quickly.

For my money, I will slash outward with a sabre grip for distance and for warding away my opponent. Slashing in this manner is also the easiest way to damage your opponent's hands and arms. If it gets closer, slashing in this manner and performing the "Mexican feed" is the fastest manner of attacking. Speed is everything.

Knives are as fast as hands. In a fist fight, you don't normally win without taking punches, be they hard or not. The difference is that knife cuts are bad whether they are well-executed or not. You WILL get cut.

Although a lot of people advocate a reverse grip, I just haven't yet found anyone who can use it as effectively as they say it can be used. The only use that I can see for it is as a surprise attack against an unwitting opponent.

As for prisoners not being trained knife fighters...

I've seen a lot of video from prisons that caught prisoners practicing various surprise knife attacks. Most were with a hidden knife against a cop who might be trying to cuff them or who was in some "traditional" LE pose but some were for surprise in other situations, too. Like another poster said, prisons can turn out fighters as good as any dojo...I say even better.

I know a lot of guys who have been stabbed and have no loss of function. I can't think of a single person that I know who has been slashed across the hand or forearm who hasn't lost some use of that appendage.

With all that said, I have to say that I have a problem with learning knife stuff from guys who want to ritualize it too much in a martial arts setting. You can learn everything that you need to know about knife-fighting in a couple of hours. Practice it a few thousand times and then hope you never have to use it. I've seen too many martial artists who don't understand how quickly a real knife fight (or any fight, for that matter) can be over. Practicing against someone who is using the same "style" as you is NOT the way to learn this particular skill.

 

[JohnKSa]

Knives are as fast as hands. In a fist fight, you don't normally win without taking punches, be they hard or not. The difference is that knife cuts are bad whether they are well-executed or not. You WILL get cut.

Don't agree.

You get hit in a fistfight because you must hit body or head to win. When you close with your opponent to accomplish this goal, you open yourself to attack by coming inside his reach.

The difference is that you can't win a fistfight by hitting the other guy in the hands and arms.

You can definitely win a knife fight by cutting the other guy's hands and arms.

I suppose that it's necessary to start with the idea that you WILL get cut, in order to rationalize the use of reach limiting techniques such as reverse holds and edge out slashing.

 

[Melvin-Purvis]

Harold, excellent post!

Well stated and thought provoking too. Thanks for taking the time...though I must confess; I don't fully understand the technique referred to as 'Mexican'...could you give a brief synopsis?

(It could be called 'Cool green Martian', and I wouldn't care any more/less, it's the technique I'm interested in here, not the name)

Also, I don't fully understand the difference between 'Saber, point out' and 'Saber, edge out'...if you have a few minutes, could you please clarify? Thanks.

JohnKSa, I'm not sure if in your last sentence you 'meant' to say something like 'If using reverse grip in a knife fight against an armed and motivated adversary, one should plan on getting cut'...or something similar. If so, I would (almost) agree...

But, if on the other hand, you were saying that a person going into a (any) knife fight should just 'recognize' that they're going to get cut...I would again (almost) agree....but, as realistic as such a scenario would be, it (almost) seems defeatist to go into an armed struggle with such a mindset... Please clarify, I'm a bit confused.

Written words, on forums...I hate them. It's just so damn easy to misunderstand what's being said...

Anyhoo, to all, the original question pertained to 'effectivity', and I'll assume that was referenced to termination of hostilities...if indeed that's the case, I'd offer that a deep slash to the extremities would be the most effective method...YMMV

Mel

-edited for clarity-

 

[brownie0486]

Harold Mayo stated:
"You can learn everything that you need to know about knife-fighting in a couple of hours."

Even basic defensive knife requires a minimum of 8-10 hours. Perhaps thats what you meant by "a couple". Just don't want anyone here to think 2-3 hours is going to make them proficient at defensive knife. Just won't happen.

A novice shown the basics in 8-10 hours will only remember 10-15% of the material covered from the students I have had before me.

Sure they see everything they really need in a day but it takes many more days and hours of practicing the techniques to get the timing and subtleness of the moves commited to muscle memory.

In reality the defensive knife tactics require persistent practice as they are diminishing skills [ very same thing with a firearm ]. Your statement that they can learn all they need to know in a few hours may give others with less background in this venue the idea that a few hours makes them some great knife fighter.

I can assure you that the guys who really know the defensive knife arts [ not the fancy/mostly ineffective dojo stuff ], are not becoming so in a few hours. To suggest otherwise does a disservice to others here who think they can now be proficient.

You may be able to "see" everything you really need to know in a few hours [ I doubt that though ] but that is a far cry from actually being able to pull the techniques off in a street setting.

Any gun guy can tell you in a few hours the "principles" of sight alignment, hand hold , trigger control and breathing but that doesn't make you a pistolero capable of incredible feats instantly.

Knife techniques are harder to perform correctly than shooting and timing is not learned in a few hours which defensive knife really relys on as well as the techniques utilized.

If you practice it a couple thousand times and then hope you never have to use you will certainly not have the timing or muscle memory to produce superior results.

In essence your post seems to be saying a couple of hours, a few thousand repetitions and you are a knife fighter. I must be a "duh" if thats true as I've been at this for 11 years and still get "taken" in practice drills regularly.

Harold Mayo:
Execellent narration, comments and observations. Could not agree more with the majority of your post.


Brownie

 

[Harold Mayo]

JohnKSa: Your last paragraph is correct. There is always the possibility of NOT getting cut but to think that an encounter against a knife-wielding adversary will be won without a wound is to think incorrectly. Knives ARE as fast as hands and don't have to be as accurate to cause damage. I know guys who, unarmed, can pretty much expect to take someone down one-on-one without any problem whatsoever time after time after time. Even they will get hit but, because of their experience and skill, they take no serious hit. Even the best "knife guys" out there will, in play combat, lose their sparring matches to people with practically no skill or training whatsoever simply because of the nature of the beast. Overall, though, of course it is possible to win without being cut...just don't expect it. I know a handful of guys who have been shot AND cut in their lives and, to a man (except for the guy shot with a rifle in the chest), they all state that the pain and disorientation from the cuts was worse than the gunshot wound(s).

Melvin: A Mexican feed is simply holding the knife in your hand with the blade pointing "up" and "feeding" the blade point first with an outward rolling motion of the elbow (mostly) and shoulder. It is a short-range tactic aimed at the face/throat region. It is very fast and can be combined with slashes pretty easily. Best use is if you are body to body with your opponent's right arm (normally the weapon-arm) trapped and he is at your mercy. "Hammer" is holding the blade basically at right angles (or nearly so) to your forearm in a strong grip. "Sabre" is more like 45 degrees from your forearm. This is truly a case where a picture is worth a thousand words, though.

brownie: I stand by my statement. Every technique that you "need" to know can be learned (one-on-one) in a couple of hours. There are permutations that can go on and on to infinity but the basic cuts and defenses can be shown (and "learned", though that is a misleading word) in that time. Retention is much higher one-on-one, too. Knife courses that I've seen for groups that run as long as what you are saying probably only cover in 8-10 hours what you can cover one-on-one in an hour or two and that's if all the students are given good attention. The statement is NOT meant to say that they are skilled in that time or even proficient, but they know what they "need" to know. To be a skilled "knife fighter" takes as many years as you can give it, just like any skill. If someone is wanting to actually be a "knife fighter", then of course they should spend years working on the skill...just like firearms skills (in which the "necessities" can also be taught in a few hours while true skill takes years) and unarmed skills. I can show someone all of the techniques of boxing within a couple of hours but that doesn't make them a boxer. There is the timing issue, too, which you brought up, which is something that is more of an "experience" issue than a "learned" issue. My apologies if my post seems to say what you are saying it says. I WILL say, however, that a guy with no training who is taught the basics and then practices them thousands of times is going to be better off than someone who studies all of the esoterica of "knife fighting" (I actually dislike that term) and practices a wide variety of techniques in the same period of time. I think, however, that you misread my post and we probably agree on things, especially in light that you admit in your post to regularly being "taken" in drills after years of practice. I would be awfully suspicious if you said that no one had "beaten" you with a knife for 11 years or some such nonsense. Most physical (or mental) skills can be learned quickly and practiced to within 10% or so of perfection relatively quickly. It is the last 9.99% that takes years of practice and experience that truly separates the "men from the boys", so to speak.

 

[brownie0486]

Harold Mayo:

Agree with your edification and thought processes here sir.

Brownie

 

[hso]

I've become an advocate of the "80/20 rule", i.e. the last 20% of "perfecting" anything takes 80% of the total time involved.

If I can arrange it I would like to host a training weekend in Knoxville where Brownie could come down and conduct some focused training on the techniques he uses. I'm considering late April to early June for the time. There should be space for a total of 9 or 10 people and I've already got 2 people that have said they would come.

