Was I WRONG about throwing knives? Reply to Adam Celadin
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Adam Celadin, world champion knife thrower, disagrees with my views on the effectiveness of knife throwing in combat:
• Is KNIFE THROWING Usef...
This is my response.
My novel, Shadow of the Conqueror Audio Book affiliate links:
US: www.audible.co...
UK: www.audible.co...
CA: www.audible.ca...
AU: www.audible.co...
Ebook, Paperback and Hardcover available from most major book retailers, here are a few of the main ones:
Amazon affiliate link (be sure to navigate to your country's amazon site):
amzn.to/2XErUaR
Barnes and Noble:
www.barnesandn...
Kobo:
www.kobo.com/a...
If you like the content and want to support the channel, you're welcome to do so through patreon or subscribe star:
/ shadiversity
www.subscribes...
Awesome Shirts and chainmail print clothing: teespring.com/...
Visit Calimacil for the best replica foam swords and LARP weapons: calimacil.com?aff=38
Buy my sword IMPERIOUS from Calimacil: calimacil.com/...
Come check out my new channel KNIGHTS WATCH: / @knightswatch
Community run discord server: / discord
My official website: www.shadmbrook...
People need to understand that just because they are enthusiasts of something. Even to the point of potentially mastering it in some way and finding a sport/niche to use it within. That does not mean that it has overall value. It just has Value in the specific context they found for it... or in situations where they do not have something better. They are allowed to like something That isn't optimal, People have done it throughout history. Some sports are actually born out of non-optimal techniques.
Let's take Knife Throwing for example.
Shad does not have the worst knife possible for throwing despite what Adam said. There are woefully unbalanced or shaped knives never meant for throwing that are useful in a variety of ways in melee combat and other utility ways that you would use a knife. Adam on the other hand several times uses knives that are specifically optimized not for being used as a knife or even in combat but for competition throwing. Some of them are actually dangerous to use for melee and unsuited for utility tasks except when you don't have or can't make anything better suited for those tasks.
Further. Shad touched on this repeatedly in many ways. But let's talk about actual distance. 2 to 6 meter's is effectively melee range. This is 6 to 18 feet. Once you get within 5', while knives happen to be a melee weapon that still works well enough in this range, Your effectively within grappling range at this point. Ranged Weapons should be useful in a reliable way outside of these ranges. Realistic criticisms about dodging should also be outside of these ranges.
Also, If Possible, when discussing dodging specifically, Evidence of using these items should be done against moving targets, not stationary targets. Stationary targets will do little that is truly useful to prove dodge ability. The reason being that the movement of the target can alter a blow from being life threatening to merely damaging, or even end up in missing the target entirely. The same can be said for something like armor penetration in many ways, You need to give a foundation of what you are using as your target and include things like padding and other accessories that would also be used in most cases of using that armor when trying to show lethal penetration through armor. This is why ballistics people that are really giving examples of this tend to do things like fire into vests with known ballistic protection ratings and do it complete with trauma plates in position and whatever other protections they might have when they are showing their capability.
Wow talk about being so clueless and ignorant of the subject. But hey you people clearly can not admit that you are wrong and still spreading misinformation.
And we also need to admit that Adam throws 1.0-1.25 lbs Flichete DARTS!!!!!!!! Not KNIVES!!!!
@Shadiversity
In hallways, back alleys, or other niche combat roles were the freedom of movement of a larger primary weapon would be limited (like a medieval tavern), sure, they work. As a battlefield weapon, they are not practical. I think the issue with both your examination and Adam Celadin's examination is that there is a lack of terrain analysis (forest, urban, indoors, field, etc.)
@@worldwarwitt2760 An environmental analysis wouldn't wield anything. Because it's throwing knives against just about anything else. Just about anything else covers things that work in the same environment you would give credit to throwing knives for to those other items that work in that area as well. Making the analysis basically moot. Because it doesn't excel in any individual place that something else couldn't also work as good or potentially better.
@@Quandry1 Spears and long swords are not especially good in enclosed spaces. Further, a sword may be impossible to draw given specific circumstances. The example Shad gave assumes an ideal situation out in the middle of a field where the weapon is in hand and ready to be used. if say a swords man was in a tavern with tables and people, all of those would be an obstacles to being able to bear their weapon. a person wielding throwing knifes would be able to bring their weapons to bear and bypass those problems. same for an archer. unless they have a bow in hand, by the time they got their weapon ready they would already be injured or dead given an indoor setting.
I think Adam was trying to sell knife throwing in general, but his response more or less boiled down to:
Throwing knives made good concealed weapons when you wanted to first strike an opponent from close range or couldn't carry a sword.
Throwing knives make a lot more sense in the context of a standard hidden knife vs a hidden throwing knife.
For what it's worth, I commented on his video that he didn't counter the argument that you made about them being essentially useless in battle - which he did like.
Yeah, a sword was a luxury item. Not everyone actually could afford one. Throwing knives is good for combat for the poorer, I reckon. The spears, clubs and some leather/gambeson kind of battle.
@@Gebunator spear is better than everything else you mentioned
@@Gebunator I don't think the poor want to be throwing away their knife every time they get into a fight. They're poor, after all, and knives cost money.
I imagine the advantage to throw a knife against a bow/crossbow in one "cowboy situation". Any of you take the weapons at the moment, an you to start together but the bow/crossbow need to be armed and the knife you take and thrown so the speed is your friend.
Guys, it seems to me that in essence, you two agree with each other. Knives are good. People carry knives. People want to have fun pastime with them, so they learn to throw knives. Throwing knives than make a fine addition to their combat repertoir. For certain uses, that is. Here, case closed.
It turns out, no one was wrong. It's just a little bit of misunderstanding, what a surprise.
@@apricus3155 your entire comment is both incoherent, and obviously biased/bigoted. next time try to actually think about what's going on, and what is said, instead of the nationality of the people saying it, and making assumptions/insults, based on that.
@Z. Michael Gehlke ~ 34:20
"From short ranges, it's very very practical."
-Guy in video
"That is where we fundamentally massively disagree."
-Shad
Just because the two of them are being polite doesn't mean there is no disagreement. The guy in the video seems to underestimate melee range and how fast someone can close the distance. He acknowledges that after a certain distance, throwing knives don't have much use. But if you are in the effective range to use a throwing knife, you are 2 steps away from losing your head and too close to run.
There is obviously a disagreement between the two. Knife dude wants to find some way that throwing knives aren't useless. And Shad is pointing out that you will be dead if you try to throw a knife that close to someone.
YES! if u are not versed in a skill, mostly talkong abiut what u dont know its not wise regardless of how much observation or underatandings u have. Go to the source and ASK. u are not a [insert lractice here] to understand all nuisances.
@@TBButtSmoothy I do not need to be a chef to know when food tastes like shit.
There is a difference between speaking from a place of ignorance and pointing out something that is easy for all to see.
The rule of thumb for a knife vs gun is that a knife is lethal within 10 meters. A throwing knife's effective range is 7-9 meters. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that simply holding the knife and running is better if it means you are more lethal from at a longer distance.
Throwing a knife has a shorter range, less lethality, and disarms yourself in the process. You don't need to be an expert to figure out that more deadly at more distance is more better.
Have you considered a 1 v 1 scenario where both combatants are aggressive and armed with a sword, but one trained his off-hand to throw knives? Seems to me like it's more appropriate to think of throwing knives an added tool in the toolbox rather than a stand-alone weapon style.
Maybe a video discussing the viability of (2 swords) vs (1 sword + throwing knives) vs (1 sword + parrying knife) etc. would make an interesting follow-up.
Adam C said in his video that throwing knives are a side arm.
It's been shown, two swords of comparable length are inferior to a two-handed sword unless you're fighting in highly constrained areas like inside a keep.
In combat, not an ambush or assassination, someone in heavy gambeson or greater armor with an open-face helmet has a small area where a knife is likely to cause a debilitating injury. Against someone with a closed helmet or sword and shield and it would need to be a one-in-a-million throw. Throwing hard enough to attempt to get deep into even cloth armor is a highly telegraphed motion, unlike a crossbow that has zero warning before launching a projectile.
Don't forget: You have Viggo Mortensen who played Aragorn in the LOTR movies with actual sword fight training accidentally deflect a thrown knife in the first movie, prompting the director to keep that shot b/c of how cool and unexpected it was (the knife was supposed to miss but the thrower messed up).
Although it's a movie and it was known that a knife would be thrown (although it was supposed to safely, completely miss Viggo), it presents that someone trained in sword fighting and is in the fighting mentality has the opportunity to also deflect a thrown object.
While a video discussion would be interesting, it would need to take into account luck/opportunity. Not every fighter walks in aware of their opponent's skills and weapons, and you should never willingly show your skills or style unless you want to non-verbally shout to your opponent "Look! Here's how to beat me!"
This. People are acting like it's meant as a main weapon. Or that it worked like it does in the movies, with the main character taking out 5 baddies with guns while only armed with a couple kamikoto kitchen knives, thrown accurately at 50 yds.
It's simply one more tactic available, once trained (like anything else, without training, it's useless.) Used to create space to flee or to create an opening in your opponents defense. Is it like the movies? No. Is it as useless as he claims in as many situations as he thinks? Also no.
Another point I'd like to bring up (and that applies to all weapons used throughout history) is that if they weren't useful, they wouldn't have been created in high quantities in the first place. These aren't some "one-off" finds from an obscure civilization. Countless examples exist throughout history (which we still find relics of today) and I would imagine the resources and skill needed to make them, wouldn't have been the easiest to come by.
So would the time and resources have been wasted on creating something that wasn't combat effective? In times when your survival depends on the things you carry and how you wield them? Doesn't seem likely.
@@MoltenMouseMetal I'm sorry, it's been shown *where* that two swords of comparable length are inferior to a two-handed sword? Those are both very broad phrases and I imagine that it would be fairly easy to think of scenarios which would fit the narrative in either direction.
