JerryLove

Here's the basic problem with that... it means that no one who teaches the art actually "knows" it. If we assume that new knowledge about an art does not come from ephiphany, then we have a problem trying to assert that an art is any more than the sum of what the people who do it know.

Properly, unbending is a quality that [someone using an appropriate art] should have "on" and in their wohle body. It is not to be used as a "technique" or a counter to anything, though it does make manipulating the person using it more difficult.

Actually, personally, I immediately go offencive with any weapon I can control. Wheather in my hand or theirs.

Mine has clips for my art.

In Christianity, the fundamentalist is the one who believes the Bible to be literal and without error. Most fundamentalists I have interacted with hold the position that a source of power is either from God or not from God. To look for energy from "nature" or "the air" or even "yourself" would be turning to sources other than God and therefore be against God (and sinful). Note tat the Bible explicitly condems sorcery and spiritualism as looking to sources of power other than God.

I, for one, have no trouble believing you. While a knife coming into play is very lethal, the comment made by some that it is "sure death" is a vast overstatement. Actually, if I only have 15 min one way or antoher, there's nothing that I can think of more effective. Considering entirely untrained people kill each other with knives all the time, I don't see how you think someone with short-training in principles would not. That said, I am not advocating a "15 minute seminar". Usually I teach that short version as a demonstration, or to a martial artist. You are welcome to your opinion, and were this not such a remote method of communication (were we face to face) we could just show each other what we mean and sort it out. If you are interested, I believe the "knife-play" video on my website includes some offensive use of a knife which fits the criteria I described (please focus on offensive use by Sigung Clear, not the training dummy) This seems to run entirely opposite of reality to me. Putting my knife nearer to my opponent makes me capable of cutting him faster, not slower. To start with "any motion", though I would advise against some sort of large "twirl the knife around" thing. I mean "back and forth, up and down". Give your training partner a knife. Tell him to hold it out in front of him and draw zig-zags in the air. Have him advance on you. See how defensive it feels.

You don't agree with keeping the knife in motion? Does your art not cover the "action vs reaction" issue? A knife in motion is easier to move into use and far more difficult for an opponent to mount an assault on. There is no [normal] time, regardless of skill level, where I would advocate standing still or not moving yor weapon. There is a difference between "keep the knife in front of you" and "keep the knife between you and your opponent"; though I fully admit that they are often both accomplished through the same thing. What I ment by the former, yo uknow, what I mean by the latter comes into the "block with your knife" concept.

On the really basic level - Don't shield the knife, let it shield you - Keep the knife in motion - Keep the knife between you and your oppoinent. I'm less concerned with grips, though in the case of "you've got ten minutes to teach, go" I'd default to the forward grip (how you use a knife to cut a steak). If you've ever seen a scared person use a knife to defend themselves, you've got a solid idea. They put it in front, wave it about, and stab/slash defensively at anything that gets near them. Do that without the panic and you've got a good, basic knife-useage tactic. Mind you, I've got far mroe deatiled stuff... my whole art is a knife art, but that's the most basic.

I'm talking about offensive knife useage. What your opponent has is more to do with defense (presuming you wish to survive), which I have already pointed out takes time. Though knife-vs-knife is a more tennable position for you than empty-vs-knife (assuming your opponent, too, would like to remain alive), it is still a "vs-knife" and therefore would call for knife defense skills... which take quite a bit of time (as I stated above). Of course, good offensive knife skills can win you the knife-on-knife fight... how much training does your opponent have? But as the all-too-true joke goes: "Q: What do you call the guy that bleeds to death in the hospital the morning after a knife fight? A: The winner"

No, yo ucould take the same stuff and teach it in a similar amount of time. The thing about a knife is that it is an effective weapon... what takes time is the "working against a knife" material. That isn't to say you can't spend more time getting better, but we just had a seminar on offensive knife work last weekend... it's not that difficult to have very effective knife skills. Perhaps he has not considered it (experience != knowledge), perhaps he finds that there is not much money to be made in what most anyone can learn in a short time and show others. Perhaps he's more concerned with knife defense (which does take time). Perhaps you are in error about what one of us is saying.

