BRUTAL KNIFING VIDEO...

[Admin]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f3b_1286227189

Could you have stopped it? How?

[Art Reynolds]

this is scary,pistol first,go to ground,empty pistol into bad guy.

[Patrick]

It doesn't look like it could have ended any better. The first guy
didn't have a chance, unless he was more aware.

The only way it could have ended sooner was if the guy who helped the
cashier had a gun. But then he would still have to get just as close
to avoid hitting the cashier.

I think it went down as well as can be expected.

I would have either been dead (the guy at the counter) or the rescuer
if I was further away. It would be the luck of the draw for me.

[Kevin]

The guy standing at the door was SOL but as GM Perkins always says if
the bad guy gets the jump on you it does not matter what you know "You
Are Toast". It was like an assassination attempt. First of all, I
would hope that I was the man in the blue shirt seen leaving the store
right before the attacker arrived.

I hope that I would have had the presence of mind to immediately reach
for the gun that appeared to be assessable (assuming he saw the
initial slashing). The guy sitting behind the counter appears to get
up to bargain with the attacker then immediately retreats. At the
very least he should have gotten up and rolled or kicked the chair
toward the attacker (to place something between between him and the
attacker) while simultaneously going for his weapon.

Last but not least I hoped I would have attacked the guy. No one
attacked the guy. One store worker appears to be trying to disarm the
attacker (keeping himself from being stabbed) while the other one was
trying to pull the attacker off of his coworker. During that scene
not once did either of them attack the attacker, they did not have the
presence of mind to strike the attacker. They were strictly
defensive. So accepting the fact that in the overwhelming majority of
fights where a knife is introduced the guy without a knife is going to
get stabbed, I would hope that I would deliver a series of strikes to
the attackers neck, throat or eyes and/or be able to snap the guys
neck if the opportunity presented itself (this is what I hope I would
do if I did not have a gun or could not get to it before the attacker
was right up on me). Another option would be to brace myself up
against the desk and deliver a set of continuous dropping kicks as
seen demonstrated by Master Watson on the Helevator video on the
website.

I will end like I started I hope I would have the presence of mind to
do what I mentioned above at the situation dictated but If I had to be
there I want to be the man leaving the store before everything bad
started happening.

[Nikolaiy.Dimitrijevich]

As soon as the opponent breaches the safety zone (or in this case,
slits the other dude's throat), start throwing heavy objects at his
face to slow him down (I would go for the computer screen or the glass
bottles).

Use chair as an obstacle on the path of the aggressor with a kick,
again, buy some time.

Get gun, keep it waist high, use left arm to keep opponent at bay,
preferably with an object using short jabs and pokes while unloading a
magazine in the opponent's center mass (his guts).

Preventable?
Yeah, if you were not too busy watching the cricket game on TV to be
aware of somebody getting his freaking throat slit.

[Brian Denyer]

Looking at the speed, pre-emptive flow of motion and
determination of this maniac I am Not sure it could
have been stopped. Not without his death or at a minimum
a serious mobility injury preventing the continued attack.
Allow me to posit a thought: he would have been just as
dangerous without a weapon in his state of mind? It seems
everything in the environment would have been used to his
advantage.

The attacker had already completed the entire onslaught
in his mind before he even made the first slash.
I don't belive there was any conscious thought
except continuous attack. Perhaps it was an altered state of mind?Eventualy when the attacker became physicaly tired he would have stopped.
Look at the difference in radiating Energy of the attacker
and the victims? It felt like a Tidal Wave in comparison,
to me anyways.
All it takes is that brief pause of relaxation of awareness
for the initial onslaught to take place.

Brian ............................V""V...
************************************************************

--- On Mon, 10/11/10, Admin <attac...@mail.websitewizard.com> wrote:

[HerbMartin]

On Oct 11, 4:56 pm, Admin <attackpr...@mail.websitewizard.com> wrote:
> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f3b_1286227189
>
> Could you have stopped it? How?

Yes. The (1st) customer appears to have survived (he runs out and is
not visibly down in the final scene) so even though he was essentially
"ambushed" or "executed" he might have survived in this case and could
definitely have improved his chances through looseness and movement on
first contact. However, he could have radically improved his chances
against both this poorly (from a technical perspective) executed
attack by NOTICING the attacker entering from his front left (outside)
to his rear left and around to his right. Getting out of condition
white and and into yellow would have given him much better odds.

The clerk COULD have shot the attacker before he moved from in front
had he been alert, but he definitely had time to present his handgun
and shoot the attacker as he came around the counter (I am certain
that his is fairly easily doable by those trained to access their
handgun and with the firearm in a good location -- either holster or
near at hand.)

The clerk did a pretty good job of surviving and then later stopping
the attacker from the point where he reach the backside of the
counter. From our regular practice he got a typical control position
(grabbing the knife arm) which CAN work but typically leads to getting
"locked on" (monkey locked) and unable to let loose or otherwise
control the attacker and the knife.

