Category: Articles

The Ukraine knife fight video – what can we learn?

Join discussion on Reddit

Watch on Youtube

There is a lot of debate around the difference between “sport” and “street” fighting, and what effect things like eye gouges, biting and knives have, particularly when it comes to ground fighting. Too much of the discussion is based on theories and assumptions.

I think the martial arts community can learn a lot from the infamous Ukraine knife fight video:

  • “Dirty” techniques work better from a dominant position, and will not reliably overcome your lack of skill and situational awareness.
  • The decision to take a fight to the ground is a tactical consideration and could happen by your choice, your opponent’s, or purely as a matter of circumstance / by accident.
  • All knives are lethal, but knife design is critical in combat.
  • Pain compliance is unreliable.
  • Control is paramount.

First, the idea you should never take a fight to the ground. This discussion is usually oversimplified and misunderstood.

You take the fight to the ground when it is tactically appropriate, and you do everything possible to keep off the ground when it is appropriate. Saying NEVER is a brain dead response. It depends on the situation.

Neither man seemed to have a plan of ending up on the ground. The Ukranian was forced to close the distance because it was the only option left when he was caught without his own firearm. There was nowhere to run.

For a moment, it worked – he disarmed the Russian and was able to force him down, before the Russian drew a knife.

In my opinion, the Ukrainian appears to have fixated on taking possession of the knife at this point, and conceded top position to get it.

Meanwhile, the Russian worked to take a controlling position on top. This was a critical moment in the ground component of the fight.

Many of us assume that if we end up on our back, “dirty” techniques like eye gouges should cause our opponent to react in pain and fall off. Or if we stab them, they will quit the fight or be injured/killed and unable to continue. And yes, this is a possible outcome.

Another possibility is that your opponent is determined to kill you, willing to fight through serious injury and pain, and has achieved a dominant position. Poking them in the eye or even stabbing them might not work without hitting a large artery.

Many have noted that the Russian bit the hands of the Ukrainian. This indeed happened several times.

A very important detail many have missed: almost every time the Russian would bite, it was in response to the Ukrainian reaching up to eye gouge him. However, the Russian was able to move his head and avoid most of the damage.

The reality is that just like strikes and submissions, “Dirty” techniques and weapons work better from dominant, controlling positions.

They stabbed each other. The attacked each other’s eyes. The (smaller) man fighting from a top position was able to do this more effectively.

Another point many have missed is that the Russian used biting not just to cause pain and injury, but for control: he held one hand in his teeth, which allowed him to use two hands to fight against the Ukrainian’s one.

He was also able to scan the environment and look for improvised weapons. He picked up three pieces of rubble, one being a shard of roof tile which was stabbed into the Ukrainian’s eye. Stuck on his back, the Ukrainian was unable to move his head to avoid this.

Knife design played a significant role. The knife lacked a pommel or guard, which would have greatly reduced the risk of hands sliding off each end of the knife. Both men lost control of the knife and were injured by the blade incidentally when their hands slid off at various times.

They also both grabbed at the blade intentionally which worked in terms of delaying attacks and fighting for control of the knife. One of the more stomach-churning aspects to watch, but they really did not have much choice.

Much has been made of the Ukrainian’s last words, asking the Russian if he could leave him to die peacefully. Personally, I don’t believe the Ukrainian gave up on survival.

I think it’s more likely that he understood he had lost the fight and was about to be stabbed a lot more, and his request to be left alone to die peacefully was a tactical decision more than anything; he was hoping that although severe, his injuries might be survivable at that point if the Russian stopped. His last words were “don’t do it” as the Russian placed a grenade under his vest.

Finally, pain compliance is unreliable, because it is not direct control. Compliance might be a secondary effect of pain, or it could cause more resistance. Control and position must be of highest priority in a fight.

In this instance, we see both men fighting through gunshot wounds, stab wounds, eye gouging, biting.

Both men were equally aggressive and willing to do anything to win the fight.

In the end, the fight was won by situational awareness, adaptability, improvisation, and positional control.

Misconceptions about knives

There are a lot of misconceptions about knives and blades.

