There can be a danger in turning something that is simple into something that is simplistic i.e., you reduce something that is straightforward and direct into something that doesn’t acknowledge context etc. Krav Maga defenses are – initially - designed to react to a movement rather than to identify the exact nature of the attack e.g., a 360/Outer-Defense, is “triggered” by a circular movement that crosses a person’s peripheral vision, initiating the “startle reflex”. That movement could be a loping/swinging haymaker (unarmed attack), or a knife slash or stab etc. However, whilst these different attacks may initiate the same reflex, and can be blocked using the same defense, the intent behind each one is very different, and once picked up on/identified should determine the way we deal with an attacker. Whilst each has its own dangers and problems, I know that someone trying to stab me is more likely to have deadly intent than someone who is trying to slash me, and if I don’t consider this vital piece of information, and treat both types of attack as “equal” then I could find myself focusing on the wrong things, and not taking into account those which are important to my survival. I believe it is vitally important to work with our natural instincts and urges, and to fail to acknowledge that we won’t treat all threats and attacks as equal is to deny the way in which our fear system naturally operates. If an attack is more dangerous and serious to us, our focus will be to deal with it directly rather than employ other tactics and strategies etc.
Perhaps the most important thing when dealing with any type of attack is controlling range. This may not be possible if/when attacked by surprise; this is one of the purposes of having good situational awareness – not letting potential threats get so close to you that you don’t have time to react and respond etc. However, once you have identified that you are being attacked/assaulted taking control of range becomes an initial priority e.g., if someone stabs/slashes you, your startle reflex may be triggered “late”, and your block may limit rather than stop the cut etc. To not move, and stay in the same place, allows an assailant an easy follow-up opportunity – fortunately most attacks with knives involve a single slash to the face with a tool such as a box-cutter/Stanley knife, and so getting an arm up to defend, even if it doesn’t form a perfect block may be adequate in preventing/limiting injury etc. However, we should never simply assume that this will be the case.
Our instinctive/initial block should form a reference point for us. It’s an untrained response, and we should recognize what it signifies i.e., we are being attacked. Movement is key in order to give us the time and opportunity to start making a trained response, whether that involves engaging with an attacker(s) or disengaging. Our fear system is great at instinctively dealing with the first “problem” but it is also quick to hand control of a situation over to us so that we can make better, more informed further responses etc., which take into account the context within which we are working. Your initial instinctive block is there to give you the “time” to execute a trained/conscious response to the attack. This is where we naturally start to differentiate between the “movement” that has triggered our reflexive block; are we dealing with a slash, a stab or a punch? Whilst theoretically we have the ability to employ any solution to the following attacks, that is not how we are naturally “wired” – the more serious the nature of the attack is, the more likely it is our focus will go towards stopping it/dealing with it directly i.e., we are more likely to focus on blocking and controlling an incoming knife attack, than trying to shut the attacker down combatively. The idea of the simultaneous block and strike/punch when dealing with a knife attack is a great theoretical strategy, however it is not something that is instinctive (if it were, every time a movement triggered our startle reflex we’d make a punch as well as bring an arm up to defend, and this doesn’t happen), or even instinctual; something that we may not do reactively but are prone to do – in the case of a knife attack, we are more prone to turn and move away from an attacker. Recognizing that we may do this is important, as if we believe we are naturally going to follow up with a strike/punch as we block, and we then don’t, we may find ourselves confused as to what we should be doing. If we recognize that we might turn and move away when attacked, we can use this as a “reference point” from which to enact our survival strategy.
We naturally and intuitively understand that a stab is a more serious attack than a slash. The Romans developed a brutally efficient killing machine. A line of legionaries protected by a large shield, stabbing out from behind it with a short sword (the gladius). Going up against such a wall of moving blades was a bit like trying to put your hand in a food mixer. The legionaries didn’t even have to be accurate; just keep moving forward and stabbing at the oncoming/engaging front line. However, there was a problem with this killing machine: even in war people don’t want to kill, and neither did the legionaries. Instead of stabbing they would slash, an action that generally wounded rather than killed. It wasn’t that they were taught this distinction, they intuitively knew the different consequences of each action, and one of the roles of the centurions/officers was to remind them to stab rather than to slash etc. Just as a 21st century attacker understands that a stab – in general – can cause greater, more serious harm, than a slash, so does the individual dealing with it, and this is where their attention will naturally be focused and directed. This doesn’t mean that it is impossible for an individual to make a simultaneous block and punch but rather they are more likely to be focused on blocking and dealing with/controlling the knife etc.
To ignore the reality that the focus of our attention will be on the level/degree of threat/harm we are facing and that we should instead behave in a certain prescribed way is to turn Krav Maga into a “traditional martial art” (I’m being somewhat unfair in saying this but I’m trying to make a certain point) that dictates what a response should always be to a particular attack, rather than recognize how we are more likely to act and react etc. When the stakes are high, we are more likely to focus on that which will cause us harm rather than the person intending us harm e.g., whilst we may use the same block to deal with a circular punch, slash or stab we will intuitively recognize that they don’t all represent the same level of risk and harm, and focus our attention and response(s) differently.