That doesn't require much training. I can teach offensive knife use in 15 minutes that very few people can effectively cope with. The knife is a great tool. I don't agree that a firearm is easer to use than a knife. Everyone knows how to cut, but not everyone can even clear the safety on a firearm. What it has going for it is that, at range, you cannot act to control the firearm. For the knife to hurt you, you are (ostensably) in a position where you can act to control the knife.

Do you have a preference to marteral/style? Are you looking for a modern hunting bow? Or are you thinking a more classical one (in which case from whom? Mongolian composite bows, English longbows, Japaneese, etc)

Fighting Against Multiple Opponents 2002 - Gerald Love Fighting multiple attackers is a situation every rational martial artist fears, and with good reason. As artists we train with a few basic ideas that make this particularly terrifying. In this article I will attempt to explain, in relatively generic terms, the assumptions we must make, and methods we must use to survive the multiple-attacker scenario. Assumptions Let's start with the assumptions made in general of martial situations and the ones we need to make in regards to this situation. The first assumption is in regards to the opponent's skill and ability. There is an old axiom in fighting to never assume that your opponent is inferior to yourself in fighting ability. This is typically a very good perspective, as it prevents you from acting from a position of overconfidence. The problem appears when you attempt to apply this logic to a multiple-attacker situation. As the old "could you defeat two of yourself" argument goes, the chance of prevailing against two or more opponents under that assumption is so low that many martial arts have chose to ignore that line of training all-together. That said, let's make some new paradigms. We don't know how good our opponent or opponents are; we shall assume from a tactic standpoint that they are as good or better as we are; this encourages us to only fight in situations where we would fight even if we knew we were going to loose. Since I think this is a good acid test for "should I fight or run", this works well. Though we have decided to train with that mentality, we recognize none-the-less that we, as martial artists, have devoted our time and sweat to becoming better fighters, and the reality is that our opponents on the street are likely to be less-capable fighters than we are. Therefore, it is quite possible to win the multiple-opponent situation. Further, since the fight has been forced, we have no real option but to try to win, so let's move on. The Setup So how do we accomplish it? Well, all situations and artists are unique. Let's get the obvious out of the way. Don't be there. That is, attempt escape or de-escalation from the moment you realize the danger. Start trying to position yourself near the exit, near the wall, near the bouncer, whatever from the beginning, even as you are trying to end the situation. I'll start with the assumption that this has failed and combat has started with you surrounded; if you start already at the outside, then you will have accomplished the first few steps anyway. Rule one of all fights, especially multiple-attacker fights, is "keep moving". Be in motion before the fight starts and don't stand still. When you stand still, that allows your opponents to choose to hit you on their terms and all at once, you will go down and you will loose. Rule two, you want to be able to see all of them. This means that you don't want to be in the "middle of the circle". You want to move to the outside of your opponents so that all of your opponents are in the smallest arc in-front of you that you can manage (a 360 degree circle is bad, all lined up in a 5 degree arc is good). How you will move from the inside to the outside will vary based on your art and situation. The first, easiest, way, is if there is an opening in their group that you can run through. If there is a wall (or better, an exit) there wonderful. A wall makes sure that they cannot get behind you again. Be wary, however of corners for they are mixed blessings, you limit your opponents to a 90 degree arc, but you are also immobile. (remember rule one) The Fight If there is not a hole already there for you, you are going to have to make one. There are a couple ways to do so, and your training will determine which you can use. Our first choice is available on video (tape 1s24), you may be able to charge through someone close, or grapple and reverse position; the details of how any individual should best accomplish this is beyond the scope of this article. Once you have some sort of tenable position the fighting begins. You usually want to fight the most aggressive opponent; one good reason for this is he will be the closest to you (being the most aggressive) and therefore the most convenient target. It's important to keep moving (rule 1) and to make sure they don't get behind you again. I find that baiting attacks is useful for this; offer a target and withdraw it in order to lure your closest opponent into committing to an attack at your prompting. If someone gets in real close, beat them around and use them as a shield against the others; but if they manage to make a good-effort escape or someone gets past them, let go and move to the next guy; you don't want to let yourself get tied up with one person when another has moved into position (remember you need to remain mobile). Keep looking for that escape position, while you may exhaust all of your opponents, that's unlikely enough that you should be really using this as a tactic to escape. If that's really not possible, look to clutter the battlefield as much as possible, make them work to get to you, so you can have less to deal with at a single time. If there is no way to maneuver to escape, then you should look at relatively quick methods of removing opponents from the fight. What that is will vary based on available weapons and your skills and tactics. Mechanical disables (hyperextensions of knees and ankles), rendering unconscious or dead, and virtual disables (blinding) are all effective methods of removing someone from pursuit and effectively fighting you. If you disable one attacker then move, you are fighting that many less; disable enough and the fight is over.

