What if a blade failed in these test? does that make it a bad knife?
I can think of knives I have that might fail some of this. Making them thicker or bevels steeper doesn't necessarily make them better suited to what I need/want done.
Instead of looking at how a knife performs in oddball events like side wacking with a stick; how's about testing in things that knives really do? For instance a video of how to carve a divot rather than how to tear up a knife while making a divot in wood-just sayin( I know Im a dick)
what the heck am I saying-I have no idea how other people use knives or what they expect
Well, for starters, I know how to carve a divot. You would be amazed how many people make a divot just like in that video. Improper technique that can cause failure of the blade will always come back on the maker. So, as a maker, you have to consider that people will do that, and that your blade will survive the task.
As for your "side whacking with a stick" comment; a blade that is tempered properly should be springy, so that when it baton's a piece of wood, it flexes with the wood and doesn't snap in half. That was merely a demonstration of a good temper on the blade, and that blade will withstand a good wallop without issue.
If a blade failed these tests, it wouldn't be a very good knife. I wouldn't want to carry a knife that wasn't tempered properly.
If you bought a knife from me, and the first time you took it out it broke.. you wouldn't be very happy with me, would you? You would expect a knife that you paid a couple hundred dollars for to be able to do certain tasks, like baton. I know I expect every knife I buy to do at least that much without failing. The tip is a little extreme, but like I said, there are a LOT of people that do it that way.