Given this reaction he could (fairly easily) be trained to deal with
the knife from that point (having the arm gripped, OR BETTER not
gripping it but passing it, or only gripping it VERY briefly).

The clerk is apparently VERY lucky he had help from the 3rd man. And
the 3rd man is very lucky that the clerk then shot and stopped the
attacker before he could be more seriously wounded or killed once he
distracted the attacker.

Ideally the 1st customer would have MOVED as the attacker entered --
presented a defense -- and the attacker would have been shot by the
clerk. The clerk could also have shot the attacker a bit later behind
the counter or even have dealt with him empty handed. The 3rd man
could definitely have improved his attack from the rear of the
attacker.

We see pretty much all of these position in our AMOK! practice so I am
speaking from real but "safe" (which might change things a bit)
experience -- and also from my limited experience with dealing with
two similar attacks by knife wielding ambush.

1) an ambush from concealment (in a theoretically very safe
location) that ended with the ATTACKER cut and no me

2) A face on attack where I was cut (no severely) and held off the
attack

Both were long ago when I had very little training, but in both cases
what training I did have was manifested without conscious effort or
delay -- the point is that what works in safe practice CAN (no
guarantee) work in a real life or death situation.

So yes, you CAN do much better. But all and all it was a pretty
decent job from people who likely don't practice knife defense nor
even combat shooting.

I would like to know the extent of the 1st man's injuries, and the
others as well.

--
Herb

[Joe T]

In the end, all we can do is make sure our awarness is at the highest
level and we take the time to develop ourselves with proper self
defense.. As far as what I would do.....who know's, untill we are
really there what we say is only opinion.....make sure you do your
exercises.

[Kevin]

That's one of the things that I love about Joe T, everything starts
and ends with the exercises. He is also right we do not know what we
will do until we are in that position other then that it is opinion or
speculation but that being said I try to use such things as teaching
methods. I ask myself what would I try to do if I was in that
situation. I also do the same when I read news reports of criminal
activities or see the same on TV news programs. Now that is not an
exact science but it has helped to program me both consciously and
subconsciously. I can tell you for fact that it has helped with the
development of my awareness.

But back to Joe T's greater point if you do have not developed the
principles then you may be left to defend yourself like the men in the
videos. Nothing is guaranteed so that is why in my earlier post the
optimal position is not to be there when it goes down. How many times
have you heard of people who walk into a store when a robbery or worse
is going down because they were not Aware of their surroundings.

[HerbMartin]

On Oct 12, 9:08 pm, Joe T <troylead...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the end, all we can do is make sure our awarness is at the highest
> level and we take the time to develop ourselves with proper self
> defense.. As far as what I would do.....who know's, untill we are
> really there what we say is only opinion.....make sure you do your
> exercises.

True as far as it goes in that we can never know the future much less
how a complex situation will be ultimately affected by minor details
that are not in the case at hand, but incomplete in that we can make
highly probably predictions when we have information from both
exercises and past experience (of ourselves or even others.)

Were this not true there would be no point in "doing the exercises' as
we would never have any confidence about whether they would help or
not in future, unknown and complex situations.

We however can make good statistical bests by relating (sufficient)
past outcomes to the most probably situations.

The original question is: > > > Could you have stopped it? How?

The answer remains that the likely outcome can be improved, and likely
with fairly minimal training, while the fate of the 1st customer is
very difficult (although) not impossible to improve. His best chance
would be ALERTNESS to his surroundings and specifically to people
moving CLOSE to him. His ability to improve his situation through
REACTIVE DEFENSE is more likely to require some significant training
(GC and Systema providing the most likely immediate benefits in my
opinion.)

Once he or the others survive that initial attack, then there is a
quite a bit of room for simple self-defense getting them through this
in BETTER condition since they all demonstrate some ability but
apparently untrained (except may the shooting skills of the clerk ONCE
he presents the firearm.)

So while true that we cannot know future -- we can predict what would
likely happen in 100 such incidents and work (do the exercises) to
improve our odds if something similar happens in our vicinity.

One very important, even key, element in such predictions is working
against at full speed, against fully resistant opponents on a regular
basis -- practice (our skills), train (our attributes), and engage in
OPPOSITIONAL practice often to fire test the results.

Most of the things that happened in the video are things our training
groups experiences on a regular basis.

--
Herb

[HerbMartin]

On Oct 12, 10:27 pm, Kevin <keh_majori...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...  Nothing is guaranteed so that is why in my earlier post the

> optimal position is not to be there when it goes down.  How many times
> have you heard of people who walk into a store when a robbery or worse
> is going down because they were not Aware of their surroundings.

