Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 172

Thread: Multiple attackers

  1. #1

    Multiple attackers

    Ive been coming to this forum for years.. believe it or not.. i stoped for a while.. something i experienced i wanted to share with everybody.. alot of people say if your up against more then 1 attacker that it is almost impossible to actually defend yourself.. (well you get this mostly from bjj people) and some people laugh at the kung fu instructors who say people attack 1 at a time.. so its easy to defend yourself.. Now from my expereince they are not Entirely wrong.. what i think some of them mean is that attackers do not rush you at the same exact time.. they have to be at least 1 second apart and when your fighting 1 second is alot.. normly they wait until one of there friends starts the attack.. then they all join in.. but they dont all run in at the same exact milli second.. they are at least a couple of seconds behind.. (well unless they are maybe a group of martialartist that have practiced and have certain singles for them to all attack at the same exact time..) from what ive experienced they dont all attack at the same exact time.. and some of them who are closer to you obviously would reach you faster.. so taking in mind distance and unexperienced fighters whos cordination would have to give you at least 1 second difference in attacks.. They dont actually all attack at the same time.. But im sure there are cases when they all do.. but how often can this be?

    - Nature fist

    One thing i also forget to add that when conferonted with multiple attackers one should keep all of them infront of you.. eg. dont let anyone get behind you..(i know its obvious but i felt like i had to add that)
    Last edited by Nature Fist; 03-04-2002 at 10:54 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Kansas City, KS
    Posts
    6,515
    Its common in initial attacks by the dregs
    that one goes for the body and one for the legs.
    All at the same time.


    Sorry to rhyme.

  3. #3
    ok.. but this has to be prementated.. to do something like that.. i mean in reality its impossible for there timing to be exact i mean exact and a martialartist well should expect this and try to handle the situation acordingly.. i mean im not saying that im a super hero.. what im trying to say that.. its not impossible.. for you to defend on multiple attackers..


    - Nature Fist

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    6,190
    You're right. It's not impossible.

    However, when presented with multiple attackers, the goal changes to:

    1. Neutralize initial attack
    2. Make a hole, in some fashion.
    3. Leave.

    You don't beat somebody up, you don't stop to worry about if you've disabled the initial attacker long enough for you to run. You simply defend, create space, exit.

  5. #5
    I remember quite distinctly in my school yard days, that if a group of us wanted to take somebody out we'd do in what we called a "rush". Everybody would mob the guy, bring him to the ground, and then we'd stomp him.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Warrenville Il
    Posts
    1,912
    With fighting in general IMHO its about being proactive, about being the first to make a move, even more so with multiple assailants, if you wait for your assailants to make the first move, they will be be control, you will be reactive, when they attack it will not be one at a time, each in a cartoon succession but more than not all of them at once, leaving you very little chance to fight back.

    To me, the best answer is a pre-emptive strike, every second you delay could mean one more opponent, hit first, create a tactical opening and leave.

    This is always of course after the you have tired to deseclate the situation with verbal judo.

    My two cents.
    Regards

  7. #7
    of course i know this when fighting multiple attackers you do not use long techniques etc.. infact my instructor always told me you have to be very deadly.. to make sure the person would not get up.. even if you have to break each and every one of there necks.. etc.. i guess bottom line is you have to use quick and deadly get to the point techniques.. now it is true i feel to strike first.. sometimes is better.. espacialy when one or 2 of them are very close while the rest are a little ****her behind.. but people say they attack at once.. they may attack at once.. but you have to remmeber some of the attackers might be closer then the others.. hence they would reach to you faster.. meaning they wont reach and attack you all at the same time..

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Warrenville Il
    Posts
    1,912
    What is your point if I may ask, as I am confused?

    No matter how a person looks at it, multiple attackers are bad business, how close a attacker is does not matter so much as the rest will bum rush you within fractions of a second, if the attackers are not close then you should get the hell out of there!

    If they are close that means business and whoever is closer you hit first and hit hard, attack being the best means of defence, after getting in your pre-emptive strike, if possible, try to find an opening and haul ass, otherwise you hit everything that moves, you scream and let the beast out.

    Keep your target zones simple, throat, eyes, balls, knees, if someone is near you, grab there face and bite there nose off, that will psyche the others out.
    Last edited by Black Jack; 03-04-2002 at 12:16 PM.
    Regards

  9. #9
    ok how come f4rther was stared out?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    land o' sam
    Posts
    4,638
    fårt is a naughty word and the software's filters don't like it in any form. except mine.