One thing I find frustrating is that people often believe purely aesthetic decision choices, or features that might improve everyday quality of life for the weapon, actually make a knife more lethal.

In reality, two pointy metal objects with a sharp edge, of a similar size and shape, will have a very similar injury profile. If you stab someone to the neck with a butterfly knife, it will have the same practical effect as the blade on a pair of scissors.

Ultimately, this means two things:

  1. All sharp, pointy metal objects are lethal and must be treated that way; police, for example, are equally justified in using lethal force whether the subject is armed with a balisong or a pair of scissors.
  2. Banning particular kinds of sharp, pointy metal objects does not make the street safer, because they can be substituted for other sharp and pointy metal things which are equally lethal (balisong -> kitchen knife or scissors for example).

Kitchen knives are used in many fatal stabbings. They are just as effective as knives “designed” for killing.

Most knives are small, simple, easy to use, easy to conceal, fast to deploy, and very effective. The qualities many people worry about are superfluous to their function, or merely improve quality of life and comfort. Much of it is about style and aesthetic concerns.

Scissors were used during infamous fatal stabbing in Fortitude Valley

“I CAN’T BREATHE” – how cops accidentally kill, and how to stop it

FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY – CONTENT MAY DISTURB AND OFFEND, VIEWER DISCRETION IS STRONGLY ADVISED.

See bottom of this post for download links to the complete video and printable diagrams.

I give permission for the video and attached documents to be downloaded, played, modified and printed anywhere for free – only for the purpose of education.

TOPICS

00:00 – Intro
03:50 – Excited delirium
05:19 – Why are police involved in the first place if we’re talking about medical issues?
06:12 – Death in custody and sudden unexplained death
07:26 – Monitor your own state of mind when dealing with the patient
08:48 – De-escalation
09:54 – “Super Human Strength”
11:01 – Ability to absorb punishment
11:50 – Pain compliance
12:18 – Pain compliance loop
13:21 – Tasers
13:55 – Positional asphyxiation
14:25 – Do not lay prone for too long
14:55 – “I can’t breathe”
18:07 – Banning pressure – my opinion
19:06 – Examples set by martial artists
19:32 – A personal anecdote
20:12 – Restraint-resistance loop
20:51 – Sudden calm
21:22 – Do not make calmness a condition of your use of force
21:44 – Piling on
22:33 – What we lack in training
22:58 – Minimum force in minimum time
23:34 – Access to risks
24:06 – Caution with handcuffs
24:50 – Biting
25:11 – Position in cell/transport – monitor constantly
25:36 – You are always being recorded
26:31 – You are at the mercy of the world
27:24 – Final thoughts

Download video here

Preventing Death In CustodyDownload

Some excellent feedback from a paramedic in the Reddit thread for this video.

How to prevent death in custody – positional asphyxiation, excited delirium, best practice methods and more [28 minutes]
byu/PaperworkPTSD inProtectAndServe

Text wall incoming: I would like to add some comments here. I am a paramedic in the urban U.S., so I do not know the training or the things that are taught to LEO, but I would offer some alternative perspective. This was a well thought out video, but I would also add some tools/methods that I have used/seen used to help expedite the process.