The one thing I end up thinking about this matter of throwing knifes is actually the cost. You're throwing it so you have to bem open about the possibility of losing it so throwing weapons seems more like disposable things or cheaper while a knife os more sophisticated. In a medieval scenario it will probably be forged or the material will quickly break or dull even if you recover it.
That's why well sharpened rocks used to be a preferable option
Just one thing with respect. If you're going to point out that people should use proper armor for armor tests, then you shouldn't point out that Adam is using proper throwing knives for knife throwing.
He never said that he wasn’t using proper armour, he was saying he wasn’t explaining the build of the armour. And the reason he brings up the difference in types of knife is because 1. They aren’t really knives as he says in the video and 2. The knives Adams use are exclusively designed to throw, giving them a unique advantage over other types of normal knives. But shad is also showing the fact that they are much bigger and heavier, and thus less damage for the equivalent material of a small sword.
@@kramttonnis6405 "He never said that he wasn’t using proper armour, he was saying he wasn’t explaining the build of the armour" uh. what?
As with some rambling and giggling in the response video shown here, I lost the plot.
I can't even relate what you wrote to "If you're going to point out that people should use proper armor for armor tests". Are we reading the same thing?
Even though I agree with pretty much all points, there is something that bugged me, even though the effective range is 2-7/8 m that doesn't mean that you have to start your throw when hes in that range, if you can see someone charging at you and hes 20m away you can surely throw the knife at the right time to hit him mid charge and have another weapon ready in hand before he arrives.
@Part-Time Gamer A sword has multiple functiosn as well. TO look cool in an uniform is the most common one. Second is to larp, 3rd is trying to kill a coachroach that entered your room (yes I have done that :P )
@Part-Time Gamer He literally agreed in most of Adam's points about throwing weapon's usage though, the thing about here is that he's specifying (like a hundred times in this video) about battlefield use in which it is not really that effective even against just padded armor and especially shield.
Edit: Knives have multiple uses as tools and as weapons, but Swords don't have just 'one' use, it's slashing and parrying as you said but also for stabbing, bludgeoning or cutting dem shrubs in some swords.
Well either way; that doesn't really determine a weapons practicality in certain context, a polearm IS the one that only has 1 or 2 puposes but still is a dominant battlefield weapon.
@Part-Time Gamer While a sword has only one function? Slashing and the "odd parry" are the swords bread and butter? I mean, let's look at how many types of swords there are, and the differences in use for each type of sword, it's a huge variation and the generalization of swords here is a fallacy mirrored by your stance on thrown weapons. I mean no disrespect at all, semantics are a bitch, maybe I read some words wrong and so I didn't catch your intent correctly, just wanna share my thoughts on the matter, again no disrespect meant, let's talk see if we can come up with ideas that might educate each other and make us re-evaluate our perspectives no matter where we land on what we believe.
The "odd parry" Is such an interesting take/phrase. Can I ask for clarification on what your mean by that? Is it like parrying wasn't a common thing, it was mostly offensive combat? Parrying wasn't generally very effective? Or most people weren't trained well enough to properly parry? Or perhaps when in a unit, parrying was less of a thing for any reason? Truly curious what you meant there.
I do want to agree with some point you made. Dodging really any projectile from a skilled user is going to be very hard, and relying on ones ability to dodge a projectile is an absolute fallacy, especially with someone skilled like Adam tossing a knife at you, you're almost certainly getting hit. Hope you got good armor, or a shield, something to tank that blow because dodging that is not happening. Anyone who says they can dodge it isn't aware of how quick projectiles are versus the human body when used with skill (And yes, Shad's tests absolutely have some serious flaws in this department, you were right, he doesn't fully get throwing weapons as far as throwing knives are concerned).
Also, throwing knives being concealed and doing damage up close, yes, of course they would be very effective at that. Almost anything that can be concealed and reasonably cause any kind of damage is gonna do just as well in that aspect, and just about any weapon can be concealed. If you get the drop on an enemy, you have a massive advantage regardless of weapon or era, so that's more a general combat principle than a specific advantage to the throwing knife.
You say thrown weapons are usually daggers, which absolutely is not true, but I feel you have a point that I'd like to expand on about daggers. The technical definition of a dagger can include all throwing knives, however, not all daggers are throwing knives, some daggers are absolute garbage to throw and will be useless. A huge difference is daggers can have cross guards or handle swelling or other modifications of the handle for some hand protection and to prevent the users hand from slipping which would result in cutting the users hand, or losing grip of the weapon entirely, whereas throwing knives opt to not have these modifications, at least to such extremes, in order to increase aerodynamics and make them more specialized for throwing, not for melee combat. Daggers (Knives really) are like swords, there's a huge variation meant for different purposes. A throwing knife has a lot of purposes, just not straight up melee, that's a dumb idea. But throwing knives are really only limited by your planning and creativity. You absolutely can use them effectively in combat, and the more creative you are, the more you think ahead, the better they become. Just like a flashbang in modern combat, it's a tool to increase combat effectiveness, not a true weapon like a sword or rifle.
I will say there is absolutely overlap with daggers on throwing and melee useage, or even utilitarian use, but any overlap takes away from any primary function. A throwing knife is obviously still a knife and can inflict lethal damage, I'd put it above a kitchen knife for sure for combat as it is generally far more durable, but purely looking at the melee aspect of a throwing knife? Not really a good option for melee specifically, especially when compared with a lot of other daggers that were specialized for melee combat such as a main gauche that allowed for more defense, but flip side, try to throw a main gauche and you'll look like an idiot and almost never cause any damage.
Also dagger-like throwing weapons are not the main throwing weapons in any part of history at all, spear type weapons are your main thrown weapons for a majority of human history. Javelins, pilums, even spears launched out of an atl-atl as long as you still consider that thrown and not propelled as with arrows and bolts, but yeah spear type weapons were always easier and cheaper to make, and way more deadly. I'd love to see throwing knives take down mammoths and whales, spear type weapons were always the main thrown weapons. Hell even pebbles were used in combat way more than throwing knives, slings are terrifying and way more effective in combat than throwing knives, also cheap as hell. Seriously, look into slings, they are so under-rated, baleric slingers were one of the coolest cultures to have used the sling and to such insane levels that throwing knives seem like a joke in every capacity when compared to a pebble and a piece of cloth.
Still : throwing knives at long range would have to deal with dodges, being deflected (shield weapon or bracers) and a loss of Inertia, even before having to penetrate armour and wounding the target. Plus the difficulty of timing your spinning throw... Someone really skilled might manage most of that, but all ?
@@mynameiswritinwater You dont have to to spinning throw, that is the point
In my view, they’re a fine secondary weapon, but go into a fight thinking of them as your primary weapon your probably going to lose. It’s also not really a battlefield weapon. But then you had to be disrespectful and compare them to nunchucks.
Been on many battlefields have ya?
@@AgeRestrictTheInternet no but neither has shad I assume
@@AgeRestrictTheInternet you never have anything of value to say, do you?
@@AgeRestrictTheInternet neither do you, but then again we are all free to have opinions, and the validity of the opinions won't depend on the person but their thoughts and how it appeals to the majority, and he is correct the majority agrees that you can't compare a nun chuck to a throwing knife, this is an apples to oranges situation they are literally two different things in a lot of sense, its not like comparing flails to nun chucks, a throwing knife does not even fall in the same category as a chained or combined arms, its a throwable weapon like a rock or a bomb
@@AgeRestrictTheInternet No but I could kill a man in 4 seconds with a knife. That's a lot faster than most other people could. Throwing daggers/knives are weapons purely made to maim the enemy, not to kill, unless you can hit a vital point, they're completely useless, and if you were armor your vitals are protected.
I feel like knife throwing could work if you pair it up with another weapon, such as a nunchuck which could be used to flail it like a helicopter blades, causing you to lift up, thus placing you at a safe distance from the offending swordsman and giving you time to throw as many knives as you had with you.
Hahahah! Bravo. 🎉
Sounds 100% historically accurate.
Having watched a few of Adam's videos, I have some thoughts on the context of where the concept of throwing knives is useful in certain combat niches. As a primary "Weapon" having the skill to throw improvised weapons is a use if that is all you have (Assuming you have several to throw). Things like screw drivers, butter knives, and scissors could really mess someone up if you have a tool kit, are in the kitchen, or happen to have your recreational throwing knives on you; assuming you still hold on to something as not to completely disarm yourself. Particularly if you are ambushing someone. Outside of that, it's not a primary weapon, however it really never has to be.
Adam has also shown techniques being able to hold and throw several knives in one hand with his "No reload throwing". This technique could be great for shock value in duels to get the other combatant to make mistakes if you also have them facing the point of your primary weapon. It would not even be all that easy to discern that you would be holding multiple throwing weapons. Even just getting one throw off at a distance is enough to feint other throws to get a reaction. Of course this assumes your primary weapon is one handed and you are forgoing any defensive capabilities of your free hand to do this.
That being said, it's not a primary "Combat" weapon, definitely not comparably to a battlefield weapon like the plumbata. but the honed skill itself could come in niche combat situations.
Had a karate instructor demonstrate this decades ago during one class where he picked up a glass ashtray and asked if anyone thought it would be an effective weapon. He then proceeded to throw it at a chair so hard that it blew the back of the chair out and slammed into the padded wall with enough force to be quite scary.
If the main idea of throwing knives is just to distract the opponent or to make him react in some way before the real attack, then that can be done with simple stones or sticks that can be found anywhere, and with which you do not need to have any advanced training for that, and you will still have the knife in your hand.
Comments like this one always make me laugh, watching people twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify a fraction of a fraction of possibly good aspect of a weapon while neglecting the other 99 terrible things about it.
@@yomauser tbf people usually forget to mention that the point is to distract and/or maim a target. if someone blocks their face with their arms as shad showed in the original video and they hit their arm instead and the person throwing the knives is well trained, they still have massive cuts in their arm and possibly still knives sticking in them. if he had mentioned use of a shield that would be more fair for the argument.
