This thread might possibly save your life.

"The usage of “Zero Point Pressure”. Instead of using brute force Kali always seeks the zone where there is less or no danger. This is achieved by the sychronization of footwork, hand and eye coordination, and timing. If there is a hole Kali will find it, if there is a lock Kali will pick it, if there is a blockade, Kali will go around it."

Or to put it another way, Timing beats speed, precision beats power.

 

Many thanks for comment - I still do not know what "zero point pressure" is or what how it is used against a Knife.

 

Ill let Hannibal reply properly, but from the quote, and it's context it looks like a concept of using footwork to move to the outside flank of an attacker to avoid the other arm and reduce their attacking options. I've only inferred that though, so it may be wrong.

 

Sure

It refers to the outside line on a person where they cannot launch another attack without moving or re-chambering so is a window for opportunity...akin to circling left from an orthodox boxer

 

In knife terms its where your best / safest chance to counter lies

 

Do you mean circling away from the power side/ circling right (orthodox vs orthodox) or have I got my left and rights mixed up again?

 

No I am not concentrating! Doh!

Yesof course it's circling right....against a southpaw It would be left

 

Cool, I was assuming you may of meant classic jkd/southpaw vs orthodox anyhow!

 

Many thanks for the clarification. Many systems make use of this strategy of positioning yourself in a position relative to the attacker that makes it harder for the attacker to bring an attack to bear. I suggest that we might all agree that this is a valid strategy as part of defence against a knife.

What in your opinion are the practical differences between doing this against an unarmed attacker and against an attacker armed with a knife?

 

There's far less room for error, you can take a grazing punch, crash to clinch and fight to an outside line unarmed, vs a sharp implement they're more likely to cut you on entry, they'll be seeking the clinch, and then prolonged hand fighting means your getting stabbed, but as that's where it all happens, you definitely need to develop skills in that range that cross over.

Interestingly this thread has made me restart running/sprint training, distance being a very good method of self defence, plus cardiovascular disease is a bigger killer then knife attacks.

 

While the armor and brick wall suggestions were silly, in some sense so are these knife defense threads. If you’re military or LEO, you might face a knife attacker, but you will also be armed. If you are living in a part of the world where this is a possibility, then you should really walk around armed yourself. A stick, if nothing else. I just don’t like the chances of facing a weapon with no weapon on my part. And having led a peaceful life for 60 years, I think any knife defense training would have been a waste of training time.

But if you were going to train, you should do so with that electic shock knife. Because that will properly stimulate your fear response and also show you the tremendous likelihood of getting cut.

 

I think this is a pretty relevent video vs a random knife attack.

Edit obviously the medical and law issues are relevant to the US more then anywhere else.

 

Would any citations from military manuals be fitting in this thread? Asking prior because it may take up some space.

(PDF's of military manuals i should say, second opinion is open from anyone who may possess or have read them who know their copy is legit)

 

A MCMAP manual with a relevent after action report would be better.

AFAIK they're the only publically accessible, data driven programme out there.

 

I dont think they have a after action report attached, these are what the pages claim they are virtual copies of:
US Marine Corps Close Combat Training Manual MCRP 3-02B

U.S. Army FM 3-25.150 Combatives


I did have a amsuing conversation about bayonet fighting with someone and they basically said if somone has a bayonet and charges him in close combat hes dead. Or something to that effect, i dont recall it that well. Thats a paraphrase of someones opinion to be clear.

Left the names in supplement of citations while i read them better.

 

No you would have to look for the after action reports on their website.


Standard mcmap and combatatives tactics vs a knife is to arm yourself, or escape, or crash to clinch, They have quite a lot of material on understanding the clinch vs sharp objects, and how to bring your weapons to bear during the clinch.

Solid stuff once you have a stand up, clinch and ground game already.

 

Do you mean like this: Hand-to-Hand Combat and the Use of Combatives Skills: An Analysis of United States Army Post-Combat Surveys from 2004-2008 (PDF Download Available)

 

That looks like a statistical analysis of the after action reports, so maybe even better, quanatatively, I'll have to read it to see if qualatatively it's still good.

But obviously context etc do differ from a civilian situation,

 

Sounds accurate, however it must be noted that in civilian life the context, and equipment people carry differs, which may well influence the results.

"Abstract
Despite technological advances, hand-to-hand combat remains a persistent aspect of the contemporary operating environment (Wojadkowski, 2007). To develop a more detailed understanding on the use of hand-to-hand combat, the researcher analyzed 30 Post-Combat Surveys administered to US Army Soldiers from 2004 to 2008 after their return from deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. 216 out of 1,226 Soldiers (19.0%) reported using hand-to-hand combat skills in at least one encounter. The Soldiers’ descriptions indicated that hand-to-hand combat occurred in a variety of tactical situations and that the most common skills employed were grappling techniques (72.6%), followed by the use of weapons (e.g., rifle butt strikes; 21.9%); with striking as the least reported skill (i.e., punching and kicking; 5.5%). These results further reinforce that hand-to-hand combat remains a relevant demand and the US Army should continue such training with an emphasis on grappling skills practiced across a variety of performance settings"

Hand-to-Hand Combat and the Use of Combatives Skills: An Analysis of United States Army Post-Combat Surveys from 2004-2008 (PDF Download Available). Available from: Hand-to-Hand Combat and the Use of Combatives Skills: An Analysis of United States Army Post-Combat Surveys from 2004-2008 (PDF Download Available) [accessed Oct 31 2017].

 

I saw you cite a website and didnt understand what website you were citing, could you eliborate on that for me? That was just the first thing i googled and used as a example on what i should look for.

thanks for the response.