  1. This was a very thoughtful video, and succinctly emphasizes your position when dealing with psych/overdose/mental health patients in delirium. Which is, in between a rock and a hard place. These people need medical evaluation and intervention, which often Law enforcement is ill equipped to provide. It then becomes a matter of how quickly can you get the ambulance to you to assist. Normally, EMS will not go into active scenes because our defense profile is much less robust than yours. But getting on the radio quickly will ensure that once you have compliance, or even 60-75% compliance, the ambulance is already on the way. Even on your way to the call, if your call notes describe someone who will need an evaluation, just start us. If we get pissy when we get there and its not super serious, thats on us and I hope you dont have that kind of working relationship with your EMS agency, because thats a junk attitude for us to have. Better an easy evaluation and refusal than a cardiac arrest.
  2. There were many clips in this video that show prone positioning, and the continued struggle. OP did a good job of alerting to the cycle of “movement/restraint” that so many of us get into, and how that leads to bad outcomes. If you have to prone someone, then do that, but if the ambulance is coming, there are also safer ways to restrain once we get onscene. The primary intervention is sedation. We all want that person to stop thrashing, so we have to get our drugs onboard. However, once we get there, you now have force multipliers. Do not shy away from using us as help to restrain while the medication takes effect. Limb joint restraint, waist and shoulder control can all be had while prone if need be, and take pressure off the chest. And to be clear, even pressure on the lower back where the abdomen would be can cause asphyxiation, by not allowing proper expansion of the diaphragm.
  3. Please continue to be observant. Many times, once EMS arrives on scene, the police tend to lower their security posture because “EMS is onscene” and it is a medical patient. But I have been stabbed by a patient with APD standing next to her because they were talking to themselves while I was doing my thing. Anyone who needed EMS and is hyperactive is by definition unstable. Please be ready to jump back into the fight. We may also have to use you as our own force multipliers.
  4. The pathophysiology of these patients is unpredictable. The reason why these people suddenly arrest with seemingly no pressure is because of whats happening inside the body. Extremely simplified basically, the drugs/psychosis/etc are causing an unregulated adrenaline dump, giving them their super strength, or their resistance to control techniques and the like. Once their body uses up all of their adrenaline, they’re going to arrest. Our sedation medications add onto that effect, especially if we have to give a double dose because of their extreme adrenaline dump. Which means that predicting when they stop fighting is a nonstarter. Once you go hands on, at any point in time, they may run out of energy and go into arrest, ems or no ems assistance. Look for the signs, and act appropriately.
  5. Thank you OP for not saying that Ketamine from paramedics kills these people.

Sorry for the long wall, I’ve been a paramedic for 11 years-ish now and teach both LEO/EMS team patient control, and basic resuscitation to the police I work with. You guys got the short end of the stick in dealing with these patients, and I dont want any of these cases to happen to you guys.

Scissors were used during infamous fatal stabbing in Fortitude Valley

A jury has been told Seyram Kwami Djentuh stabbed Lauie Tagaloa in the neck with scissors he bought minutes earlier for $3.90.

The two groups had been “eyeing each other off” and were keen for a fight, before Tagaloa punched a man in the other group and stomped at his head.

The confrontation continued before Djentuh stabbed Tagaloa once in the neck with scissors. Tagaloa died within moments.

Link to Brisbane Times article

This raises three issues:

The futility of the death

The situation was entirely preventable. These are young men seeking to prove themselves to their peers by showing bravery and demonstrating their prowess and composure in a fight. They were seeking confrontation, with one man arming themselves when they knew a physical confrontation was about to kick off.

We can minimise this kind of outcome by providing opportunity, role models, purpose and discipline to young men, and an outlet to prove themselves and achieve self-worth. Suppressing competitive behaviour in boys and denying them these opportunities is how you amplify toxic masculinity. Their energy has to be directed into productive and benign pursuits. If they aren’t provided a positive group of peers and role models, they will find their own who may be antisocial in nature.

Scissors are lethal weapons

Secondly, this demonstrates just how lethal any type of blade can be. The next time you hear about police shooting someone after they attempted to stab someone with scissors, go back and watch this video, and remember what just a pair of scissors can do.

Bans on specific types of blades are fruitless

Where I live, we have banned the following types of knives:

  • Flickknife
  • Ballistic knife
  • Sheath knife
  • Urban Skinner
  • Trench knife
  • Butterfly knife or “balisong”
  • Star knife
  • Zombie Knife

Any object made of strong material with a point can be used to stab, and any hard material with an edge can be used to cut.

Banning any type of blade only results in the use of blades which are not prohibited, especially kitchen knives. Kitchen knives are typically made of steel, have a long sharp blade and a point, with a full or partial tang, and ergonomic handle.

These attributes make kitchen knives more effective as weapons than many of the banned knives, which are mostly designed for their appearance.

Knife designs can increase reliability and practicality, but they are all lethal, including cheap scissors purchased from a late-night corner store.

Laws which prohibit the carrying of blades and other weapons in a public place have more merit and real effect on outcomes, depending on the area and cultural context.

