Hi Sun Helmet
To answer your question, I never felt threatened, I just thought it was comical that this guy actually pulled out his training blade just after pushing me out of the way and then started grimacing at me. He never did anything because I just cracked up in hysterics at this guy's histrionics and for the fact that he obviously doesn't get out that much.
Was this guy someone from the UK training group or actually with the US instructors who came over for their first seminar in the UK? We film everything so I'll try and get a copy of the video and see if this is on the tape. If you were actually standing behind Tuhon Sayoc while he was teaching it might have been caught on the video.
Although I was a bit critical- come on what do you expect when the Grand Poobah tries to show a finger flick disarm- I did find Ray Dianaldo very helpful and a downright soulful cat who knew what he was talking about. One of the giveaways was his opinion about the useless finger flick disarm.
The finger flick disarm is to show the concept of a downward angled impact on a blade that is placed forward. Since this was an introductory
seminar we take people through the baby steps. To put things into context
- Sayoc had never
taught a seminar in Europe. We are not taking it for granted everyone studied FMA, or knows how we teach things. We also do not know who is showing up. A guy showing up LATE
is a red flag in our book. A guy standing BEHIND
the instructor is another. Maybe not to you, but wouldn't it be an anomaly if EVERYONE
in the seminar stood as close as you BEHIND
the actual instructor?
Tuhon shows the guy moving in with the blade but he's never
flying into a thrust - it is more a brandishing type of scenario or the guy gives a semi-aggressive thrust - like a probing type thrust which happens in reality. In that context it does work. I know because I've done it out in the real world. Here's the context -
The hand is palm down in this situation with the knife flat in view. If the person does not KNOW you are going to disarm him, then it is actually a very safe way to gain an entry EVEN if it does not drop the blade. You don't give your WHOLE hand to the point or edge in case he adjusts his blade. You don't go for a grab because you need a distraction or another halfbeat to gain that.
Now, let's think tactically. Can you see yourself pulling off that disarm if a blade was in YOUR hand? Basically the index is now subbing for the blade?
Now in THAT context it is FMA 101, EVERYONE
does the drop disarm... but if you walk the student through on the concept of the direction of the disarm and they don't have a burr about making snide comments like "Grand Poobah" and such then you might actually understand what you were doing and how it was actually going to progress.
If you take the same concept of that disarm and you have an actual longer blade. That angle actually gives you a level change into an entry lowline thrust or a non linear slash that is already within the reactionary gap of the attacker.
Now let's look at what Tuhon Ray Dionaldo said. He may have been looking at the way you guys were practicing it and may have already picked up the cynicism and given up on you guys. He's not going to debate the merits of the disarm since it isn't his seminar. He'll try and assess what the situation is and move on to the next thing. Perhaps later on a lightbulb will come on.
I am beginning to see that context and perception is different in your posts than how others may see things.
For example, you mentioned that Tuhon Tom Kier spent an HOUR
teaching you TEN
scenarios. You write it out as if that is a BAD thing.
Yet in the same post, you complain about the complexity of the techniques. Which is it?
Now if we look at this logically, you're stating TTK spent SIX minutes PER scenario
that Hock can show you in TWO minutes.
SIX minutes and you're griping about it. SIX LONG
What is the correct amount of time to spend in a scenario? Is four okay? How about five and a half? Some might say you can spend HOURS on ONE scenario.
Also, there's also talk of a TACTICAL belt of knives. That's a TRAINING RIG, we even have a FAQ section about the TRAININg RIG in the sayoc.com site. There is no TACTICAL KNIFE belt.
However, if you ever rig up a soldier with blades - where would you put them? Why would you place them there? And how many reps have you done to make sure the blades were prepped for anything that might happen?
Now if you have done that - then why is a training rig such a silly thing?
That's like saying no one fights with a focus mitt, so it is stupid to use a focus mitt.
With a training rig you get hundreds of reps deploying the blade from a sheath for any drill. You get THOUSANDS of reps NOT putting it in your pants but in a sheath.
Next time you train with blades - count how many times you DON'T deploy from a sheath and now think of the other guy who just repped a thousand times deploying his blade just because of the "silly" training rig.
That's a bad thing how again?
When you drop a knife in training - do you install THOUSANDS of reps bending down and picking it up casually? Or do you get THOUSANDs of reps deploying a secondary?
We know what TACTICS are. ANd we know what TRAINING is.
And in the case of a TRAINING RIG it is actually tactically sound.
Every thing is about placing things into PROPER
Like this ITALIAN CULT FOLLOWING person you talk about. Now it was the FIRST
Sayoc seminar in the UK. That means if the guy was from Italy, he probably never personally trained with the Sayocs until that seminar, correct? In your comment you derided a person that was just starting out and you apply it as if he was a longtime Sayoc "cult" member. I don't know about you, but don't you actually have to put time into a cult before you are in a cult?