Right -- there are examples (good and bad) of both of these in the
video:

1) Good: A customer leaves the store before it starts (probably just
luck but who know why he didn't walk toward the approaching knife man)

2) BAD: The customer with the cut neck COULD have been much more
aware -- he let the attacker enter right at his LEFT REAR with no
(appreciable) notice nor body movement

3) BAD: The clerk didn't deploy his gun early (neither when the
incident first started nor before the attacker got behind the counter)

4) Good: The clerk DID deploy the gun rapidly enough to stop the
attacker when the fight moved back in front of the counter (thus
proving that he MIGHT have done it as in #3)

There are probably more but these are the ones that are both pretty
obvious and which are subject to the kind of training we see for even
newcomers to a variety of combat arts from GC to even Concealed
Handgun License courses given in mere hours.

Training to survive ambush and assassination once the attacker is
CLOSE is a pretty tough problem, but anyone CAN learn awareness and
early deployment of defensive responsive (from movement to guns etc.)

[Nikolaiy.Dimitrijevich]

It might be wise for the future, for the clerk to install some kind of
stalling device preventing customers from having access to the till
area so easily.

Just think about the difference a small locked flap door would have
made. Would have bought you at least 3 seconds!!

[Joe T]

Does anyone know where this location was? Environments are quite
different around the world, some places are not use to that level of
violence. Go to parts of Mt Vernon or Yonkers NY and it might be
considered routine to be dealing with violence, and the clerk would be
behind a 6"wall of Impact Plexi. btw: Thanks for sharing

On Oct 13, 3:33 am, "Nikolaiy.Dimitrijevich"

[Kevin]

RIght Nikolaiy, but the reality of the situation is that the guy is
just a clerk not the owner so any improvements would have to be
implemented by him (owner) and the question by Admin is could you have
stopped it so we are dealing with what we see in the video (we can all
add something into it that makes results better for us) so we should
restrict the answers to that. You do raise an issue for another
discussion because every now and then there is a story about some
store clerk risks his or her life trying to do something heroic not to
save themselves or another person but to save the company's
money...how foolish.

I think the reason the guy who left the store before the chaos began
was as Herb says just dumb luck and the reason he didn't walk in the
direction of the approaching maniac was that he was not going in that
direction. To be fair to the guy at the door whose throat was slashed
many of us would ended up with our throat slit because it is
practically impossible to be at a heightened state of awareness 24/7.
How many of us is always aware of what people around us are doing at
all times whether in the store or on the street?

[Brian Denyer]

Way back in the early 1970's when I arrived in Los Angeles
in the wee hours of the morning. Being hungry and looking
for a store to buy some food before going to bed. I found
a all night Liquor Store open. While looking for some Tomamto
Juice my gut acted up. I always stood on a diagonal while
reaching for food. Peripheral vison picked up a movement
towards me and I turned to find a young male comming to me.
I made a turn and took a T-stance. He had one hand in his
coat pocket and asked if I wanted to buy the new looking wallet
in his hand? The was a junkie. The projected surface pattern
was of a hand holding something in his right hand pocket.

He talked in a low voice 1and started to lean forward.
Looking at the store clerk I noticed he had a nickle plated
357 magnum and was twisting his hand back and forth making it
reflect the overhead light. The guy with the wallet was pushing
his hand harder and I could see the outline of a gun barrel and
the top strap.

He kept saying 'lets see your wallet to see if it fits'
So I was stuck with either being robbed by the junkie
or being shot by the store clerk trying to prevent a hold up.
Remaining calm I noticed thta the Junkie was becoming more
excited as time went on. Not taking out my wallet was the
only option because I don't carry one. Repeatedly I informed
the Junkie that I only had enough money for the Tomato Juice.
After sticking out my hand and apologizing he actualy let go
of the handgun and shook my hand. I went to the counter and
bought the Juice. The Junkie left the store and was out of sight.

Brian ..........................
*******************************************

[Admin]

From Brian:

"This is a very sad story one that this Officer will have
to live
with the rest of his life . I have 1 concern and that
is this Officer
trained for this type of engagement and he fired 11 rounds
hitting
the adversary 10 times yet he failed to stop him. The
adversary
fired 2 rounds killing 1 innocent.

There can be possibly 1 reason that was told to me
during my
1985/87 relocation to L.A. At that time I knew many
Pistoleros
and never forgot being told a gun that does not shoot to
point of
aim is a secondary fire arm . When in a gun shop #1
check gun
is unloaded # 2 Place firearm on counter with in reach
#3 look accross room pick a point #4 close eyes pick up
firearm
point at marked spot #5 Open eyes - If your not on
target -- forget it ! .
This goes along with a saying popular at that time" I
rather
be missed by 6 rounds from a .44Mag then hit with 1
round from
a .22LR .. I think this is the most over looked aspect
in the purchase
of a hand gun, While in L.A. I Owned Revolvers and Semi
Autos and
tried 10 to 15 brands of Ammo, as most guns can be
finicky ,
and only 2 ever shot consistently straight.

Any one's that didn't got traded back, Expensive Yes, but
worth the
the ones that did, the confidence boost alone is worth it."

[HerbMartin]

Like Joe I too would like to know the location and a few details about
the neighborhood or culture.

The video is labeled with "Kamera23" as the spelling so we can
presume at least not likely in the US etc.

The more I look at the video the more this seems to be a liquor
store not a general small grocery (but if that is liquor it might just
be a grocery with a lot of liquor).

Having the gun doesn't seem to be a big issue for him -- it was
right there at hand so likely the law or culture allows (or at least
tolerates) his being armed -- and he even goes out in front while
holding the gun (BTW: this is NOT a very wise idea even where guns are
completely legal especially since he apparently has already called for
emergency/police assistance.)

We can presume that the clerk felt there was enough threat to keep a
firearm at hand; even though I am an adamant proponent of everyone
having the right to be armed, most people simply won't go to the
expense and trouble to do so unless they perceive a (significant)
threat.

I don't see any way to tell that the clerk is (one of) the owners or
not. Without evidence, I had an impression that the 3rd man (who
helps) might be a relative or co-worker. He does intervene, risking,
and almost losing his life, when that intervention is not required.

Most interesting would be to hear their own stories and especially the
details of the resulting injuries.

I remain convinced that even #1 might have survived, and perhaps
wasn't even seriously injure. He seems to have some blood on his
shirt near his right collarbone, but no obvious spurt is visible and
he has already moved/wiped his hand through that area by the time we
see the (likely) blood.

#1 actually made one of the best moves he could have made (given he
doesn't see the threat coming) -- he rotates while moving his body/
neck AWAY from the knife pressure (good GC or Systema perhaps
<grin>). The rotation moves the SIDE of the neck under the knife
rather than the front or front-right-quarter which is the most
vulnerable area. Possible bad effect of this rotation is that he
might have HELPED the "cut" by rotating into it, but that is mitigated
by moving away to lower the pressure -- much better to get a longer
cut that is shallower or even move the cut far to the side of the neck
(not sure if he succeeded in this.)

Also, at the end when the clerk goes outside no body is shown on the
ground, and the clerk's body language does not seem to indicate that
he is looking down at the first man just out of the camera view (he
could be there, but we don't see any indication of that.)

Update:
In the comments the consensus was Turkey -- then someone posted the
"Google translation" of the supposed story from Antalya, Turkey
04.10.2010. The translation is very rough (google remember) and MIGHT
not even be the actual incident but seems to match up and tell us:
ALL survived (including knife guy and #1 if I read correctly); lots of
injuries; surgeries -- #1 seems to have had injuries to "neck muscles
and veins".
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f3b_1286227189

One possible explanation (but rampant supposition) is that this is a
"radical muslim attacking a liquor [selling] store and customers"

[Admin]

The knife video on the forum is a great case in point for awareness
and learning the most basic knife defenses that we teach routinely. Of
course no one is always going to be alert to danger especially when
relaxing in an environment that they live in daily for hours on end.
Having said that, the way the attack went down shows how a determined
attacker can get the jump on victims. The guy standing near the
entrance seemed to have no reason to expect a knife wielding maniac
was entering the store. In fact from the footage the knifer maintained
a relaxed demeanor. He simply walked in and smoothly cut the standing
man's throat like an assassin. Next the man sitting and watching TV
seems to be in the wrong position to access his pistol so he reacts
the way he can and is lucky enough to grab the knifer's arm long
enough to sustain only a few wounds. We do not know how badly he was
injured though. Luckily for the TV watcher the third man came to his
aid and grabbed the knifer who then turned on him and began to slice
and dice. The TV watcher then was able to shoot the knifer quickly and
decisively with a point shooting methodology. Don't know if he trained
that way but it was instantly effective. Having seen quite a few live
knife fights and having worked on many homicide and assault scenes
involving edged weapons, I would say this: Basically the first guy had
nearly no chance unless he was on general alert for whatever reason a
person could be. The TV watcher could have also been in a state of
mild alert also which may have kept himself from being stabbed. If the
TV watcher had the ability to put his back to the counter and use
strong kicks instead of trying to fend off a knife with bare hands he
may even have injured the knifer. Had the TV watcher had his pistol at
his side he may have been able to stop the knifer with gunfire.
Remember although the knifer fell with one or two shots so quickly it
could have been a situation where multiple shots did not stop him as
is often the case in reality. So the TV watcher could have done all
the right things like being aware and having his weapon at the ready
and still sustained injuries or even worse. The third man was brave
and actually saved the day given the circumstances. I don't know the
extent of his injuries but he allowed the TV watcher to get off the
shots that ended the altercation.

Comments: Nice shooting. Notice no apparent sight alignment. If he
took the time to align his sights he may have given the knifer that
tenth of a second to cut the third man one more time.

Kicking from a back up position works if you are nimble enough to
get your legs high enough and have sufficient strength to make a
difference. Holding the knife hand is something many people who are
now dead have done. It did slow down the attack somewhat. In most
cases the knife wielders usually managed to get the knife loose and
continue to cut, slash and stab often many many times. Just one well
placed stab can be sufficient though.

If you are in an environment that causes you to think about having a
gun then practice with it for as many contingencies as possible. Learn
what can realistically, forensically can happen. Don't rely on
uninformed imagination or flowery circus techniques and such other
crap. Find someone or some source of information on REAL attacks and
work from there. If you are weak in the principles of Balance, and
Sensitivity and don't know how to move really well then work on it
till you get stronger in these areas. No amount of role playing will
help you get better balance. Practice serious balance training. Once
you can depend on your feet to be under you from many directions and
deliver devastating kicks and strikes and access your weapons in
practice then you may be lucky enough to survive and even prevail in a
life and death situation. Don't forget to train in Ground position
combat (not locks) and learn to deliver devastating kicks and other
damaging blows while on your back. Remember: Luck favors the prepared
man. Ground Fighting seminar October 23----Knife, Stick and Gun
seminar November 20. Real test of ability and enhancement at the same
time. No Bull, No Alibis. JP

[HerbMartin]

On Oct 13, 7:31 pm, Admin <attackpr...@mail.websitewizard.com> wrote:
...

>   If you are in an environment that causes you to think about having a
> gun then practice with it for as many contingencies as possible.

...

Absolutely!

And there are several things that most "gun carriers" (those with a
CHL or who keep them at hand in their business or home) fail to
practice:

1) Getting "off the X" -- does no good to "win a gun fight" and get
shot or stabbed while doing that -- MOVE (e.g., learn the Pekiti
TakeOff or similar)

2) Draw while moving (as in #1) -- most important is to be somewhere
else, but many people don't practice drawing to shoot

3) Point shooting -- even those that practice this seldom practice
doing it while movi (off the X) or across the body one handed since
the movement is at an angle

4) Accessing -- doing all of the above and more -- while under attack
(e.g., by a knife or club wielding attacker)

Most people who use a firearm will try to stand and outdraw the bad
guy unless they have really excellent training. Almost everyone
(including police) will try to draw the firearm while being being
chopped up by a knife -- HINT: when in close contact deal with the
COMBATIVES PROBLEM first, then access the firearm.

Gabe Suarez and Suarez International (SI) is one of the best soures or
this type of training and practice (including Roger Philips who
developed "Point Shooting Progressesions, i.e., book, video, and
classes and has now joined SI)

AirSoft practice is invaluable here. Shoot against charging bad guys
with weapons. Shoot against bad guys who already have their weapons
pointed at you. Deal with a knife attacker who is ON YOU and figure
out what works and what doesn't to get your gun out with dying first.

I cannot recommend the video "Die Less Often" high enough for this.
Also, the AMOK! gun video (AmokWeaponsAccessAndRetention) by Mark
Human.

(Next on my purchase list are the GC weapons videos).

[Ari]

Herb, I thought we went over this when we worked together, but I guess
I didn't make the points strongly enough. There are SERIOUS problems
with the materials and methods you're pushing. Watch the GC weapons
videos, then more importantly, explore those methods during or after
the GC seminars in Austin in December.

[HerbMartin]

I suppose you mean the Die Less Often DVD, since you did mention the
Dog Catcher, but no we didn't discuss any problems with it.

What are they?

[Ari]

Without getting into specifics, those things you mentioned (Die Less
Often, AMOK, Pekiti Take-Off, Suarez stuff), from what I've seen
(ain't seen it all and haven't trained with them, so this is one guy's
impression), overcomplicate and formalize things (causing problems
under duress), promote dangerous pattern seeking, and in some cases
promote dangerous tactics.

Some examples:

Remember when we talked about the formalized, cued "take-off"
movements vs. simply developing your balance and movement in order to
be able to move decisively at all times?

Dog Catcher: so you're supposed to close with an undiminished knifer
and basically grapple him to the ground while landing only incidental,
unbalanced strikes, after of course you've seen him coming at you with
a knife? Again, this is based only on what I've seen. Worst case
attacks using knives are not that predictable and controllable and you
should avoid bringing your vitals closer to the blade if possible.

Note the line John had above:

"No amount of role playing will help you get better balance."

That applies to all the principles and to all forms of scenario
training or attack rehearsals. The real thing (reactive self-defense)
never goes down exactly like in training, which is why it behooves you
to enhance your ability to move adaptively and decisively (with
balance, looseness, body unity, sensitivity and total freedom of
action) in order to remain unavailable yet unavoidable to attackers in
all circumstances. Techniques, tricks and tactics should be taught and
practiced NOT to be "solutions" to given "situations," but to expand
the mind's understanding of the principles and their expression.

Not at all saying that anything that is not GC "sucks" necessarily.
However, reality ("forensic reality" if you will) dictates that we
adopt training methods that enhance subconscious adaptability and
performance under worst case conditions, armed or unarmed.

Hope that made sense.

[HerbMartin]

Ari, I want to specifically answer this in some detail, but don't want
the nature of "email" or "forum" exchanges to make it sound like I
don't value you and your friendship highly. At the same time, I don't
want to miss us reaching a more useful understanding by avoiding being
clear.

So please forgive anything that doesn't "sound right" and please see
what is useful below. Then come back with anything you wish and I
will do the same....

On Oct 15, 11:23 am, Ari <arikandel2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Without getting into specifics, those things you mentioned (Die Less
> Often, AMOK, Pekiti Take-Off, Suarez stuff), from what I've seen
> (ain't seen it all and haven't trained with them, so this is one guy's
> impression), overcomplicate and formalize things (causing problems
> under duress), promote dangerous pattern seeking, and in some cases
> promote dangerous tactics.

Since you haven't seen this stuff in detail (e.g., trained with them)
then I will re-emphasize my recommendation that you (and others) look
into this as any rejection based mostly on partial understanding is
similar to people who have dismissed GC without trying it or perhaps
without giving it fair experience.

With YOUR SKILLS you may well find problems or more likely just places
where you can improve on their techniques -- these improvement might
be strictly for yourself, or for your students who have GC skills, or
even for those who don't have GC skills.

[I know that has happened for me -- I developed at least one
improvement (for me certainly and for everyone with whom I has so far
shared it) to the the Dog Catcher. ]

> Some examples:
>
> Remember when we talked about the formalized, cued "take-off"
> movements vs. simply developing your balance and movement in order to
> be able to move decisively at all times?

Using the GCC "Entries" such as the CCUE, Prow, "answering the phone",
and perhaps the Dig Dog or Drac as examples of "default methods" or
"temporary methods" that newer students might use until more skill in
GC is developed:

Both formal (e.g., CCUE) and principle based methods work together
synergistically, especially as DEFAULT actions when you are caught
unarwares, i.e., as DEFAULT methods.

So please understand the purpose of the Pekit take off (and similar
methods):

It is for situations such as having a Gun already pointed at you
(surrending is not an option, e.g., you are being moved to a 2nd crime
scene). GC (and most everybody else) agree, "Don't go to the 2nd
crime scene".

So how do we get our self offline (of the muzzle) long enough to draw
our concealed handgun (or other weapon, or even to get space to just
run)?

One answer that (consistently) works after minimal proper practice is
the Pekiti TakeOff.

While it can be done by "anyone" who is mobile, it is a DROPPING
movement, familiar in general to all GC students, and (extreme)
balance and looseness will definitely make it easier and more
effective.

There is a "Systema" version known as the Russian TakeOff -- they
differ in small ways but are similar in overall concept -- oddly
enough it turns out that (for some subset of people) they are each
better at different types of situations -- pistol vs. knife attack,
closer vs. further, different body types/mobility of defender.

Again, can these takeoffs be improve? Perhaps, and I would not be
surprised.

However do we KNOW they work? Yes, both from real combat reports and
our own practice with Airsoft or full speed knife attacks.

Get two Airsoft guns with masks (eye/head protection) and a partner:
Have the partner stand with gun drawn at various distances
representing common hold up situations. Start with you gun holstered
AND CONCEALED (or other weapons if you aren't allowed to carry a
firearm) as you would carry it.

Try various methods of getting offline and escaping injury. Turn and
run, Pekiti take off, draw and shoot, attack with your knife, whatever
choices you have. Your partner's job is to SHOOT you when you move or
otherwise take acttion -- your job it NOT to "kill him" or "to WIN"
but rather to SURVIVE (preferably unharmed).

Keep what works.

Right now...our best collective experience is that the Pekiti Take Off
(or similar) offer a significant advantage over most other methods,
especially if you are armed with a firearm and develop rudimentary
point shooting ability.

> Dog Catcher: so you're supposed to close with an undiminished knifer
> and basically grapple him to the ground while landing only incidental,
> unbalanced strikes, after of course you've seen him coming at you with
> a knife? Again, this is based only on what I've seen.

No, closing isn't really a significant element of the Dog Catcher; it
is not about closing with an attacker per se, but rather it is a CCUE
(close combat Universal Entry) or more accurately a CCU RESPONSE (not
really an entry) when you have been caught (relatively) unaware and
the attacker is CLOSING with you.

It's a (possible) default response like the GCC CCUE or answering the
phone with drop when attacked from the back.