Brawl and movement tactics

This clip (courtesy of World Star Hip Hop, of course), illustrates several concepts I’ve covered in detail in a previous article and video, which you can find at the bottom of this post.

In the video we’re looking at today, a topless black male in blue jeans performs exceptionally well in terms of managing multiple opponents.

After knocking down his first opponent, he sees another male stepping forward and crossing the line of bystanders. He identifies this as someone who intends to intervene in the fight.

Typically, the plan of the bystander is to attack from the side while their target is focused on someone else.

Our main character immediately target switches. Target switching is a key component of fighting multiple opponents. He hasn’t completely taken the first man out of the fight, but he now has to prioritise the man who is moving forward because that is now the most serious threat.

As he approaches the second man he takes a wide angle, keeping the rest of the crowd in his peripheral vision. This avoids having the crowd behind him, completely out of sight.

At this moment, a third man approaches, but he’s on the side of our main character, and they form a line standing roughly shoulder to shoulder.

Main character sees his first opponent coming back to attempt a flank while he’s focused on the second man.

Main character correctly switches back to him, prioritising the opponent who is approaching from a dangerous angle.

This is exactly what I talked about in my multiple opponents video. An excellent demonstration of target switching.

The second man then crosses the line, which is often a big mistake because it exposes the flank, but main character was not in a position to take advantage of it.

It then becomes two individual fights which is a very common occurrence in a brawl.

While you’re dealing with your own problem however, you should try to remain aware of what the others are doing, because one of them is going to transfer over to your side when their problem is dealt with.

Which is what main character does. When he gets the chance, he transfers to the hoodie and blindsides him in exactly the same way they were attempting earlier but didn’t have the skill to pull it off.

And here you have the contrast between one man who could remain situationally aware enough to target switch, and another man who could not.

The other failure is wearing a hoodie in a fight, which can be for control in grappling.

This is why I advocate for spending at least some time grappling and sparring in a gi. People do wear jackets and other clothes that can be gripped in a fight.

Another video I’ve made which is relevant to this is about issues around bystanders, you can also find that below.

How to fight multiple opponents
Bystanders: the critical aspect of self defense and policing we don’t talk enough about

What is proportionate self defence?

Street fights and self defence scenarios are often discussed in the most extreme terms, which leads us to the most extreme conclusions, such as:

There are no rules in a street fight, therefore I will use every method which is commonly banned in sports such as eye gouging, biting, groin strikes, weapons; I will never take the fight to the ground because I will get stomped by several people, and there are needles and glass and lava on the ground; I will maim and kill and rip and tear.

In reality, violence and confrontation run the gamut from imposing body language to nuclear weapons, and then there’s everything in between.

When we are defending ourselves, the laws in most places expect that you will use a proportionate level of force if you need to defend yourself.

If you’re a strong young man, and a 75-year-old woman tries to slap you, it might be considered reasonable and proportionate to hold her wrist to stop the slap. Biting her nose off would be considered disproportionate in most places.

So much conversation around self defence lacks nuance; here’s an example of a situation that might help us think about it.

This man was eating at a restaurant and another man has tried to steal his phone. But the victim trains jiu jitsu (this has been confirmed), and he resisted, held onto the phone and they end up in a short grappling match before the victim throws him on the ground, and then that’s it. The offender realises he’s outmatched, he submits, and just walks away.

You hear people say ridiculous things like never grapple in a street fight. Never take someone to the ground because 10 of their friends are going to appear and stomp you. If someone attacks me I’m going to bite and eye gouge and hit em with furniture and stab them etc., etc.

There might be times when those things are reasonable, but they’re often not. Maybe you can put them on the ground and it resolves without any injury at all.

If your local laws permit, maybe you can consider a citizens arrest if you can be bothered going through the process of holding him there until police arrive and providing a statement, showing up at court and so on.

You might want to check them for weapons before you let them up. And once they leave the area, you should probably leave also, in case they decide to return with a weapon. Those are things to consider.

Self defence laws usually revolve around a proportionate level of force to protect yourself and your property. Using more force than is reasonably necessary to get the job done could be considered excessive, and this is where people get into trouble.

