Sounds like BS to me

M

madmike

New member
But I believe in giving everyone a fair hearing.

Renott Training and Supplies in Ohio.

claims to be able to teach basic knife fighting in an 11 hour day.
Intermediate in an 8 hour day.
Advanced knife fighting in a 6 hour day.
Make you an instructor in another day.

"WE teach realistic knife training for both attack and defense. We teach WESTERN knife fighting as opposed to the Filipino systems so common in martial arts schools as well as police and military programs. You should not ignore the fact that sword and spear against sword and spear, the greatly outnumbered Spansih conquered the Philippine Islands." they say.

Um, well, no. The spear was long gone by the 15th century. The Spanish had cannon and arquebuses, and this guy DENIES THEY WERE RELEVANT. The Spanish followed behind their advance attack of syphilis, influenza and smallpox, as they did elsewhere, and "conquered" the friendly main island tribes, then spent 300 years getting their butts kicked by the Moros, who were armed mostly with sticks, as I understand history. Strategically, the Spanish won. Strategy wins wars. Tactics wins knife fights. The Spanish lost tactically.

Nor am I sure what relevance sword and spear has to knife fighting. Last I practiced, all 3 were different arts entirely.

He also argued with me as to the effectiveness of bows. Repeated the folk myth that a crossbow with a lighter projectile and shorter draw that has less range somehow has better penetration than a Welsh longbow. Argued that crossbows were used for castle defense, and longbows weren't. When I asked him which he shot, he replied, "I don't shoot either one."

The Tower Armouries, the War College, and Sir Robert Hardy are going to be shocked to hear those theories.

BUT!!!!

Amusing and juvenile knowledge of history and weapons aside, is his knife fighting training worth a damn? Or is it more BS?

Anyone know?
 
mike...

Disclaimer: I am NOT a certified instructor in ANY combative art.

I have always wondered about the utility of a one-day course. Now I am certain that you can teach some basics and rudamentary skills in a short time. And given a good teacher and a good student a one-day course might give you the ability to out-fight maybe 50% of the general population. Not the trained population, I do mean the general population.

But learning basic skills is not the same as mastering and retaining these skills. For that you need repeated practise in order to be able to use these skills against much of the other 50% of the population, those who have some skills themselves.

I guess that I would have look at the reputation of the instructor, the cost of the class, and what they actually promise and deliver. The part of this offer that has me doubting it is the part where they would make you an instructor in a second day. To me that is an unrealistic expectation.

My suggestion, from my limited background, would be to look for an instructor who promises less but is willing to work with you on a longer basis. This guy may in fact be a good knife-fighter, but I wonder if he is a good instructor.

I am sure that someone with more experience can enlighten both of us.
 
You could probably give a good class on defensive tactics in a day, but knife fighting would need to include some offensive techniques.
 
the first gentlemen I took my CCW course from knew what he was talking about.

he was however. a poor instructor...

the second one spent less time but taught much more...

being able to teach does make a difference.
 
Absolutely, Mr. Barr. I had rather be taught by a man who is of medium ablility and outstanding teaching ability, than by one who is of outstanding ability but has poor teaching skills.


That said, I agree with FPrice. A short class from a competent instructor will do a lot for someone with no formal training. It won't make you a master, but even a video by a good instructor will make you more capable than most of the population.

But make you an instructor in just one more day of training?

No. That's the part that discredits this whole thing, in my book. How many of his 'instructors' were raw recruits just last week?
 
I think that kind of depends on what the definition of 'basic' knife-fighting is.

'Basic' knife-fighting as practiced by Thuggus Illiterati and taught in prisons around the United States can probably be learned in a couple of days.

'Basic' fighting in the skills of la raseur or navaja can probably be learned in 3 to six months. Kali or silat takes a little longer for the basics, call it six months to a year.

The difference lies in the philosophy: prison or street knifing is totally offensive, used as part of an ambushing technique with the goal of assassinating your opponent, rather than fighting him. There is little or no actual strategy or tactics involved in the training, and the critters don't plan or train for a fight lasting longer than a heartbeat or three. "Smash-stab-scoot" is probably the most complex strategy involved in prison knifing skills.

Plus, in prison, you get to train eight to 16 hours a day.

La raseur, navaja, kali, silat and other blade skills initially train using the blade as a defensive reaction to an attack. They lean heavily on defensive skills, only incorporating the offensive later on in training, and plan on the fight being a fight instead of a murder.

And the training is usually for an hour or three, two to three times a week.

LawDog
 
I think it depends on the student. Think of someone who takes one crappy shopping mall karate class and he gets alot out of this class and is good. And there are those who study for 20 years. Have black belts in everything and they still suck.

I have taken a few 1-3 day weapons and hand to hand combat classes. (seminars) I have never felt like an expert afterwards. But I left with a better understanding and a better base to work with then before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top