The DC as a default response is designed to work well, with no major
"choice points" (that is no conscious thought of "he does this, then I
do that") against a wide variety of the most likely SUDDEN (knife or
other) attacks. Prison rushes such as the "Sewing machine", "weed
whacker" or just single committed sudden and surprise charges from the
front are it's forte. It works acceptably against high (overhead and
diagonal), mid (sweeps), and low (sweeps or stabs) attacks -- the
primary method is taught against RIGHT handed attacks since most
people are right handed and most knife attacks are from the right
hand.

[With one modification -- unfortunately a minor "choice point" -- it
works the same against left hand attacks, but it can also work as
given initially without this change, although with diminished
effectiveness.)

The DC is about surviving that first rush to do what you suggest
correctly below... The goal of the DC is to live long enough to use
all of your skills, to find options, to run, to deploy a weapon, etc.

> Worst case
> attacks using knives are not that predictable and controllable and you
> should avoid bringing your vitals closer to the blade if possible.

Agreed. Such attacks are tvery unpredictability and that means we
must consider all such rush attacks to include a knife trying to cut
or stab us in head, neck, or abdomen -- even if the weapon is not
visiable -- and then STOP or DIVERT that attack long enough (not
permanently) get to an outside (usually) position as we do with many
of the CCUE moves.

All this must be done without ending up in a Clinch or Grappling or
Ground Fighting if at all possible. (Note Survivng on the ground is
better than dieing standing up but we must presume that the attacker
has friends, another knife, or is stronger etc than we are so we do
NOT want to be in a grappling match with knife wielding criminal.)

But again, note that the Dog Catcher is just one option for that
specific case of "Oh crap" and there could be better options as
default responses to this type of attack.

So how can we decide?

The only way we KNOW if they work is to "fight them out" -- some
people apparently cannot do the Dog Catcher (much like some people
find the original CCUE confusing) usually because they haven't taken
the class or have otherwise missed the key points either by learning
it (improperly) from the video or learning it from someone who didn't
get the key elements internalized themselves.

The Dog Catcher does suffer from one particular problem in my
opinion: It is a LITTLE BIT complicated -- there are 3-4 key elements
and people who miss one of those or fail to train them to automaticity
will (correctly) dismiss the Dog Catcher as unworkable for
themselves. (But this gets back to a recent topic from he GC tips:
Such people should NOT judge me by their standards.)

BTW: My main improvement to the Dog Catcher s a "training" technique
that makes it safer to train CORRECTLY but still at full speed. The
"real" Dog Catch is TOO Dangerous to train properly unless you armor
up the attacker with a helmet or head guard that protects against head
butts and knockouts.

> Note the line John had above:
> "No amount of role playing will help you get better balance."

Agreed.

Role playing however can helps us in other ways, primarily as a form
of orientation and slow work that lets us take proper (i.e.,
effective) action.

However, going BEYOND "role playing" to OPPOSITIONAL testing can show
us where we have weakness, both in our balance (etc) and in our
technique. We use the opposition to test, to see what is (becoming)
effective and what needs work.

We use it also to find variations (as you have pointed out, no set
technique works "as given" against real world variables and pressures)
and to develop our sensitivities and flexibility (in the looseness
sense not in the anatomical) to these variations.

Ideally we want to make any "technique" become merely a framework for
our principles and eventually for that techniques to dissolve or
disappear into our abilities to act and react smoothly to
unpredictable and chaotic situations

> That applies to all the principles and to all forms of scenario
> training or attack rehearsals.

True for scenarios and rehearsals, but if properly setup up an
OPPOSITIONAL WORKOUT can gives us much useful information about what
is likely to work or not. It can do this safely if we set some
minimal but critical restrictions, but generally have the attacker
FULLY COMMITTED to completing the violent attack.

If we cannot survive a "full speed, fully committed attack" from our
friend who isn't going to kill us, then what are the odds we can
survive one when a real knife is involved and we didn't see it coming?

> The real thing (reactive self-defense)
> never goes down exactly like in training, which is why it behooves you
> to enhance your ability to move adaptively and decisively (with
> balance, looseness, body unity, sensitivity and total freedom of
> action) in order to remain unavailable yet unavoidable to attackers in
> all circumstances.

Absolutely agreed. This is NOT an "either/or" situations. Many
Systema folks do ONLY slow work and believe that somehow that is going
to automatically translate into an effective response to a truly
violent attack: Just Breathe, Relax, Move, keep Form. It helps, but
it isn't sufficient in my opinion.

> Techniques, tricks and tactics should be taught and
> practiced NOT to be "solutions" to given "situations," but to expand
> the mind's understanding of the principles and their expression.

Again agreed with this addition:

In the case of the CCUE or other GCC material (and the DC), these
offer temporary support until high level GC skills can be developed
AND functionalized OR as "default" responses when you are caught
unaware and the attack and attacker is already entering your space...