With this scenario where I live, if the victim had done exactly the same thing and the offender is on the ground not moving and saying OK I give up I’m sorry, then the victim kicks the man in the head, he’d probably get charged with assault.

Think about what it would achieve in terms of the objective of self defence. Yes, he tried to steal your phone but he’s not any more. He’s not attacking you, or threatening you, he’s stationary on the ground in the moment. Using force was reasonable while he was trying to take the phone but that stopped.

“He deserves it, there should be revenge, he needs to learn a lesson, he should be punished,” these are not justifications of self defence, these are excuses to assault someone after a self defence situation has already resolved.

There would be other circumstances where a head stomp would be reasonable, for example he sees the man pull out a knife while he’s laying on his back there, it might be reasonable to kick him, knock him out. These situations are fluid and change moment to moment, and you have to react to what is in front of you.

If you use force, you will later have to explain why. To what end? What was your objective, was it reasonable, was it necessary? Because if you could have used a lower level of force, or done anything else to protect yourself, then it wasn’t necessary.

It’s all fine in hindsight, yes, but that’s why I’m using the term “reasonable” so often. Would most reasonable people in the same situation believe that your actions were reasonable, and necessary, and proportionate?

A rule of thumb is that when the threat stops, you stop.

Learn about the laws in your area and what is considered self defence, you might be allowed to do a lot more than what I’ve described, but you need to understand what you can and can’t do legally. Otherwise, you might start as the victim and end up being the one who goes to jail.

Male violence and gendered violence

There is a popular belief in Australia that domestic violence, and violence generally, is getting worse. However:

If homicide is the yardstick by which the level of violence in society is measured, then the belief that violence is increasing in Australia cannot be substantiated.

https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi359

Most discussion has centred around women as victims of homicide, however, men account for about 70% of homicide victims. Over the last 30 years, all homicide has been falling.

Women are certainly over-represented in intimate partner homicide, but these numbers are falling along with the overall count:

The likely cause of the drop is due to the following factors:

  1. Improved socio-economic conditions, including employment opportunities, better education, economic stability
  2. Public health initiatives to address mental health issues and substance abuse – we know that people with mental health drug abuse issues are over represented as homicide offenders
  3. Demographic changes, because we have an aging population who is less likely to commit crime
  4. Improved law enforcement and judicial response, with more effective strategies, crime solving, community policing and prevention measures assisted by technological advancements

Further pursuing these issues will ensure that homicide continues to fall; conversely, a decline in our standard of living, and public health services, could result in more violence in the long term.

Also missing from the conversation is the fact that men are victims of male violence at a higher rate. If we want to prevent the murder of women, we have to protect men also.

All these points and more are discussed in the above video.

Man taken to ground in street fight, brutal armbar follows

According to the source of the video on Reddit, this fight started after the drunken older man had been arguing with a group for about 10 minutes and was given many chances to leave.

The man wearing the ADCC hoodie (Abu Dhabi Combat Club, a prestigious submission grappling tournament) kicked off his footwear shortly before the video starts. Then:

Strikes -> clinch -> takedown -> mount -> armbar -> head stomps from armbar -> mount -> elbows.

Bystanders offered to call an ambulance for the older man following the fight, however he refused and kept saying that a bunch of “homeless guys” had attacked him.

As I’ve explained in a previous post, the standing vs ground debate is a red herring. Sometimes going to the ground is the optimal strategy, sometimes it’s not. In all cases, grappling skills are necessary whether you want to stay standing or not.

Saying “never go to the ground in a street fight” is idiotic, and at best a misguided oversimplification.

In this instance, the man who performed the armbar was not jumped by a group, was not stabbed, there was no glass and AIDS needles and lava on the ground.

It also starkly illustrates the effectiveness of join locks. This is not a submission, he did not wait for his victim to tap. He just destroyed that arm.

None of this is to say that his behaviour was justified, that’s up for you to decide. Where I live, it would be considered excessive and serious charges would follow. Make sure you understand local laws before using force.

The standing vs ground debate in martial arts