@@OctaviaLIVE If the main objective of throwing knife is just to distract before the real blow, then it doesn't matter if a knife cut, get stuck or main a target, the important is that the enemy is distracted or with his defense is broken for a few seconds before you close the gap, you can do that with stones or sticks at any distance without special training, and you will still have the knife in your hand ready to use it. For me a long time training how to throw a knife is pointless if you can do that with a regular stone, that can also work if the foe has helmet on, as it was done in medieval duels.
In fairness to Adam, in a modern setting where people are unlikely to have any armour, I think if he did manage to get a body hit with one of those knives (though I think I'd personally call one of those he used most a dart), I think his attacker would be sufficiently injured/distracted to make legging it much more viable. Even if adrenaline carries the attacker through the start of the subsequent chase I don't think they'd keep it up for long.
I think in combat terms Shad tends to think in terms of committed warfare or duels, which is often somewhat different to more "casual" combat situations where there is a lot of weighing of the situation, and people are more likely to run or just disengage after only a short engagement. In a more casual situation, a hit from one of those knives is significant.
Shad sometimes it seema like you forget that fighting happens in more places then a battlefield, especially fights involving knives. A modern comparison would be like talking about pistols on the battlefield, sure they're used sometimes but the vast majority of uses of pistols is gonna be in everyday life, throwing knives are the same. Just like it would be silly to try and use a handgun on a modern battlefield it would be silly to use a throwing knife on a medieval battlefield, unless it was your last resort. In civilian life tho handguns are extremely useful and used everyday, and id assume its a similar story for throwing knives in the past.
I'm no weapons expert but of any kind, but what I can be critical of is shads debating skills here. Shad made a video about throwing knives hyper focuses on one situation they might not be useful in based on maybe not the most knowledge on said subject. Adam who uses throwing knives critiques shads video and adds more context and knowledge about throwing knives. Shad gets mad that we are not sticking to his specific hypothetical in order to frame his arguments.
@@zkapsh no
@@zkapsh bro this is like arguing that oranges taste like oranges and then someone saying um no oranges look orange its no longer even the same conversation
@@zkapsh exactly this, Shad does this far too often, arguing from a narrow perspective/situation. Most of my Shad views nowadays are from actually experienced and educated individuals (Scholagladiatora ect) adding nuance or clarifying points Shad has attempted to make; I like it when content creators are able to say "I don't feel comfortable to comment with any authority on this weapons use" like David Rawlings in a recent Elden Rings weapon video when he was asked about the Shotel.
@@nathanthom8176 this is why I stopped watching a lot of content. He's arrogant as well in my opinion unwilling to look from other perspectives.
The police have done studies on how much distance a person can cover before a cop can pull out their gun and fire off a round. I believe the distance was around 22 feet. So take that as you may.
EDIT: I believe this was from a standing position. I got this from Donut Operator by the way, so fact check me.
Translation for continetal europeans. 22 feet = 6.7056 meters.
@@bohemicbohemian9190 the rest of the world*
Here's a vid by donut operator on this exact thing. ua-cam.com/video/eX7f_6ilZvE/v-deo.html
@@bohemicbohemian9190 Thank you.
Please keep disagreeing! This is really been a fun ride so far. I have always been on the fence about throwing knives my whole life and I have been a casual collector. You both remain respectful and cordial even though you still make tiny stabs which keeps the entire thing funny and entertaining. Keep it up and show the world you can be gentleman in a disagreement.
edit: I suck as spelling.
Yeah, it's nice to see people discussing things like adults. But the videos could be a bit shorter. It's a lot of repetition and waffling around the subjects.
@@Runegrem They do ramble a bit. Is it because they are both passionate? and a bit nerdy? Honestly I was subbed to Shad already and didnt even know the other guy and I am now opened up to a ton of new videos and people I never would have known about. I would like to see them both run a similar course both timed against 2-3 live opponents using some form of safe HEMA type gear and truly see what percentage is it skill and whT is the length of training time required to become an effective skill or defensive technique. Again I really am on the fence. I think its really cool and I really like the smith and Wesson blades. I am going to do an hour of practice tomorrow I really am interested in this no spin thing.
I was kind of hoping that they would just fight and see who lives. My money is on Adam.
@@rehoboth_farm setting this with a duel. only us real 1300s kids will remember
@@battlefieldcustoms873 I was thinking about something more like Bartertown. You know, two men enter one man leaves.
Also the level of accuracy he's talking about is competition, I shoot both competitively and instruct defensive shooting, very different situations. The main difference is the threat of being attacked.
Hi Chad, I was looking for your reaction to Adam's video and I'm not disappointed. I have a historical account of using throwing knives in a combat context. Once I was at an exhibition about WWW I and there were letters from soldiers which they wrote home. I remember one letter from a Czech soldier who was a stormtrooper in the Austrian army on the Italian front. The letter was from the time of the Second Battle of the Piave River. There the author of the letter mentioned using throwing knives in trench storming and mentioned one detail that caught my attention. He mention that they used throwing knives or daggers which were intentionally heavy up to extend it no longer matters if they hit with a blade or handle and could knock out an enemy if hit in the head.
... the same war where the banned shotguns... because they were too effective...
@@zarthemad8386 Shotguns didn't actually get banned, though. When the Germans threatened to execute any American shotgunners they captured, the Americans responded by threatening to retaliate against German POWs. The Germans backed down.
Of course, this is also the same war in which the Germans were notorious for their use of poison gas and flamethrowers; so, no one was taking German outrage about "humane" weapons of war too seriously!
@@randlebrowne2048 C&Rsenal talks about that whole thing in one of their shotgun videos.
So at that point, you may as well be throwing a rock at their heads 🤔
@@thundermarkperun1083 Steel has a bigger density than rock, better handling and there is this pointy end that can hit eventually with greater effect.
22:30
No. No spin is still used at 10, even 20 meters.
It's AFTER that, spin comes in
Situations where they'd work is if there's something keeping your adversary from easily closing distance. Like quite uneven ground, a short wall, a gap in the ground, large objects, etc.
I literally just finished watching the other dudes video wondering how you'd respond. Awesome stuff. I don't think throwing knives are useless, but rather, they are rarely useful.
Interesting note: DnD seems to get a few things right with this stuff. Daggers have a throwing range of 20ft/60ft or approx 7m/20m. It was NEVER meant to be treated as your main weapon. If you wanted to focus on throwing stuff, you'd choose the plumbata/dart due to their lower weight and same damage and range. The way throwing daggers could be used would be that you're charging the enemy but you're just out of melee range. So instead of wasting your turn, you can throw a dagger/dart for a bit of damage.
virgin dagger vs chad shortsword and darts
Though also in D&D:
Daggers are a Light weapon and Darts aren't. Meaning that you can throw 2 Daggers for every 1 Dart due to Two-Weapon Fighting. (In general, not the Fighting Style). Helps for a Rogue when you don't have Extra Attack, as having two attacks improves the chance of inflicting your Sneak Attack.
On the other hand, Darts are very very cheap by comparison, making them very friendly on the resource expenditure side. You can buy 20 Darts (Throwing Knives) for the price of 1 Dagger.
I would also recommend a Whip as a personal defense weapon. While it may only do superficial damage to non-sensitive regions, the snap and its use in public punishment would definitely have a psychological impact against any lightly armored opponent.
The Whip could also function as a makeshift garrote-wire for a less bloody kill on unsuspecting foes, but a Club could do the same job for a similar kind of mess.
A respectful video defending yr points while correcting some of his. Thank you. The only aspect that wasn't mentioned by neither of you is silenc compared to bow and arrow that has some more noise I think, so maybe it can be used for silent killing.
How to see how good a weapon is... how many armies have been using them throughout history. Like one of the greatest weapons of all time... the spear.
Btw I think your demonstration has a particular weakness shad - in what kind of combat situation a third person is going to count down till combat starts? It has a drastic effect on the demonstration - most people won’t be able to start running during Adams throwing action. Therefore assuming both opponents are facing each other with weapons out and Adam throws first - he probably would land a hit even if the distance was only 5-8 meters. The only question is - would you hit him?? Idk
yeah, also shad is prepped for a throw, against someone who very obviously, isn't skilled at throwing knives, and didn't even try to aim at him, let alone throw it heavily. not that he should, but it's a very flawed "showcase" of how it'd go down. to begin with, you'd aim at the legs, not the sword/helmet. he also only started throwing the knife with shad within one step. that's obviously a bad idea. throwing knives, or any thrown weapon really, can be really good in war. its situational. just like a sword, is situational. you wouldn't want to be holding a bastard sword when sieging, for example. really, none of these videos showcase the entire argument, instead focusing on minute parts, to the point the true argument is lost. can throwing knives be used, and good, in medieval warfare. hard yes. would they be situational, also hard yes. it's like any other medieval weapon, it depends on whats going on, whether you'd want to use it. the biggest upsides of a throwing knife, are how light they are, how easily concealed, how they can be used for other things outside combat, and how, when they are used, they are very good, at what they are used for(distractions, or wounds, towards an out of range enemy.). downsides are just as obvious, as they are the same for every weapon. takes time to learn, not everyone can learn, and not always good, infact sometimes being a flat negative to use ( spears in cramped winding buildings as an example. or in a scramble)
also, medieval armor, that most soldiers wore(and conscripts), isn't likely to protect you as most people seem to think. especially on the legs, one solid hit, and your fucked.
but basically, what shad, and adam, are saying, but seem to be saying past each other, is that they work, but like any medieval weaponry, are situational, and sometimes completely ineffective.
@@Choryrth Not only that, but i think they're comparing the usage of the throwing knives in the wrong scenario. Of course in a face to face engagement, throwing knives would be disadvantageous.
@@pokeng yep. especially since the swordsman is presumably, looking right at you, and prepared to react to what your doing. in a big ass battle, your not gonna notice(most likely), the person to your side quickly throwing a knife at your leg/arm, or some such. knife throwers aren't duelists.
In my opinion thrown weapons are a tertiary weapon for disabling attackers so you could try to get away, it would be great for making a distraction to get around a group of people that are in the way
Throwing daggers are not even comparable to javelins, throwing spears, or even plumbata, war darts, ect
As a fan of knives I would always keep it in hand over throwing it.
I think the problem is that Adam is viewing this from the perspective of a 'world champion knife thrower', he has a bias because he is so proficient with throwing knives. Someone who studies many types of weapons and doesn't have the time to master one to world champion level would be far better served using even a throwing knife as a melee weapon instead of throwing it.
I'd like to have it considered on how much you'd want to throw an expensive chunk of iron with the high possibility that you're not getting it back.
@@shanehunt3019 i quite disagree. first of all, a small piece of metal, that doesnt even have to be maintained or anything and is really simple to produce is definitely not an expensive chunk of metal.
Second, in a battlefield scenario, there will be definitely some cases where you can save an ally's life by throwing a knife at an enemy, even if you only distract him. whats worth more, 100g of iron, or your ally's life?
Third, assuming you survive a battle (because else theres no point in arguning about retrieval), you will easily be able to scavenge more weapons etc, so whining over the loss of a few tiny iron pieces is just silly. If something can help you win a battle, you wont back down because of "oh i might loose that one disponible item worth of money" its your damn lives you and your firends are fighting for.
And fourth, if you dont use the knives, you wont loose them. And if you use them properly, you will be able to get enough worth out of it. You're not gonna run around throwing blindly 20 knives a minute at enemies for a whole hour or more. And btw, if you do that, there's gonna be lying A TON of knives around to retrieve after combat.
@@andreas_rr This is an incredibly Tolkien response that's bouncing between rational points and anime friendship magic.
Sure you could scavenge it back. My original comment was more of a joke than an actual point cause competitive throwing knives can be expensive.
Also, if your friend was in a life threatening position where your only option to even try to save him is with a knife throw in a medival battlefield, you'd probably have a dead friend and a stabbing implement that the enemy can pick up assuming they'd even want it. Your line has probably broken and your best bet is retreat.
I'm not going to have discussions on this because we are literally in the comment section of a HEMA historian. I'm an IT guy who likes throwing hatchets. Yeah they would 200% be shit on a battlefield and I'm a damn good throw.
It isn't biased because the context shad was also talking about was someone who is proficient in knife throwing. The context is that of someone who could easily throw a knife and have it hit.
Exactly, while your everyday footsoldier throughout history would generally have little to no experience throwing knives....but you could give them a javelin or bow or even darts with little training required
You got me thinking about other combat situations.
Lets say there's a larger battle(multiple people on each side), and you aren't currently under direct attack, but you use the throwing knife to hit someone assaulting you ally.
That would be a more suitable situation, as your target is occupied with his own opponent, and less likely to try to evade or attack you.
If you have time to throw a knife at a guy standing 6m away showing you his back, you might aswell take a step or two and use your spear or polearm, the main weapon on a battlefield. Or use a deadlier weapon, like a javelin. If there's guys inbetween you and the target, you open yourself up by throwing a knife. Since you either have to put down your main weapon or shield in order to use the throwing knife effectively, you are an easy target yourself. Taking those risks for a weapon which most likely won't hit lethally, isn't exactly smart. A better situation would probably be if you need to chase down fleeing targets after their morale broke. A knife even to a leg slows down once adrenaline wears off, potentially granting you a prisoner or kill you would otherwise have missed. But then again, the short range makes this situation very short lived.
All of this is ofc just my opinion, I might miss obvious points. I'm sorry if that's the case.
I do wonder how effective a throwing knife would be against unarmored horses, the neck is quite vulnerable I guess. Though I'd prefer to have a spear and a shield in my hands, if a horseman is 6m away. Cavalry throwing knives would be interesting, but a bow or crossbow is better in most aspects I guess.
I think a bow is perfectly suited for that role since it's much more lethal and in turn-- helpful for your ally that is being attacked.
That is my practical experience in our all weapon fights, that just works and works well. When a neighbouring enemy shield guy throws a knife at you, he hits 95% of the time, just because of the wtf experience. You account for spears/bows etc, but you never expect someone to pull a throwing knife from behind a shield. The entire dodging arguement is true for a bow/javelin/plumbata. If someone is staring you down, they will dodge your bolt/arrow/javelin, you pick unexpecting prey, same with throwing knifes, you throw when they dont see, and when you are safe behind ranks. That's legit, and you can carry a couple of knives over a brigantine no issues, it's like a tertiary weapon. Primary - polearm, secondary - sword or something else short (less then 1.5m long) and then knives are awesome tertiary weapon. Having 2-3 throwing daggers to your rondel, may save ur buddies life.
he is still speaking throwing knifes as MAIN weapon bro whsy would you take that in a large scale combat you run out of knifes and and what than? just use a real main weapon and carry some knifes in case you can use theme
@@FreekyPower I never said anything about it as a main weapon...
A knife in combat is a secondary at best.
Am I the only one to object the the definition of "throwing knife" being applied to something that lacks a (functional) handle or a cutting edge? Those things he's using are throwing sticks/bars.
Edit: Nope, Chad was on it as well.
I'm not even sure why you'd want a throwing knife as a secondary. You'd usually just use a dagger as a secondary. Or use the knife to stab someone with.
If you want an example, albeit a graphic one(you've been warned), of how far someone can move even after receiving a catastrophically lethal strike, then go watch the Rittenhouse shooting. The second individual who struck him with a skateboard, received a rifle round at point blank(barrel in the chest). After the shot he then runs 12 feet away, this is after his heart has been torn apart from a rifle round and he has 0% chance of survival at this point. In that 12 feet if he was a committed attacker with a sword, a lethal strike will still arrive at your body.
That's why you have follow up shots
In close quarter combat, throwing a knife is actually very effective when used in conjunction with other techniques. For instance kicking or shoving the opponent just outside of his striking range you can throw the knife into him very easily. A thrown knife penetrates deeper than what you could achieve with a stab
I like the response and willingness to break it all down. I think you took the video wrong. He was only showing how an experienced knife thrower can be successful while also validating your points. I truly think he was just making jokes about how good it is when comparing skill levels.
shuriken Are not designed to be lethal there designed To distract and to somewhat incapacitate by either being thrown in the eye or someone's hand to make them drop their weapon.
Ah yes two youtubers having a civilized arguments no drama just doing it gentlemen style
Oh yeah and both you should probably just ignore the uncivilized barbarians on both of your video's comment section
Well, it seems that Adam's argument is throwing knives are effective when an opponent is in close range but not ready to fight yet, right?
I think any kind of weapon is effective in that situation, even a Nunchaku is.
@56:10 this argument is really sad, and disingenuous. Like someone who can throw knives adequately wouldn't adjust the throw depending on whether the target is rushing in at you. Be better, Shad.
I know it would have gone against the respectful tone of the video (which I liked) but I kind of wish that when he observed how spike like those knives were Shad had said "That's not a knife. This is a knife!" (Crocodile Dundee reference for the younger people out there)
@Shadiversity
In numerous videos, you say "in the moment of X, you could respond by doing Y", but a lot of those situations make it sound like turn-based combat.
Would it be possible to include practicle examples (video bits) of such interactions in future videos?
It would be nice to see the actual interaction. (and it's always fun to see Oz getting hit with stuff ^^")
Reason for this also is, you say "the action of throwing, you would already have been struck", but wouldn't the machette user also be struck in the face with the throwing knife at that point, turning it into Mutually Assured Destruction?
Plus its an assumption that the thrower is standing still which is contradictory to the whole point Adam is making. you can retreat and throw simultaneously. its not about precision its about hitting a target anywhere and fleeing.
@@DanielCruz-yy1xf which Shad probably would agree on, as he mentions in his "wrong" archery videos that archery was less about hitting a precise spot and more about hitting an area.
Thing with the other guy's is that will everything he said is true and was very informative. The sing is that you two came to pretty much the same conclusion
Maybe, but "it's a great hobby" and "it gets you outside" has *nothing* to do with its effectiveness combat. I watched some of the video. And it was apparent Adam (the professional knife thrower) missed the point entirely.
@@willsofer3679 Haha, I recommend watching the whole video.
Adam agrees it's not a good primary weapon or ideal for combat. (Which is Shad's main point.)
Since he didn't really disagree, Adam focused more so on showing knife throwing as a great hobby, as I suppose a few people may come to the odd conclusion that "not good in combat = pointless to learn."
low IQ
If the point of the intro is "i suck at throwing knives" then the statement at the end probably shouldn't be "throwing knives suck". Kind of leaves the wrong impression.
The joke was that he sucked but blamed the knives.. which is a valid enough joke imo.. problem is that it's a video that's actually saying the knives suck :P
Also at the like 3-4 foot range if you wanted a distraction weapon I'm pretty sure pocket sand would be as if not more effective as a distraction.
The biggest problem for Adam in combat is that he is a skilled thrower.
You might be going "whoa but that doesn't make sense", but anyone doing martial arts for extended periods of time knows not to break eye contact. But whenever Adam throws something he locks eyes with wherever he is aiming and then hits within 10 cm. This would mean that a trained combatant with something as small a buckler has enough time to block his throws majority of the time.This is something you have to deal with when you are within 5 meters, people's reactions (can) start as soon as you lock the target, not when you throw because to get that kind of accuracy you lose the peripheral vision of a buckler moving towards your aim.
As a martial artist and ex soldier i need to disagree partially... throwing something could be a great opener for a attack it dosent even need to be pointy :) but you need to find the right moment for the attack. adam is not wrong but there is just a small window for attacks like this and they need to be paired with psycological attacks. Distractions like this have safed my life at least two times. one of the times i even threw my sunglasses and it opened a small window for an attack. adams point of view is modern but in medival times this would be much more complicated.
This isnt true if they arent already prepared for the throw. Mythbusters did this entire deal with whether or not you could bring a knife to a gunfight and the answer is, yes, yes you can. Because if you arent already 50% on the way to shooting someone coming at you with a knife within 25 feet, you will NOT be able to react in time. They tested it with the gun in a holster, with the gun in a rested but armed position, and with jamie already in a firing stance and the only time he could consistently hit Adam was when he was already ready to be shooting. BTW, paintballs travel 300 feet per second. Not only is there strong evidence that catching someone unawares with a thrown knife wont allow them time to react, we have historical records of these knifes being used in combat situations.
And none of us are arguing that its a terribly lethal option. Its just that throwing your knife WORKS; its why so many cultures have them. And even IF the opponent stops and blocks it, thats an action they had to take that they wouldnt have otherwise which can buy you time, especially at range.
Shad is right, a shitty fantasy wallhanger is the same as perfect quality combat ready replica when pointing out that spear beats sword any day.
Well if we look at Japanese martial arts throwing weapons has mainly only been used historically as distractions and slowing down an enemy that pursue you, not necessary as weapon used to kill.
25:05 if you really know how weapons work, it's easy to dodge a machete from that distance (considering that the hand is handling more weight and no big melee weapons are big.) after you dodge some attacks, you will have lots of chances to throw a knife and let them bleed until they are weak. it is used as a distraction instead of a primary weapon. You have focused on the fact that they are just about to hit without realizing how easy it is to dodge a melee weapon if you have the distance. They will run at you, and it is better to have a primary weapon, but it can help wear down an attacker.
Example: You pushed an attacker to the ground, but it is dangerous to do a follow-up attack. You throw your knife instead.
We should all remember that we can still avoid attacks. It is not good to only consider dodging knife-throwing attacks, we should also consider dodging those primary attacks. That is why many people freeze or panic when they are about to be attacked because they always forget that human attacks can be dodged, and the flurry of attacks are imperfect and can be dodged somehow.
(edit) 35:46 in real life situations, probably anyone will not be charging mindlessly like that easily knowing that their opponent is carrying a weapon. At that time a skilled knife thrower can throw an attack and run away.
37:16 that is the reason why you should not charge mindlessly. You are using primary weapon against a secondary weapon. Secondary weapons are called secondary for a reason. They have their uses as secondary weapons. Why would someone carry a pistol if they have a big rifle? and they may even carry melee.
He said in his video, throwing knives are a secondary weapon. Not a primary combat tool.
I'm positive throwing knives couldn't defeat Gambisons.
To give some comparison, a Gambison has the same sort of resistance as what dog dressers are wearing.
A thrusting attack needs to be very strong or have enough kinetic energy to avoid being amortized by the layers of lin, i doubt you could achieve this by throwing knives.
What if the guy wears Gambison AND a mail coat ?
You probably would have to aim for the few openings in the target's protection, while in movment...
If you add this to what's explained in this video, then it's pretty obvious that throwing knives or any melee weapon was never "a thing" in medieval warfare.
It was really situational, something you would probably do as a surprise attack on an unprepared foe, like during a discussion.
LOL, I watched Adam's video and was just wondering if you were going to do a reply.
I love Shad's content and it brings me genuine happiness seeing him so passionate about providing entertaining and educational content to youtube. However at minute 27:00 in the video when Adam is explaining that he would fake out his opponent to land a throwing knife attack Shad says they would be able to close the distance in time, no offense but I do not see shad being faster than this guy in any situation let alone a hypothetical combat one. I found some of shad's responses to be sensical and respectful, but in some parts of the video he came across as rude to me. Even if he could close the distance and hit him, he would still end up with a throwing knife to the face or neck as it is near impossible to miss that close to a target Shads size LOL. Shad needs to listen to what Adam is saying with the intention of understanding where he is coming from rather than trying to just prove him wrong and defending himself. The argument that "oh this hypothetical strategy isn't gonna work cuz I would stab you first" gives off the "You didn't kill me cuz I have an invisible bullet proof vest on now" we use to do when having Nerf battles as kids haha. MUCH LOVE TO YOU BOTH
I'm sorry. I actually have an edit to this to add now that I have finished the video.I have unsubscribed. Learn how to treat your fans with respect. You didn't do anything but attempt to dismantle his opinions while trampling over several of your own. Sad part is I agree with your stance about throwing knives but your lack of respect and overall demeanor was gross this time around. Your buddy had your d!ck in his mouth parroting anything you said too, doesn't mean you are right.
Maybe you can use throwing knives in conjunction with a shield, buckler or another weapon to block or parry, something you cannot do with a bow or even a sling.
Seems like knife throwing as a sport is a lot of fun, but it would be a last resort in actual combat.
Former Combat Marine here, blackbelt in MCMAP and hand to hand training instructor including knives. Look I love throwing knives, its something I enjoy doing as a hobby and with my kids. YES its an impressive skill to have. But anyone who says with any seriousness that they would throw their knife at someone in a combat situation is either inexperienced, an idiot, or both. I get being passionate about something youre good at. But theres no way im throwing my last ditch option at someone, even if it sticks, THEY now have my weapon and im at a disadvantage, not going to happen
Adam might be good but I don't think he thought of the concept of armor. If it was an idea of medieval adventure or vs a knight the knife will not kill anyone.
He has a video where he easily penetrates chain mail a good 3 inches with throwing knives.
Adam actually says in his video if the opponent was wearing body armor It would be less effective It was brief but he did say it
Yeah, 5 metres is nothing in HEMA or even just in fencing.
I'm 4 minutes in, and the amount of time necessary to explain the importance of judging distance and then which technique to use and blah blah blah blah, illustrates Shad's point perfectly. All this about only using certain techniques at specific distances just highlights how impractical and useless knife throwing is in combat. If you're throwing a knife it's usually going to be out of desperation, not because that is the best way to accomplish your goal.
Listen, I used to throw knives as a little hobby in high school, I didn't have videogames like my friends so I dedicated hours upon hours to this just to pass time. I got pretty good at it too. It's not useful, getting it to stick into anything is hard enough, connecting with the target at all is also hard enough, doing both is even harder.
I think an interesting point is that you guys even point out that what he is throwing aren't even knives... In a place where weapons aren't allowed, throwing spikes might be something you could get away with carrying.
Compared to a pilium that could render a shield useless, I don't see how a little knife stuck in a shield would matter in the lease. Throwing axes, tomahawk, or the Frankish Axe that i forget the name of seem very useful. A competition is NOT a combat environment. Even in shooting firearms, combat shooting is VERY different from competitive shooting.
To add a couple of thigs to your response:
With spinning technique, you need to take into consideration that opponent moves even in medium distance. You would need a lot of battle experience with throwing knives to be accurately hitting your opponent.
Considering, that for a long time in history spear (knife on a stick :) ) was one of the most popular weapons on the battlefield, you are not even in two steps range, you are one step from having to defend yourself, two steps from death.
As for throwing knives in general, There was African throwing knife, that was called Mambele i think, that was more useful while throwing in combat, especially against shields, but fundamental problem of throwing away your main weapon is still there,
SPINNING technique is 100% useless against anything but a stationary target, because its impossible to calculate the spin needed if the target is moving towards you at variable or unknown speed, technique wouldn't help you at all unless you can calculate the exact point of impact with spinning technique since the target is moving. Also, if the target slows down or speeds up mid throw the throw would be useless as it wouldnt hit with the point.
and well, there was the roman javelin , the Pila which was used to pierce the shield and make it useless and cumbersome for the defender. If the shield got hit, there was a good reason to drop the shield. Nevermind that with the Pila, a hit would hurt and the mass and inertia was sufficient to actually penetrate armour
Good thing no spin knife throwing exists, can’t believe Shad still can’t figure that out
@@dexaphobia8085 uh its brought up that no spin is only good up to maximum of 6 meters, which is useless in a battle field, and it has less impact when it hits. Even gambeson would completely block knives.
@@tristanm8838 nope, Adam was talking about half spin throwing.
Shad still doesn’t know about that technique and his reaction video cut out Adam talking about it.
He literally knows nothing about knife throwing outside of what Adam talks about in his response video, and even then he missed a few crucial points.
I mean cmon there are three major techniques for throwing knives, in his first video he only knew of one (full spin throwing) and by the second he had only learned about no spin knife throwing.
Shad its awesome that you take these response videos in good faith and are respectful in your own responses. Too many creators are quick to assume people are just attacking them and go for insults and mud slinging over actual conversation and consideration. Good on you man!
I don't think this guy's ever actually been in actual combat, so what makes him qualified to judge combat situations.
''Throwing knifes suck'' - Sun Tsu
Video games have taught me anything, its that throwing knives are best when paired with a complementary status effect of some kind.
Imagine lightning throwing knives irl, theyd be awesome
I use Japanese throwing stars as a drinking game. It's amazing how few people can hit a target and make the throwing star stick across the apartment. It's like darts in the pub but way harder. I am still the only one who could make the 'batman' star stick. The Batman being shaped in the iconic way with only two points at the ends to strike with.
I only really see using throwing knives as a last resort or as a distraction as Shad says, though it may also be useful for attacking unaware or unarmoured targets where doing it at a short range is necessary or important because they can be more easily hidden than say a bow and arrow. Additionally just because something is short range does not mean that the other person can easily strike back. In shads example they were essentially in an open field with no obstacles, if there were obstacles then I think throwing knives have a niche use case. For example someone could attack from above or from behind something that would prevent the person being attacked from being able to close the distance.
Yeah, i could see them being good for combat that occurs accross a banquet table haha
There is a reason there is a perception of knives as assassin's weapon
No spin is a quick draw and stick, so you lose less time it combat. Spin gives you range but takes longer to throw. Knives were used against unarmoured targets.
When you say that you're going to throw a knife over someone who is charging you, you are assuming the knife throwing isn't going to lead their target.
Terrible choice against an aggressor who can reach you.
Better at short-medium range against an opponent who can't reach you, such as attacking from a balcony or behind a fortification.
Very good opener for injuring an opponent at a short distance who hasn't spotted you. I'm thinking of guerilla tactics.
Summary - limited tactical use, but not useless.
Imo it's not so much an opener but an insanely good one/two time use skill for clandestine attacks against unarmored opponents who haven't spotted you. Easy to conceal, throw it and run away, lot's of confusion where it came from afterwards. Not something to be used in a battlefield but on the streets. Wouldn't want to be some noble on the receiving end getting hit by this in the back wearing my clothes only.
He is addressing 1v1 combat but in war formation, Shad, you are right
It sounded to me like the point he was saying was it isn't used on a battlefield, and it's effective when in a crowd as you have a concieled weapon that is less likely you to be confiscated. Can't really pull out a crossbow or a sling without drawing attention I would assume.
Outside combat, where would knife throwing be useful?
Geralt Of Rivia once killed a rat in complete dark once,
and was pretty proud of his throw, until he realised that the other could not see it because it was completely dark.
There is literally a shuriken of the size that Adam uses hanging in Odawara castle museum in Japan.
Also can we just talk about how knives in general even when wielded melee make for terrible self-defense weapon due to high lethality and low stopping power? The main purpose of any weapon throughout the ages has been defending it's wielder, not hurting his opponent - that's secondary. With knives unless you get a headshot it's a double kill at best, as Shad said. No one wants that, come on.
They're really only good against people who're less armed than you. I think their only good points in self-defense are that they're easy to carry and can deter someone from attacking you.
I disagree a weapons main purpose is to multiply the force you can put out with your body, they aren't defense tools, this is why until armor got reliable enough to defend people fighting had dedicated defending implements, because a sword or spear is made to deal damage not defend.
@@Runegrem They're also extremely good agaisnt people who dont have knives...
@@BananaMana69 You miss the entire point. Why would you want to deal damage in a fight, any fight? To prevent receiving it.
@@Synthesid That doesn't make a sword a defense tool lol.
also something described as a throwing cross or wurfkreutz was described in some german manuscripts it looks like a fun weapon for melee and throwing
the bow is also a useless weapon. a shield that easily blocks them
In combat hitting the target with a knife from 10 meters is effective. Like if you are walking through the wild and there is some wild animal he can land like 4 shots and then resort to something else.
If you wanna hear a story about Adam and an 11year old boy from 2011 , he had to move from his village. The dude is whack
Missed opportunity to do the whole "that's not a knife" thing.
My understanding of shirikas was as poisoned weapons and stealth not combative weapons. Tools of assassination.
There is a story about a knife dual in the old west. I believe it was Bridger but maybe it was Kit Carson. Don't don't hold me to the name, but the important thing is it is told for the truth in oral tradition among the Navajo.
The story goes something like David and Goliath. The Indians agreed to call the battle off in a contest of champions and the weapon decided on was a knife. The white man was of medium stature and was not a great knife fighter, but was experienced in it. On the other hand the Navajo champion was a rare giant nearly 7 foot tall. The champions stripped to the waist, and began to circle surveying each other. Then out of the blue (the first strike of the contest) the white man took the greatest risk a knife fighter can take. He threw his blade hard striking the giant in his heart felling him instantly with one blow.
This is the story relayed to me by a very many sources both Indian and white man. Also I agree this was a high risk decision on the white man's part. Another point is he was lucky his blade struck the giant man in the heart, and was a death blow that must have caused a catastrophic drop in blood pressure causing him to be incapacitated immediately. Something similar to a heart shot with an arrow to a deer. Honestly it very lucky gamble, but was the right choice for the white man in that particular instance.
Point is in a knife dual it may actually be a risky but possible technique.
The cold steel throwing daggers are good knives for both throwing and a solid knife. I prefer the jack dagger model
Shad is clearly wrong about the important points 1. Knife throwing is effective in a combat situation. 2. Short medium even long distances (30) meters 3. It doesnt take nearly as long to throw a knife at your face and land it, as it does for you to close the distance. Meaning no way your getting to anyone even with a sword unless you throw it, before they throw a knife at your head.
I think you missed his point. The first part where he is talking about throwing it and running away you missed where he said concealed. As in like an assassins weapon.
''Throwing knives suck''
- Sun Tsu
...probably
I understand I'm commenting to a 1 year old video. However, the Tueller drill developed to inform officers threat ranges of a combatant with a knife vs. their holstered firearm. This is a direct correlation.
I think a thrower is best used as a compliment to a singlehanded sword, as all other ranged options would be too slow for close quarters combat like swordfights. Having a sword in one hand and a thrower in the other gives one a shank in a sword clash, or a close range attack to make a charging swordsman flinch just enough to buy the one or two precious seconds for you to run them through. That said, to use throwers this way requires having one at the ready along with your sword prior to a battle starting. It also requires the enemy to not be waring armor. Also longswords provided better reach, lethality, and versatility than a onehander comboed with a thrower.
The crossbow is likely more effective than a thrower, it could get off a shot just as fast and with greater accuracy and killing power upclose per shot, greater than a thrower. Also if you miss your shot and the enemy closes the distance, a crossbow could be used as a makeshift shield to block a sword blade once or twice enough to get away. When gunpowder pistols hit the scene, they were used heavily as complimentary ranged weapons in conjunction with a sword, especially when combat was waged on ship decks.
Though...the thrower could have also been favored by assassins, since they were easy enough to conceal, poison dipped, and ideal for stabbing the throat of a VIP in an assassination and not on the battlefield. Again I'd suspect even assassins would prefer using throwers more as cheap, expendable shanks concealed and in the middle of the night, stabbed into a king's throat as he sleeps, and left there. A clever assassin could carry multiple, one for stabbing a king at night, the other for planting on some other servant in the castle.
I don't see even the best knife thrower in the world picking a thrower to off an attacker with a sword. You'd only get one shot, throwers only tend to sink a quarter of its blade into a target when thrown, not enough to be lethal. Armored knights laugh at throwers, and even if you somehow got extremely lucky and nailed an enemy in the eye with a thrower. You better have a dagger or a sword to finish the job quick because the guy's gonna want revenge.
The takeaway, its my theory that a thrower knife was at its most useful as a tool for assassins, not as a weapon of war. Even if the enemy was naked and armed only with macheties, a thrower simply is never going to be enough to kill a man who is trying to rush you with a bigger blade. Buuut throwers are small, and sharpest at their tips, ideal for poison deliveries, small enough to keep hidden while getting close to a target and being able to end them. Its second use could compliment a sword in direct combat, but a throwing star would be superior for that kind of thing. Dirt and pebbles work even better when thrown at the face than a throwing knife, even if you're the baddest knife thrower in the world who can sink a bullzeye without fail every time, the most damage a thrown knife can do is gouge out an eye, or make the enemy flinch. If making sword wielding enemies flinch for you to off them in a rush, you're better off just throwing a pouch of dirt mixed with hot peppers at the enemy' blinds them for longer and for dirt cheap XD.
In combat I would say the best out of throwing knives you can get would be as a last resort or distraction. I would say outside of that the best thing you can get out of knife throwing is learning precision. Oh and some fun. I would know I throw knives myself.
no you were not, 1st of all he's not throwing knives but purpose made throwing "things" 2nd when he start by saying "I'm world champion so this proves it's good" on the contrary it proves it's not if you need to be the best of the world to make it work it's a bad weapon, even someone not learned in the use of a stick can do heavy damage
I'm fascinated by the ridiculous nature of this video "battle" and even more by the armchair-tacticians weighing in and speculating. I've been throwing knives now for over 35 years recreationally. Not passionately or in competitions and I still wouldn't say I'm anywhere near mastery of it.. I can't even see that in my future and I enjoy it and have a throwing knife board hanging frame in my back yard. People are comparing knives and darts, considering armor and the idea of dodging an attack and it's mostly nonsense I'm reading. Adam Celadin's video was straightforward, factual, and honest. He doesn't make knife throwing out to be anything other than what it is. I believe knife throwing "can be" effective in combat.. so can rock throwing.. or casting dirt into your adversary's eyes. In combat, you're going to use ANYTHING you have available to get an advantage. Knife throwing is simply adding another option you can turn to. It isn't a skill that should be relied upon but neither are firearms. I've had them and have seen them fail, that's why they have developed tactics and positioning. Shadiverity is wrong, unfortunately. Adam Celadin expressed that knife throwing is an effective "distraction" and it "can cause damage and kill", therefore it does have effectiveness in combat. If I were confident with instinctive throwing and in a CQB where my firearm failed and everything fell into place where that was the best option available to me, I would use it. I wouldn't COUNT on it to "kill", "wound", or even "stick" into the individual, but I would use that as a distraction to get me to my next best option. It isn't going to be the tool I would turn to unless I had no better option and I wouldn't throw it unless I had more than one.Throwing dirt in someone's eyes is also effective in combat. It might not kill your adversaries but it might be the edge you need/use to get close enough to finish them off. Now then, climb back into your video game battles and don't forget to tell those you love that you love them.
from the standpoint of a fairly good amateur knife thrower, someone who done martial arts and fought alot in his life, lived in very dangerous situations while always having this skill available for about 20 years, i learned to throw knives with both techniques he mentions, as well as halfspin and quickthrow, all this said, my experience is, in about 100 "combat" situations i found myself in only in 1 of those throwing knives were relevant, everything else i would be better served with my knife in my hand, only 1 time i wish i had them and i didnt because i was abroad, couldnt fly them and didnt bought a pair up in London, where i was robbed in a back alley, the dude hit me, took my wallet and ran and only then a throwing knife would be handy, with an oponent with his back turned that you cant catch on feet, only plausible situation for knives to shine when thrown
Shad will say something and reiterate like 10 times that he means, specifically in this specific circumstance and context that he is currently referring to. And I'm like we get it Shad! Move on with the rest of the video already!
Then the next video is him responding to someone who took what he said out of the specific context that he meant.
Shad: "At sunset the sky is orange. Again, I mean at SUNSET. The sky isn't always orange, just at sunset."
Guy: "Nuh uh! In the morning the sky is blue!"
Me: :/
If people don't completely miss the point after it's repeated 3 times...
Anyway in most presentations it's good to repeat at least once
Im not sure why he hearted your comment but boy do I agree lol Shad is like the king of waffle, I can only stand to watch one or two of his vids in succession cuz the amount of over-explaining and repeating he does is just incredible. It's like a solid half of the video, and the other half is him needlessly trying to justify why he holds the opinion that he does. Why use 100 words when you can use 10,000!
The context can be just as faulty as the argument, just because someone sets an overly specific context doesn't mean the opinion they deliver can't be addressed with a broader observation.
it really do be like this... I sometimes watch his videos at x2 and can just wait for the next time he says the point. it's kinda painful at times.
Repeating myself several times in a certain pattern is how I learned to deal with dimwits... Uh, I meant... Humans..
One of the more common "Did you know"s from LOTR is that Viggo Mortensen actually deflected that thrown knife in the fight with the big bad Uruk, and it wasn't even scripted.
It was a "happy accident". Could've been bad.
@@AnotherDuck Like that one time he broke his toe kicking a helmet and screamed to the heavens. That was bad. Fun fact, they took that take in the movie because it was by far the most poignant way Aragorn could ever mourn Merry and Pippin.
@@liwendiamond9223 A little bit of method acting never hurt anyone. Oh, wait...
@@liwendiamond9223 even 'funnier' is in the fellowship of the ring when sam walks into the water to go after frodo... he stepped on a HUGE piece of glass that was stuck in his foot. he kept finishing the scene and then had to go to the hospital.
@@miniclip1162 Reminds me of Martin Sheen in Apocalypse Now. In an early scene in that film, he is basically in the throes of madness, drunk, possibly on LSD. He's dancing and thrashing around his little hotel room, and he smashes a mirror- I think that part was scripted.
What WASN'T scripted: the huge cut caused by the broken mirror on Sheen's hand. Required several stitches to treat the wound... and if you just watch the movie, you'll see this exact take. The blood you see on him in that scene- real. The pain he appears to be in- real. Him wrapping a towel around the wounded hand- probably out of concern.
There's a lot of interesting stories like this. They only interest me when the take ends up getting used, though; sure, the cool stories can be interesting, but it's way better when you see it in the film and you can connect it. "Hey, that's the moment when Viggo broke his toe!"
I feel like Adam's response wasn't really to Shad. I feel like he was really clarifying, and suggesting ways that he feels it's useful, even if it's really only a distraction or intimidation technique. I feel that most of what he said doesn't actually apply to criticizing Shad or Shad's points, but clarifying to people who he feels may get the wrong impression from your video.
I feel like this rebuttal might be a little more directly oppositional that Adam's response would really call for. I think on most points, he really agreed with Shad.
Adam also mentioned that most throwing weapons, speficially shuriken and boshuriken, were primarily defensive tools, meant to distract ones opponent and were otherwise primarily used as poison delivery methods. However, he does go into great length about how TECHNIQUE can make it more effective then what shad was referring to, with combat throws vs spinning throws. He even shows that with practice and training, he can go far beyond the range of what Shad initially argued AND WITH ACCURACY. So if we allow for it to be used against unarmored opponents within acceptable ranges... there are actually a ton of situations where a throwing knife can be both useful, and effective. Shad really doesnt want to be wrong here.
@@ThreeGoddesses I don't doubt that someone can accurately throw a knife for in long ranges with enough practice, but things to consider though; throwing a knife in such long range would cause it to lose its inertia and thus-- less power, and this is really important because battlefield (the main point of Shad when it comes to its use) soldiers would definitely wear padded armor at the very least, the target would also be able to see the knife coming at them and have plenty of time to either dodge if far enough, or block/deflect it, using a throwing knife in long range and battlefield isn't really very practical since that's not what they're meant to be used for.
The primary and basically only good use for throwing knives is unarmored combat, fleeing and concealment/stealth, all of which are not really exclusive properties of a throwing knife and can be done by other weapons just as well or better.
@@user-tzzglsstle585e38 ok I just want to point out that hitting a thrown knife with a sword is a LOT harder then your making it out to be. Think about it: Can you consistently hit a baseball thrown by a skilled pitcher? Standard knives weigh about half a pound, just a little more then a baseball. Can you hit a softball thats been pitched by a skilled pitcher?
Knives can travel about 50 kph through the air.
And Yeah, sure. Throwing a knive in miiltary conflict isnt super feasible. But thats NOT what i said, I did mention that throwing against armored opponents isnt feasible, nor is it what ADAM said. And it completely negates that the vast majority of INDIVIDUAL instances of violence is outside of war... where people are far less likely to be wearing armor. And you would be far less likely to be using knives in military combat regardless.
Which was NEVER THE POINT of either video. Its always been "How effective can a thrown knife be" and the answer is... well, yeah, it can be effective, ESPECIALLY IF YOU PLANNED FOR IT TO BE AN OCCURENCE. Dont just take a knife from a sheath and throw it for coolness, its something that you need to have prepped and practiced for.
And it totally takes historical usage of throwing knives out of context; they were used by many cultures, and often to great effect.
Many cultures HAD throwing knives used historically:Shuriken and boshuriken, the mambele, the kpinga. India had throwing knives, native americans used throwing knives.
And if there wasnt a throwing knife, there were throwing axes. Thrown blades have been around for centuries, and have seen historical use AND success. Shad is not only arguing a very specific example where knifes arent effective, hes ignoring their use in history.
@@ThreeGoddesses Your Actually using Faulty logic in the skilled pitcher argument. The average person may have trouble with it. But Another Skilled Baseball player actually has a decently good chance of hitting that ball. But more than that. The average person is not just going to run into a skilled pitcher to have to hit a ball that is thrown by. Further more Deflecting that ball takes much less skill and capability than actually knocking it out of the park. It only requires intervening the bat between you and the ball, where ever it goes beyond that point doesn't matter. which is actually easier for the average person let alone somebody skilled at swinging the bat.
That skilled Pitcher against that Skilled Batter is the actual scenario argument that should be used when it comes to throwing knives vs being able to block or deflect the shot. However, To go further, When your talking about an unskilled pitcher against an unskilled batter. There is less likely that the Pitcher is ever going to get that ball where it needs to go in the first place to help compensate for the unskilled Batter to deflect the ball. And both of these scenario's ignore the possibility of just stepping out of the way of the ball.
As for the Historical Context. That is incorrect. While there is evidence that knives were thrown in lots of cultures, there is little to no actual historical evidence in almost any of those cultures of them having any Great Effect as you put it. While Thrown blades have been around for a long time. They've usually been presented as something that you do only if you have to and their effectiveness for doing so has been almost non-existent historically. Having something used enough to have it recorded in history does not mean it was necessarily effective, or used in a wide variety of scenario's. The reality is that if you have something that fits easily in the hand. At some point in history it's likely that it has been thrown and a culture has adapted some version of it for that. Also of particular note about any versions of throwing knives that had what could be argued as real cultural significance, They tend to come from cultures that either had ban's on weapons that most could carry so concealable weapons had increased popularity, or they are cultures that never really got into actual swords.
It's interesting that you bring up the Kpinga in particular because that one has more evidence of being a status symbol than a truly effective combat weapon that was thrown, And it has the interesting distinction that it's really hard to call it a knife despite that's the category it got thrown into because of what is an extremely unique design who's practicality outside of it's culture is questionable at best and it's probably better classified as a unique kind of weapon rather than trying to call it a knife of any kind.
@@Quandry1 we have actual european swordsmasters write in their manuals the value of throwing knifes and swords as a battle tactic. So not only are you WRONG that we have no evidence of their effectiveness, but some of the leading and most trusted instructors of swords combat thought it was valuable enough a tactic that it was worth mentioning in books about swordsmanship.
The argument I was using wasn't faulty logic; it was a metaphorical analogy meant to indicate how fast a knife can go. A good throwing knife is a little heavier then a baseball, about the same as a softball and go about half again as fast, with less of a forward face then either. It's harder to deflect a knife then it's being made out to be, even for a skilled swordsman.
So not only is shad being deceptive in his arguments about throwing knives, it ignores historical precedence as well as expert testimony. And even in his actual showcase, he WAS hit by the knife, and his friend barely made an effort after the fact to engage.
Are yall familiar with the 25 foot rule? It's a concept in law enforcement, that if someone is within 25 feet of you with a knife and your not in an active ready position to fire, you cannot react faster then that person can close the distance. And most people can't run 30-40kph, the average speed of a thrown knife. Maybe Usain Bolt could, but hes literally the fastest man alive. Mythbusters tested this in their experiment in regards to bringing knifes to gunfights. The concept is similar; if you aren't prepared for the knife throw, your very much unlikely to be able to react in time to dodge or deflect it.
So if there is historical evidence of its usefulness through expert testimony and publication, it was used by multiple cultures in a variety of roles, and a modern expert disagrees with an amatuer about its effectiveness, what's the conclusion that we can draw hmmm?
I really appreciate your response style. Respectful without any bashing, yet filled with information. Awesome!
Shad is a good and humble man
Be wary of the warden
Well that's clearly the hallmark of a lukewarm moderate fence-sitter.
@@wakkaseta8351 or just a polite human being…
@@Jim-tb7sj
Well yes, if your definition of "polite" is actually "unproblematic".
That's the right way to take a punch: "Did he call you fat?" and Shad continues to support that with "...evidence of me being chunky on the side..." and calls it fair criticism. Well played, good sir!
I believe the comparison of knifethrowing to a firearm would be that you can quickly "fire it" without having to carry around a bow or similiar weapons of war.
If you carry 3-5 knives it's probably easier to deploy than a bow in a "civil" setting.
I believe Adam is referring to a civil combat situation and Shad is talking about a battlefield.
Even the throwingstars are not deployed in a battlefield situation, rather they would be used during surpriseattacks or infiltration.
I think both Adam and Shad is right, but they are talking about different settings. That's why Adam is agreeing with Shads points although he tries to have opposite points.
Also I believe Adam is talking about throwing weapons as a group and Shad is purely talking about a typical knife you use to throw.
In order to continue this discussion you need to agree on the talking points:
-are you discussing all throwing weapons?
-are you equipped with other closecombat weapons?
-are you fighting an opponent with plate armor or only a chainmail?
As a viewer it feels like you are talking a bit past eachother.
Exactly.. Adam is pretty much saying that if you are trying to surprise attack someone, or give yourself a chance to run away in a civilian setting, a dedicated throwing knife is very useful as an opener.
Shad is talking about an actual battlefield with people already actively trying to kill you with weapons of war.
Yep, Shad is trying to show that having ONE throwing knife as your only weapon on the battlefield is a bad choice which Adam dosent dissagree with, but they still can be usefull depending on the context . Shad asked what are the benefits of knife over other range weapons excluding guns,first is speed : from being disarmed to launching a projectile knife is the fastest and they are easy to conceal and carry without issues, Shad himself said many times that ppl used to use swords in non battelfield situations not becouse they were better but easier to carry in day to day conext than for example spears, same with knifes, easier to carry and conceal couple of knives than a crossbow on your back.
Also you can have both sword and knive as self defence options, when you see attacker aproaching you pull out both, if you have time (distance) you throw your knife and still have the sword in you hand, if you dont have the time ( attacker rushing at you with full speed) , then you use both as melee weapons.
Good points and i think they definitely talk past eachother.
I think it doesnt matter too much wherther it's a battlefield or a civilian setting. Ít's nice to say bows exist, but as an archer and kendo practitioner, i can pretty confidentially say that carrying 3-5 throwing knives and deploying them in an opportunity is much more useful as a melee-oriented unit than having a bow, as using a bow in melee range is just really dumb in every single scenario. The biggest advantages of throwing knives are that you dont need a bow (which does also have its advantages on the battlefield), and they can be deployed quickly and onehanedly. You can still defend yourself with your main hand weapon while randomly throwing a knife with your off-hand.
Knife-throwing is not an effective primary or seccondary weapon, but it's a really effective opportunity weapon. you just carry them, and if there's a fitting opportunity, you can still get a lot of value out of it.
Additionally, a knife throw move should be rather unexpected and used when the enemy is off guard and not expecting it. Arguing that it's so easy to close in, and demonstrating this in a situation where the swordsman is just waiting for the "go" to rush in the thrower before he can throw the knife is just a wrong and nonsensical comparison...
@@andreas_rr anything can be an effective opportunity weapon a brick can be an effective opportunity weapon
I think the way throwing knives would be most useful, is when you are the one, closing the distance. Like if you are in a knive-fight and your opponent starts running away. If he is faster than you, then you could throw your knive to still get him, but this situation would not occur on battlefield. With this perspective movies and videogames are actually quite accurate because they are tipically an assassin weapon (mostly against unarmed/unaware opponents).
I would say that it would be generally interesting to see a range of different situations:
-- Shad has demonstrated the situation where both attack at the same time.
-- What if the knife thrower initiates the attack* and the melee fighter rushes only in reaction to that?
-- What if the knife thrower initiates the attack* against the melee fighter who is forced to stay in place?
-- What if the melee fighter initiates the rush* and the knife thrower defends themselves with that last ditch throw?
-- What if the knife thrower tries* to throw and bolt and the melee fighter only rushes in reaction to that?
* where "initiates" means that they get to choose the time for it.
I imagine the person practiced in using a projectile would know the distance to prepare and launch the projectile as well or better than their target, if there isn't enough space or opportunity, they aren't in some video game build where they are forced to take that option.
This situation would actually be very common on a battlefield whenever one side starts to lose most people run away they dont stay to be killed. Shad even says this in like all of his videos about ancient warfare.
@@Dan-rl1pi yeah but a battlefield isnt a 1 on 1 situation and killing one opponent doesnt mean you're safe to lose your weapon.
@@littlebrowny6983 not really the point here. Battles weren't like you see on TV just a big skirmish you had lines and formations there would be time to grab a secondary weapon while behind a shield wall and throw shit at people on the other side then get your main weapon and attack again.
Enough of endless talking. Now test it ! Adam Celadin is world champion, he's quite one of the best knife thrower we can find. Now we just have to find a HEMA champion, and apply theory to practice to get the final answer !
The final answer is already in the history books, it’s a niche use that could save your life but it’s unlikely so training time is best used for just about anything else.
Well, considering that the main use of the throwing knives is to give you an opportunity to run away, the person who can run faster would win.
This topic is always rather interesting. I've gotten very good at knife throwing over the years, and I must say I sort of agree with Shad. Now, they're not as useless as they were made out to be in the previous video. However, in a medieval style battle, probably not. There's just too many variables. Your opponent can close the distance in seconds, and if their reaction time is good enough, they can probably move out of the way in time. A throwing knife is probably good as a secondary, but they should not be relied on in a fight
Not to mention the sling was used more than a throwing knife, and used more effectively with throwing rocks at your opponent.
I think of this like "where DnD got it right". The thieves Guild could probably use em. Back in Victorian and before that was some vicious internal army battles. Improv armour etc. Throwing knives would probably be very useful close quarter running house to house battles. Well NOT attracting the local constabulary. Heh
I fully agree. my only criticism of shad's previous video was that it made knife throwing to seem completely useless but that is because Shad tends to look at things only or rather mostly in the context of a medieval battlefield. in which case I would agree that it would be useless. but Adams video (whilst also agreeing that it should not be used as a primary weapon and that it is nothing like how it's shown in games and movies) is about the fact that it can be useful as a defensive and offensive tool or even just as a deterrent. especially when trying to avoid a fight or just slow down the opponent. I agree with that completely.
@@soundrogue4472 I don't think that is a good comparison. slings and bows are ranged weapons in nature and they cannot be used in close range because the wind up time is simply too long. rocks are effective but not so much against soft targets with clothing on top. yes it can hurt but honestly small rocks are only really effective if you can hit the head or maybe the hand which are both hard to hit. so I believe that the throwing knife can fill that niche in nicely, because first of all it looks much more intimidating so it can draw attention, and secondly any hit you land will be noticeable unless the other person is fully berserk. but it's not a massively powerful weapon, and it's not a guaranteed fight stopper with the first throw. which is why context matters. the fact is even against lightly armored opponents throwing knives are not a good Idea in the midst of combat. but as a deterrent or distraction in a single fight? they can be very effective
I think that goes along for any knife, I don't think anybody had their knife, dagger or short sword as their primary weapon in a medieval battlefield
You need to learn the knive throwing skill first. +5 damage for throwing knives +10 charisma
+10 coolness
Knives are effective in combat, if you attach them to a long pole..oh wait, that's a spear!!
Hmm I know one woman where a knife placed in an attackers leg saved her life, or how her placing a knife in the wall beside an aggressive man's head changed his mind about pushing his luck.....surrrre totally useless in modern day urban combat
Something important to take into account:
It takes up to 8 seconds for someone to collapse after being shoot trough the heart with a pistol round. (Incapacitation via most high speed rifle rounds is almost immediate)
It takes 30 seconds aver for someone pierced trough the heart to collapse.
As a bow Hunter I've seen deer go full sprint for over 30 seconds, and cover 50 yards or more, after being shot trough both lungs, and the heart with a 3 edge broadhead arrow.
The takeaway:
Not just because you threw a knife, and it pierced the heart, does it mean that your opponent will stop fighting.
Life is not video games, or movies, and opponents pierced through the heart can keep fighting until they collapse, and you might be dead by then.
I don't think anybody advocated that throwings knifes are good as a primary weapon, but more of a distraction that can cause some damage, once you lost your main weapon, so you can throw the knife & either attack with something else or just make a run for it
Deer are substantially more durable than people, it might take time for someone to bleed out when shot through the heart, but they aren't moving about. Whereas a deer can get it's leg ripped off on a fence and run away like nothing happened, terrible comparison.
@@antonius.martinus Or you could carry another, good weapon as your backup weapon and use it in an effective manner. Like a proper dagger for example, or a short sword even, or a small firearm if we're talking modern day combat (which soldiers already do, they carry pistols as a sidearm).
Also, the whole scenario of losing the primary weapon is extremely unrealistic. 9/10 times it would spell immediate death since if opponent sees you do something like drop your sword on the ground, you're going to get rushed and killed immediately. As Shad said, you won't even have the time to throw a knife as a distraction an run. Don't lose your primary weapon... and if you do, use a backup weapon that's actually effective at it's job.
@@RiskOfBaer
Ok, lets say that the shaft in your polearm breaks, so you take out your sword wich you end up dropping for whatever reason or is not effective against the armor that the opponent is wearing, would you rather a) take out your dagger and try to fight someone who still has its main weapon, or b) have another short range weapon that you could throw to run away? I mean, I guess you could throw your dagger, but at that point you would be losing a more valuable tool, than just a cheap piece of weighted metal to throw. Also, why would you stay still while someone is charging at you, you can still move around.
Life is not video games, deer aren't humans, and you can "prove" pretty much anything by cherrypicking your scenario.
43:00 back in the day the Mythbuster's did a thing on "bringing a knife to a gun fight" and it was surprising how far apart they had to be for the gun to be successfully drawn.
I still burst out laughing at their first attempt, where Jamie trips in the middle of his lunge.
Can you draw a sword faster than you can draw a gun?
Can you run faster than you can throw?
To be fait tho, it was with a gun that needed to be cocked and the security removed manually.
If they tried with a gun that had a bullet already in the chamber and just a grip safety it would have been better.
@@dearcastiel4667 A firearm is generally not kept in condition 1 though. You shouldn’t have a round chambered or the safety off until you intend to fire
@@supernova719 what?