If we cannot perform against a fully resisting, full speed opponent
when we KNOW it is going to happen then we are unlikely to be able to
do it in a combat situation.

> Not at all saying that anything that is not GC "sucks" necessarily.

It is a common probably with most arts and most martial artists which
I rigorously work to avoid -- everything that works for ME is good --
every that that doesn't isn't UNTIL I can find someone who can teach
me to do it well enough.

That is my only criteria -- ultimately it doesn't matter it Royce
Gracie can use it to win a UFC championship, or Brock Lesner, or if
Vladimir Vasiliev can 'defeat' five guys with knives, or even if John
Perkins used it to survive against a punk with a knife IF I cannot
demonstrate it reliably with MY body, MY conditioning, MY abilities,
etc.

Even things I did MYSELF when I was young to survive real knife
attacks, real attacks with sticks, real attacks by gangs of 3-5
attackers don't matter if they depend on luck, specific context, or my
youthful abilities.

Ultimately all of this can only SUGGEST what might work now for
me.

> However, reality ("forensic reality" if you will) dictates that we
> adopt training methods that enhance subconscious adaptability and
> performance under worst case conditions, armed or unarmed.

The real test is does it make us safer. I will explain (or argue)
with those that dismiss Guide Chaos without giving it fair experience;
I don't accept anything that I cannot make work for me (repeatedly),
or that I don't see work for specific people.

Too many martial arts have sold themselves a bill of goods through
failure to test -- too many people dismiss GC through a failure to
learn what it really provides and try it.

I bring this attitude to all my practice -- Systema, AMOK!, and GC
specifically. Right now I cut GC a LOT of slack because I see the
potential for it to advance my art and safety even though I cannot
currently functionalize (much of) it myself.

Should I dismiss GC simply because I haven't given the practice enough
time to make it fully effective for me? That would likely be vary
foolish of me so I practice, practice, practice my exercise drills and
my contact flow.

Just because I cannot (clearly) see the benefits of GC in MY full
speed practice doesn't mean either that they aren't already there, nor
that I won't develop those benefits in the future (soon I hope), but
once I can do that not only will I know that the practice is
worthwhile, but also my AMOK! other training partners will see and
feel the evidence directly.

I am old man at 58 so having people ask, "Hey Herb, how do you make
that work?" and hearing "By practicing Contact Flow and exercises to
improve my balance, pliability, body unity, and sensitivity. Wanna
learn how?" will definitely make the younger guys take notice and give
them motivation to spend the time and make it work for themselves.

Part of my current work during ALL AMOK! practices is how do I
functionalize my GC experience?

Interestingly, AMOK! probably has the best take on this portion of the
problem -- because if you can functionalize anything (e.g., use
Systema or BJJ as an example if thinking of GC this way is
uncomfortable or heretical) while performing an "Oppositional Workout"
then it is has a fair chance of working in real combat.

If you cannot, it has a fair chance of FAILING in real combat as well.

AMOK! oppositional workouts radically changed my thoughts on Systema
-- it didn't keep me from appreciating or training Systema, but it
made me work much more effectively to convert that principle based
training (like GC, Systema is almost totally 'principle ' based) to
something that would actually work under pressure.

Does this mean that AMOK! is "the answer" -- absolutely not -- or else
I wouldn't have subsequently taken up GC and be spending so much time
practicing and training GC daily.

AMOK! is a bit more "technique" based than GC and Systema, but largely
does train "mechanisms" (something like technique building blocks, or
elements, or an alphabet) that then can be infinitely assembled into
custom "techniques" during a conflict -- people who have GC (or
Systema) attributes will be able to do this (and even just to SEE
this) much more easily than those that come mostly from "Traditional
Martial Arts" (TMA) -- they will tend to see the mechanisms and the
examples as fixed techniques.

AMOK! has adopted the "3 Dimensional Performance Pyramid" by Scott
Sonnon as a training model and methodology. The book found here for
$25: https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/The-Three-Dimensional-Performance-Pyramid-Manual_p_60.html
is WELL WORTH the money and time to read it.

This is about HOW to train, not what to train (do GC, TMA, etc) -- it
is VERY compatible with GC and especially "Contact Flow" ideas of
training slow. Scott Sonnon refers to "Soft Work" and "Hard Work" and
how to balance these.

Tai Chi and (many Systema people) tend to stay in "Soft Work" all the
time, and some BJJ or Mixed Martial Arts folks stay in Hard Work too
much.

All of this is related to "Deep Practice" which I specifically learned
about from John Perkins (indirectly) and his recommendation of the
book "The Talent Code" by Daniel Coyle. (I would like to start a
separate thread topic on this.)

> Hope that made sense.

Respectfully, I would ask that you look a bit deeper first to find
what is of value and what needs improvement.