EDC Throwers?

dig-it said:
If you throw and miss, aren`t you giving them a weapon?
Odds are, they've already got one.

It's usually pretty enlightening to throw a few "rapid response" challenges to knife throwers. You can take a guy who has a 80-90% stick rate, simply have him trot backward a few steps, turn and throw... and watch that blade sail right past the target.

Realistically, there are only a few situations in which you could plausibly throw a knife and make it work, tactically. I've seen a lot of people who can do it, and even they wouldn't. If you can't easily throw and stick a blade on a cold throw (no warm up), this isn't the tactic for you. If you can't do it without looking at the ground to guess your range, this isn't the tactic for you. If your stick rate isn't near perfect, this isn't the tactic for you.

I've been throwing for 20+ years. I've got a variety of throws, have no trouble sticking a variety of blades on the first throw--even ones I've never thrown before... and this isn't the tactic for me. Great fun, but in a clinch situation, this is a bad idea for me.
 
dig-it said:
If you throw and miss, aren`t you giving them a weapon?

That's if you don't train to CLOSE while throwing. You don't throw stationary like at a target... you throw as you close. Also, one of the best things the enemy can do is try to pick up a 'missed' blade as you are closing.

Look at the response of the other guy. With a projectile you dictate his response or he eats impact or a point.

If you're having a guy trotting BACKWARDS to throw then you're not training projectiles. You're target throwing, and WATCHFUL is correct in calling them 'knife throwers'. A knife thrower is not using the projectile tactically. Especially if he is standing there gawking at where his projectile went... it doesn't matter if it sticks or not.

Just look at the history of warfare. Projectile ALWAYS comes first before the CQ engagement.

The concept is really opposite of what others have been stating, the primary weapon is designed to 'stick', the projectile is designed to close.

Try having the guy RUN at you with a projectile trainer and another trainer drawing right behind it. If the first one misses he is STILL on top of you. If the first one hits... he's still on top of you AND you're wounded.

We've field tested this so many times with single and group situations and they all come up the same. Throwing a projectile will buy you the beat to close the gap.

Again, don't throw if you do NOT think it is worthwhile. But don't expect the other guy NOT to throw in the meantime and close on you as you try to evade something coming at you very fast. Remember, in reality, you won't even SEE what is being thrown until it is too late.

So train like the OTHER guy will throw something even if you do not. It may save your life someday.

--Rafael--
Sayoc kali
 
In regards to "giving them a weapon" I have to say that while it is a possibility it may be a smaller possibility than one might think. If I throw a knife (or any projectile) and it misses, there is a good chance it will go pretty far past my target. If I throw with the intention of closing a gap then I doubt I will be throwing lightly. So if someone "slips" a throw I'm guessing my knife will end up at the very least a few feet behind them. If they turn to retrieve my knife then I have at the very least bought myself some time.

Now if my knife hits or sticks then it will either stay "on" them or fall to the ground. If they go to pick up my knife then again I have bought myself some time. If they pull it out of their flesh or clothing then yes possibly I have given them a weapon but I have inflicted some damage (cut or impact) or at the very least a reaction as Sun Helmet has said. Unlike "The Crow" I really would have a hard time catching or parrying knives being thrown at me.

If I used a sling to throw a rock, or hurled a spear or even thrown a grenade at an opponent there is always the chance that they can use it back. I just feel that action is faster than reaction and provides the opportunity to take control of a situation, even for a moment. I also feel that throwing a knife to close the distance is "safer" even if I risk losing my weapon, then being on the receiving end, trying to track and recover a projectile that was being thrown.
 
Many years back a friend and I experimented with a form of street fighting that we called "Run Foo". The idea is to survive when somebody (and likely several somebodies) attacks you without provocation in a situation to their advantage. One of the basic principles we formulated was that it was very advantageous to throw something into someone's face as part of an attack. It doesn't have to be dangerous and you don't have to throw it hard for it to give you an opening through his guard. I was doing rubber knife sparring with another friend and told him about that principle. He told me to try it on him. Even though he knew what I was going to do it worked on him, twice. The first time I threw my checkbook in his face and nailed him in the solar plexus with a knife thrust. The second time I knocked him down with a controlled side kick to the chest.

Controlling an opponent's moves, controlling the distance of your engagement, distracting him, and taking the initiative all give you a tremendous advantage. I consider throwing a knife to be part of a combination attack. You throw the knife as you are closing from just out of range. You follow it with your body with something like a side kick to the body or a hard knee kick at least. In either case I expect a little breathing room to run or deal with the next guy. For the next guy I will use my other knife. This one is out of view in a reverse grip. I will throw something harmless at this guy, but he will be expecting a knife. That will open his guard.
 
Ok, this makes more sense to throw an object as a distractionary measure, and yes it certainly does work. I would still prefer to throw a handful of change, a rock, clump of dirt or even kick something at an adversary if possible rather then throw my knife.
 
Back
Top