MMA...Multiple Attackers

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Kind of like this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...039138&q=fight

Reply]
This is not a Multiple attacker senario at all. This is a SINGLE attacker going after bystanders with no real fight in them by an athlete who so far out classes his multiple victims that it isn't even funny.

[1bad65]

Reason being I do not believe it has merit outside of the ring. Outside of the ring, they are no problem at all.

So what is the best art for 'the street'? I bet guys like Liddell and Couture would get killed by a 'street fighter' like yourself. Get real.

Hell I can just shoot you as you step out of your car. WTF is the big deal.

Hope you enjoy prison. Don't drop the soap.

Most MMA practioners will say that their training is far more realistic. So to me MMA is nothing but a ring SPORT, not real life fighting.

The best way to train for a fight is by practicing fighting. Again, what art is better for 'the street'?

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Again, what art is better for 'the street

Reply]
Good, Old Fashioned Kung Fu!

[Bruce W Sims]

So what is the best art for 'the street'? I bet guys like Liddell and Couture would get killed by a 'street fighter' like yourself. Get real.




Hope you enjoy prison. Don't drop the soap.




The best way to train for a fight is by practicing fighting. Again, what art is better for 'the street'?

Well, then, I'm a bit confused. Putting the gun to one side what is it we are about in training? For instance, how many times have people been in class and a teacher states that such-and-such a move is intended to "blind" a person, break a joint, or dislocate a shoulder. These are some pretty serious and debilitating actions, right? Well, if you are not going to actually USE the material that you are training in out of fear of moral or legal reprisals what's the point of the training?

In Hapkido we do a lot of training regarding low kicks, strikes to the kidneys and bladder as well as strikes to the neck. The implications are pretty strong. Am I hearing now that such things are just "martial theatre" because when its time to use such methods people are afraid of going to jail? As I write this I am recalling the old adage about not drawing a gun unless one is willing to use it. I wonder if the same can be said of MA training. Is it worth training unless one is will to "go all the way", as it were? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[1bad65]

Well, then, I'm a bit confused. Putting the gun to one side what is it we are about in training? For instance, how many times have people been in class and a teacher states that such-and-such a move is intended to "blind" a person, break a joint, or dislocate a shoulder. These are some pretty serious and debilitating actions, right? Well, if you are not going to actually USE the material that you are training in out of fear of moral or legal reprisals what's the point of the training?

This has been discussed before. Say someone pushes you and keeps moving at you. If you blind him, or rip off an ear, or land some sort of 'death hit' , you can be charged. You don't have a blank check just because you were assaulted. You will have alot less to worry about legally if you land a quick jab or take a guy down and control him than if you do any of these 'deadly' techniques.

And in all seriousness I really doubt the effectiveness of these 'deadly' techniques. I don't often see guys with eyepatches, or ears missing, or chunks of flesh bitten off, or their faces ripped up. Either these 'deadly' guys never fight or their tehniques don't work in practice. I say the latter, but what do I know, my art only works in a ring/cage.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

And in all seriousness I really doubt the effectiveness of these 'deadly' techniques. I don't often see guys with eyepatches, or ears missing, or chunks of flesh bitten off, or their faces ripped up. Either these 'deadly' guys never fight or their tehniques don't work in practice. I say the latter, but what do I know, my art only works in a ring/cage.

Reply]
Maybe not in a civillian setting, but go to a more savage area, like Iraq, and I bet you would see this type of stuff becasue you are free to do as you please, especially if you are an insurgent.

[1bad65]

Maybe not in a civillian setting, but go to a more savage area, like Iraq, and I bet you would see this type of stuff becasue you are free to do as you please, especially if you are an insurgent.

Strawman. We are discussing 'the street', not Iraq or military combat.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Eh, ok.

If we are discussing the street, best bet is to hos 'em down with pepper spray and run away.

[1bad65]

If we are discussing the street, best bet is to hos 'em down with pepper spray and run away.

For multiple attackers this makes perfect sense.

I still wonder why some people pay good money for MA training that promises to be able to defeat multiple attackers.

[Badger]

More than one get a gun..
if you have no gun well thats no fun,, you better run!

[xcakid]

So what is the best art for 'the street'?



The best way to train for a fight is by practicing fighting. Again, what art is better for 'the street'?

As I have posted before on this forum. No one art is better than the other. Street fights are dynamic and unpredictable. All it will do is give you a leg up on your typical brawler. What you do with that leg up will depend on the situation and the person fighting. You can have all the fight in you, but while you are doing a smack down on your opponent, his buddy come up behind you and stabs you, not much you can do is there? Anyone can be caught with a lucky shot. Anyone can be jumped and stabbed. Anyone can be a victim of gun violence.

Oh and I never claimed to be a streetfighter. I have been in a few street altercations. Mainly back in my partying days. I will never claim I have won each and everyone, not even on the internet. Been thrown in jail once for winning a fight in a bar though.

Those days are gone. I am now 39yo. My banging head days are over. If I ever get into an altercation these days, I will try to descalate the situation. If I can't I will shoot to stop the threat. Plain and simple. I only use martial arts to access my weapon. I have a good job and can afford a good lawyer. I also live in TX where we have the Castle Doctorine that now extends to ones person.

I practice to fight with a firearm, knife, baton, pepper spray and sprinting away while on the phone with 911.

I still wonder why some people pay good money for MA training that promises to be able to defeat multiple attackers.

Cause they believe in what they see on TV and the movies. And for the most part never been in a real fight.

[Shadow Skill]

Personaly I've never been jumped before, but I think sucessfully defend yourself is do able ... depending on the # of people you are up against, and how willing you are to " pull the trigger" and use some lethal techniques, and keep moving, changing you hight and angles using your opponents bodies to your advantage. like I said never done it just my thoughts.

[Bruce W Sims]

I'm sure that this issue has been covered before, and I apologize if I am sounding a bit dense, but, honestly, it sounds a bit oxy-moronic to use the sort of position I am hearing on this thread. Somebody correct me if I am misrepresenting the feelings here.

The thread started with a question about how to handle multiple attackers, yes?

OK. Work with me on this.

If I am facing multiple attackers, by definition I am at a diadvantage unless I can identify a multiplier or some sort for myself. That multiplier might be some extraordinary martial, skill a cold weapon such as a club or a hot weapon such as a pistol.

If I don't use the weapon I have I run the risk of being beaten, and quite possibly to death.

If I use the weapon I can be charged with "excessive force" of some sort.

Having said that, lets review the activity that we train in (IE. Martial Arts). There are a number of techniques which can maim or kill another human being. If we train hard enough, those skills may be ours and we can use them--- and be charged with excessive force. Or we can choose NOT to use them and attempt to defend ourselves using only power-based concussive techniques, which, at their best all of my assailants are going to use and have, most probably, no MA training.

SO...... Let me understand something here.

If the only sort of training and fighting skills that are allowed in the US are concussive techniques which is to say "non-lethal" techniques.

and

It is a given that attackers will acquire targets that they identify as unarmed, disadvantaged and isolated

what exactly am I understanding the people here to be about? Or is this just another one of those MMA "trollings" by another name? Because otherwise its seems that people are advocating that there is no method of dealing with multiple attackers unless that method assures compassion for the attackers which they, themselves would not show to me. Is this about right? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Asia]

I'm sure that this issue has been covered before, and I apologize if I am sounding a bit dense, but, honestly, it sounds a bit oxy-moronic to use the sort of position I am hearing on this thread. Somebody correct me if I am misrepresenting the feelings here.

The thread started with a question about how to handle multiple attackers, yes?

OK. Work with me on this.

If I am facing multiple attackers, by definition I am at a diadvantage unless I can identify a multiplier or some sort for myself. That multiplier might be some extraordinary martial, skill a cold weapon such as a club or a hot weapon such as a pistol.

If I don't use the weapon I have I run the risk of being beaten, and quite possibly to death.

If I use the weapon I can be charged with "excessive force" of some sort.

Having said that, lets review the activity that we train in (IE. Martial Arts). There are a number of techniques which can maim or kill another human being. If we train hard enough, those skills may be ours and we can use them--- and be charged with excessive force. Or we can choose NOT to use them and attempt to defend ourselves using only power-based concussive techniques, which, at their best all of my assailants are going to use and have, most probably, no MA training.

SO...... Let me understand something here.

If the only sort of training and fighting skills that are allowed in the US are concussive techniques which is to say "non-lethal" techniques.

and

It is a given that attackers will acquire targets that they identify as unarmed, disadvantaged and isolated

what exactly am I understanding the people here to be about? Or is this just another one of those MMA "trollings" by another name? Because otherwise its seems that people are advocating that there is no method of dealing with multiple attackers unless that method assures compassion for the attackers which they, themselves would not show to me. Is this about right? Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

The SMART pple on this thread are basicly saying that empty handed MA skill is not really going to be an advantage in a multiple attacker scenario. Best course of action is to get away or get a weapon. Both of which have their issues and don't really give you an advantage over them either it just makes it less disadvantageous.

The less smart pple think Aikido or Karate will give you an advantage over them. It won't.

A basic rule of thumb is if you can't beat one person you are not going to beat him when he has friends. Many idiots think that their art will magically bestow upon them skills to defeat a horde of attackers even though they get beat down by one guy consistently.

[golden arhat]

if what you mean by MMA are those in grappling, the answer is no, they cannot handle multiple attacker,

but strikers can.. wether karate, aikido,kungfu, muaythai.. no doubt

sigh


consider that aikido isnt a striking art
consider that alot kung fu guys cant strike properly or effectively
less so with karate but still alot dont know how to guard properly
muay thai is a great art but lacks grappling

what about when one attacker tackles you and his friends try to kick you in on the ground

surely wrestling is applicable then

sprawling ?

throwing ppl ?

take downs ?

bridging ? (not as in hung gar i mean bridging with your feat and back to get the attacker off you and back on your feet)

i fail to see how those dont apply in a mellee fight

and consider that most mmaists have better striking and kicking than most traditional so called "striking arts"

i'd say ur average mmaist can do just aswell or better as any of those arts