Having a similarity to something Godly does not make something Godly, and the fact that many proclaimed Christians fail to see the problems is irrellevent. Satan can offer power to, and we can draw parallels between Satan and God in a similar manner. Is Satanic energy OK for Christians to draw upon? You may be open-minded if you wish, but to believe that "all energy is OK" first requires that you reject elements of the Bible as untrue... Which is fine with me, I'm all for honest heresy.

Just so long as no one considers this "fighting training" then. When he starts, kick like yor kicking a football right up his middle. You might want to lever back rather than lean into it though (just in case your timing is really poor and he gets a foot up). You'll likely catch either his supporting leg or his groin (unless he's not closed in enought for his own kick to reach. Same response works... it's really hard for him to continue to deliver anything with your body-weight going into his one-legged support structure.

"Phase 1" (the first 6 months or so of study) has a cirriculum of twenty-some classes, each focused on something different. Each class has a given set of material that must be conveyed during it. A class starts with a groub Bagua form that we use as a warm-up and to build strength. The class then pairs of (Junior students with senior students). The instructor will explain one-or-two points on the topic, then illustrate them, then that senior student will perofrm them on the junior and explain more if neccessairy, then the junior will perform them on the senior with the senior correcting. Move to next one-or-two points and repeat until the required material for that class has been taught.

That's a generalization... I have no use to practice at "fighting speeds", it wouldn't teach me anything. I've demonstrated at them, but its counter-productive to skill.

I try to avoid sparring people "my level". I like to spar people either better than me or worse than me. I learn more that way.

I'll third White Warlock; Sparring for me is traning (for both myself and my partner), not competition.

And how would you support this hypothesis? The Christians don't deny the existance of power; they simply argue that any power not from God is evil. How can you differentiate the holy spirit from satan in this context? You seem to be simply assuming whatever best helps your position be accepted. Pray: an address (as a petition) to God or a god in word or thought Meditate: to focus one's thoughts on : reflect on or ponder over The words do not have the same meanings nor attempt the same goal. Next you will be calling spiritualism a type or prayer (and that's explicitly condemned in the Bible) Jesus went into the desert in order to be tempted. He fasted for 40 days and then was tempted. Are you claiming that God would have otherwise succumed to Satan's will? The Bible does see a difference. Heck, even accepting "it's praying" doesn't help because it's praying to something other than Jehovia; which is a violation of the first commandment.

Though point-sparring rules may mess with this, I like the "attack when you feel the urge"... as long as you make sure that "anything he does gives yo uthe urge". That way, if yo uscrew up and get hit, you can at least maintain inititive. Few things are worse than trying to defend and failing with no fall-back action involved.

I assume you mean to a street fight, not to a NHB match. OTOH, do you do an art that you think is more complete than boxing? When will you be fighting Mike Tyson? Perhaps a given individual does not need to be able to defeat another in order to have a better idea. There is certainly something to be said for size, strength, speed, endurance, skill level and experience.

If they are effectively safe and reliable; then there's no worries about the kicker getting jhurt in sparring. If they are not, then why would you spend time on them as a fighting technique? I think there are some very narrow circumstances where a spinning kick (particularly the spinning back kick, which is the shortest and fastest) is appropriate. Outside of those circumstances, I don't want to turn by back on my oppoinent while standing on one leg... just seems like a bad thing to do.

Meaning that spin kicks are poor fighting technique (in general)... so perhaps we should kick them in the back to get them to stop throwing them when they won't actually work?

I can cover that distance and hit in one step... perhaps I should read back a page or two ad see what you mean by "don't move".