You stand 15 feet from me pull out a 12 inch bowie knife and heave it like an olympic athlete. I am freaken’ ducking. I am distracted. I have been stalled for...5 seconds if it misses? Then you pull out your second knife and there is a knife fight or some kind of fight? Would you rather have fought me with two knives in your hands or one? Are you carrying three big bowies? Four? Eight? What?
If one threw their knife, they ARE fighting with two knives. One just either stuck it deep into the target's face/chest/kidney/spine, or caused a hard impact blow that could break an eye socket or cause stitches (a guy recently threw a foam action flex stick in training at someone running AT him, and caused several stitches on the brow, plus stopped the guy dead in his tracks due to impact - cause was the PLASTIC handle!) or caused a thrust wound far deeper than a gripped thrust, or they missed (which is actually a low percentage at that range).
If there's doubt on the advantages of throwing a knife, then the best way to test it is through simulated scenarios.
KILLSHOT
Start it with one guy with three knives, and the other with one.
Watch how the scenario drastically changes, and how tactics evolve once people catch on on the do's and don'ts of throwing a projectile. Grips change, deployments change, ranges change...etc.
Now add several scenario based training modifiers to the equation and watch it evolve.
Now do it for thirty years.
Will it still look the same?
If one is concerned of an attacker picking up a knife against them then do NOT throw it.
If one has studied the tactics of projectiles and used it effectively for thirty plus years, then throw it.
Simple as that. There really is no wrong or right on this. It is situation based.
At fifteen feet, once the knife is thrown and the person reacts to it - NO ONE will have time to duck.
One's only hope is if the guy MISSES. (hope the guy hasn't been grouping his throws in one foot groups at that range on a moving target)
And also that the thrower wasn't FAKING a throw to get the target to react, so he can frame in on the target's second stage of reaction.
Reactionary Response starts at over twenty feet with a projectile.
The Tueller drill proves that a man can't even DRAW a weapon at eighteen feet, much less react to evade a throw at fifteen. One would have to be a 3 time gold winning OLYMPIC knife dodger to evade that.
We've proven it THOUSANDS of times in seminars with... CHOPSTICKS... which are FAR FAR safer, and the weight of the chopstick is basically nil compared to a heavier weapon that actually has momentum behind it.
With a knife that has weight, all the target will know is something hit them VERY hard and it has FAR more IMPACT power than a straight thrust with a gripped knife.
At FIVE seconds, the scenario has altered. The knife guy can cover 80 feet or so of distance....ESCAPING or CLOSING.
As per percentage of curriculum, the projectile is but ONE range of a scenario. One can skip it entirely. The one thing most of us agree on is that the OPTION is there. If one trains with that range in mind, then that means they have also added in the precautions of projectiles being used AGAINST them. It will change how you close and escape as well.
One might actually want the guy to TRY to pick up that knife. There's tactics that work perfectly against that guy who has 'knife tunnel vision'. It's one of the first exercises we do with the training rig.
As per military using the knives as throwers... SF teams we have trained already do.
The results thus far have been VERY positive.
To clarify, Sayoc (since Hock has brought up) is not just FMA (not that there's anything wrong with that - SFS has a lot of FMA in it). It's the consolidated experiences of all the Sayoc instructors who have blade experiences from various arts, western and eastern. The base is FMA, but the progression of Sayoc for the past thirty years, is to EVOLVE the FMA beyond the limitations of culture. To think about edged weapons beyond cultural boundaries.
Therefore, Sayoc Tactical is A knife course taught today to various military groups primarily because it is NOT centered on a culture based curriculum of FMA, but adapted to the specifications and requirements of soldiers out on the field. How they move, their tactics, their gear, their goals. The curriculum is culled from experiences and info from various sources that Sayoc has been fortunate to cultivate. Just like Hock's group here in the states, just because he once practiced FMA does not mean he is purely Filipino... evolution happens.
Thanks for allowing the clarification.
--Rafael--
Sayoc Kali