 

[JohnKSa]

My point wasn't that it's always possible to keep from getting cut (or not), but that it should be your GOAL to keep from getting cut.

That's my goal, and so I'm not going to do anything that puts me any closer to my opponent than I have to be. Knives are reach weapons and if he can't reach me, he can't hurt me. I'm not going to try to close with him--I'm not after him, he's after me.

That means I use the saber hold, edge down which gives me maximum reach for the length of knife I'm using.

If my opponent is using a reverse hold or some similar technique that limits his reach, I will be able to stay out of his reach while keeping him within my reach. He will be leading with his hand, I will be leading with my knife. Even if his knife is longer than mine, his hand will be in my cutting range before his knife can reach my hand.

The farther he reaches in to get me, the farther up his arm I will be able to cut him.

I may not be able to reach to his body to deliver a "mortal" wound, I may not be able to deliver extra-deep cuts, but I'm not trying to kill him anyway. Besides, after I cut on his arms & hands (or whatever gets close) awhile, it won't matter whether he's cut on the torso or not. His knife hand is likely going to be my main target unless he gets careless. It doesn't take too long to ruin a hand's effectiveness with even relatively light cuts.

What I was saying with the last paragraph of my previous post was that unless a person goes into a knife fight intending to get cut, there's no way that he could rationalize holding his knife in a way that lets his opponent reach him more easily than he can reach his opponent.

 

[brownie0486]

JohnKSa:

I believe your stated defensive posture and theories of why it will work are sound.

Brownie

 

[USarmyFL]

As far as that "rambo" topic that got brought up... Why give an attacker a break? Whats that saying.... "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" ? I could care less about what a judge and jury thinks about me if another person is trying to kill me... and the only way to stop someone espescially if they are determined is to be "rambo" and stab and cut vital organs/areas..... Cops and military dont train and shoot center mass for no reason....If you dont hit something vital (and even if you do) the person can still fight back.... Sure maybe you can be nice and cut his hand and prolly just maybe he will be like dang that hurts im bleeding..... But why try to just hurt them when they are trying to kill you?

 

[brownie0486]

If you dont hit something vital (and even if you do) the person can still fight back.

I've seen people stabbed in vitals [ the chest ] and still fight back, and walk away to go to an emergency room some hours later as well. You comment even if you do hit vitals, they can fight. If you can't be guaranteed a stop by closing and targeting vitals, why would you when your chances are increased by distancing and taking targets of opportunity when they reach out to you?

While you are in "tight" with the BG, your chances of taking damage at the same time are increased exponentially.

Distance equates to safety, not all people who would harm you are Rambos either. They look for easy marks and have no taste for taking damage of any kind themselvs for the most part.

Brownie

 

[yy]

Contingencies!

when and how to change tactics and grips when we realize our assailant is a rambozo type? By that I mean one who has disregard for getting cut and is trying to close in for grappling and stabbing.

Does it make sense to try to change grip, also close in, and try to realize mutually assured destruction (slashed/stabbed to death)? May not have the chance or time.

 

[hso]

USarmyFL,,

Welcome to THR!

How'd you find us?

I think you missed the point of the Rambo question. Sometimes lethal isn't safest when you're dealing with a knife. If all someone is willing to learn is sentry removal techniques because they "kill instantly" then they're probably a Rambozo. They've seen too many movies/TV/games. Limb destruction of an attacker can often be a quicker way to reduce the risk to drive in to terminate the fight. If all they want to learn to do is "Kill, kill, killllllll!" then they're throwing away essential tools.

 

[Shawnee]

Hey CWL...

I'm totally uneducated when it comes to knife-fighting so there is no "challenge" here - just a straight question.
I've always heard the cavalry sabre was intended to be used (first) more as a "sharp club" against limbs or any "target of opportunity", and only as a "stabber" once the path is clear, so to speak. And fersure using a sabre to "stab" someone on the ground when one is mounted doesn't sound like a commonly possible event.
Maybe I need to find an old-time cavalry manual and look it up. Where have you found the tactics of cavalry sabre use?

Many thanks !

 

[Matt_W]

In a simplistic way of looking at the problem I would observe that a slash to to the chest is not as lethal as a stab to the heart nor is a stab to the throat that misses anything important more lethal than a wide slash to the throat.

Anyway who is going to rely on just one thrust or slash anyway?

Knives are like any other weapon, targetting is key.