    HEY!

    i guess that means my fårts don't stink!

    better tell my roommates.
    " i wonder how many people take their post bone marrow transplant antibiotics with amberbock" -- GDA

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    166
    Do any other schools practice sparring against multiple opponents?

    That is one of the best things about my school. We do group sparring of all types (2 on 1, 3 on 2, 10 on 1, etc.) Not only does it help to prepare you against multiple attackers, it helps you to learn to work together with others in attacking a single or groups of opponents.

    In the real world, it is rarely one on one. Most people won't pick a fight with you unless they feel they have the advantage. Either they think they can fight better or they have friends to back them up. Usually the latter.
    Got Lineage?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Playa Jobos, Puerto Rico
    Posts
    4,838
    You're not from the ghetto are you?

    I've seen people hopelessly beaten to a pulp by groups as large as 15 and in combos as small as 2. Poeple are smarter then you are giving them credit for.

    However, I have faced off with 5 guys (my younger brother and friend yielding behind obviously not looking to get involved). What I did: I picked up a big rock on the beach, these were "locals" who did not want us surfing there.

    This is what I said:

    "You don't fu(king know me. I'm not some little beach bit(H, I'll Fu(king crack one of you real good with this. You want to fight us 5 on three, no problem.

    But I know where you live (motioning to one guy I did not know where he lived but he knew I knew someone that knew him, so it was possible) and I'll be back with my boys from Newark tommorow."

    They laughed, as if the whole thing was a local joke and walked away. They were standing above us on a pier, they were throwing rocks at us in the water.

    If they would have attacked I don't know what would have happened. I wasn't feeling threatened for some reason.

    Get out of it any way you can. I feel I could fight two drunks, or punks. Not two decent martial artists similary sized. Not yet at least.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    land o' sam
    Posts
    4,638
    on a more serious note, two questions dealing with this:

    1. do YOU (each of you) change your attitude and go even earlier if you have more than one potential threat? no a guaranteed threat, but a couple of chumps checking you out and giving you crap? do you personally feel that, due to the greater potential threat, that you're justified in starting things aggressively? please explain why and give examples, if just hypothetical.

    2. does the LAW view potential victims of multiple attackers as being more justified with going earlier, given the greater potential threat?

    basically, for each of these questions, the situation is that you have a couple chumps/gangbangers/etc. who are either looking to start sh!t, roll you or just make themselves feel bigger and harass any random person on the street. the problem is, you don't know which, and you naturally feel a greater threat. now, do you respond to this greater threat and react earlier than you would had it been just one person?
    " i wonder how many people take their post bone marrow transplant antibiotics with amberbock" -- GDA

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Warrenville Il
    Posts
    1,912
    Its best to judge everything situation by situation, use whatever you can to get out without resorting to violence, but when you know these efforts will not work, you should react fast and first.

    1. No, pre-emptive is pre-emptive, it all has to be done by feel, its just safer to be proactive than reactive.

    2. On a personal note, I could give two flying figs as to what the law thinks, the law is not there to protect me, they are only good for that after the fact, to clean up the mess, so to speak.

    I will deal with the law side of the battle after I walk out, something which I may not of been able to do if I had waited for them to start kicking the **** out of me.
    Regards

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Playa Jobos, Puerto Rico
    Posts
    4,838
    Rubthebuddha: About two months ago I had a pretty large juice head put a heavy hand on me at a club for reasons I won't go into.

    He was larger then me, and shirtless, showing off his muscles, and placed his hand only shoulder and squeezed. Whiel dancing, I flung my left arm out and my knuckled caught the underside of his bicep (sting! ouch). He removed his hand rather quickly and stepped back to the edge of the dance floor. I noticed 2 or 3 friends, they were also built like him.

    They didn't speak. I kept dancing. I was wearing dress shoes (****!). He came again, and I saw him this time. As he reched for the grab the chest conversation I got to his outside and had both of my arms over his reaching left hand. I had perfect control at that point and could have jarred his chin with a rising palm. I didn't. The situation didn't call for it and his friends did not go unnoticed, or my dress shoes.

    I said in his ear (loud music): "Is that your girl?" Not waiting for an answer I continued, "Then why don't you dance with her."

    He stepped back again. I held my ground for a minute or two, just out of pride (I'm still young) and then found another corner to chill at.

    This is 100% true, as the scenario mentioned above. This one was handled more calmly, the other I was foaming from the mouth practically filled with rage. The rock, and the need to display an animal quality, I guess moved me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •