JerryLove

The nunchuck is an Okinawan improvisational weapon. Chinese styles (like Tiaji) pretty much universally use war weapons, not improvised weapons. Further, IME, Taiji doesn't have weapons forms.. it uses the same forms with and witout weapons. This is fortunate, considering most people spend years on a single form. I would be very suspicious of a nunchuck form in Taiji.

I believe Howard is 64. The youngest right now is 20.

Much of what you say can be established empircally as non-universal. Heck, I can think back readily to a case that did manage the news. A guy in Texas one halloween. He had a Japanese exchange student, in a costume, who did not speak English well and had gone ot the wrong house for a party. The man came out of his front door with a handgun and shot the confused 14-year-old in his front lawn, killing him. Let me reiterate. He shot a minor, who obviously did not speak English well, who had made no threats, who had not even made it to his front door. He did not spend a single night in jail, and was aquited by a jury. I'm also reminded of a pair of burglars doing home invasions in Kentucky. One night, the owner of the house they had decided to break into opened fire and killed one. When asked how he felt he responded "I feel bad that i didn't get them both". And youare confusing "jail" and "prison". Jail sucks, but does not have nearly the events you are implicating. BTW, I've already completed college and already own my on home. I'm not sure how I could therefore loose my chance to. If I end up in a fight, it's because I could not avoid it. If I kill someone, it's because I felt in fear for m life and was forced into confontation. I'd rather not end up spending years in court over it, but it's a possability. I have no idea who you are writing to. If they had a choice in the matter and chose to kill someone, they deserve to spend their life in prison. If they did not have a choice, then they did not have a choice... and your nay-saying is irrellevent.

It depends on the skills in question. I can walk into most any art and imitate what they are doing unless it's a physical issue (I can't do a 720 flying kick because I don't have the gymnastic skills). I see this is most advanced martial artists I interact with.

I'm not the integrator, so I'm not sure. It's taught by my instructor (Richard Clear) as part of the Silat cirriculum (he was learning and teaching Chinese martial arts long before he started in Sialt).

How much time does the IDF spend on CQB? How often does a clash between and IDF member and a Palestinian end up being a CQB fight? How does being desigend for a strong, healthy, young soldier, in gear, with friends make it a good art for everyone else? My exposure to KM is *very* limited; so, of course, this is said from more ignorance than I would lie; but what I've seen is decent for it's target goal (basic HTH fighting and agressiveness training for soldiers and police), while lacking the broader applicability or sophisticated efficacy of some other arts.

Really? I know quite a few people who have killed (mostly vets) without a "stifled and dark" life.

I have some material extracted from baji, but I've never seen it as an isolated art.

Dunno... I do all of my martial training in shoes. Depending on where I am working at the time, they can vary from sneakers to steel-toed engineer's boots.

And whatever you do, don't shoot them with a hunting crossbow. Apparently a "humane" way to kill an animal is so heanous that it qualifies for "aggrivated murder" (never thought that would be a real charge) in some states.

Even if your whole body was involved, it assumes liniar speed (speed ramps up and down), and ignore pushing from the ground.

You need to know how hard you hit. You will need something to measure that if you desire to put an objective quantity. There are insturments for this. For PSI, divide by striking surface. If you want to know if your hits will hurt, go play with people and start rampingup power till it hurts or you can't any more.

If you don't assume that, then you should call the thread "tactics against an inferior opponent"... in which case "anything you want". Don't be absurd, the question only makes sense given some parity of skill level.

And how would you accomplish that? The Boxer spends 100% of his time working his boxing game. How are you going to spend 100% of yor time working your boxing game and also 100% of your time working your kicking game? You will never be able to out perform a specialist at his speciality given the same amount of relative experience/skill... that's the point of specialization. It's because you have less experience / practice in a given amount of time, because your time is more divided.

When does your punch get "as strong as it can possibly get"? A boxer spends more time on his punching than most other arts. If at 6 months you can still improve your punches, a 6-month boxer has put more effort into punching and so should have a better punch. Next you'll tell me that if you can't out-grapple a BJJ player at his own game than your grappling is useless. Different arts have different strengths and weaknesses. A boxer's strenght is upright punching within a given range. If you stand there and play his game you are dumb. As to wheather you should study a range/weapon without being the best at it... tell me, would you rather fight a boxer with no grappling skills, or a boxer with some grappling skills who can, therefore, pound you from a clench? You don't have to be the best at something to make it worth studying.

The inside of the shoulder will hit the brachial artery (or is it the subclavian) and is a relatively quick bleed-out to death. The "Butt" contines a great deal that will not respond well to a knife thrust. There's all of the nerves controlling the legs and hips for example (good way to paralize someone)

Fighting Against Multiple Opponents Fighting multiple attackers is a situationtrational martial artist fears, and with good reason. As artists we train with a few basic ideas that make this particularly terrifying. In this article I will attempt to explain, in relatively generic terms, the assumptions we must make, and methods we must use to survive the multiple-attacker scenario. Assumptions Let's start with the assumptions made in general of martial situations and the ones we need to make in regards to this situation. The first assumption is in regards to the opponent's skill and ability. There is an old axiom in fighting to never assume that your opponent is inferior to yourself in fighting ability. This is typically a very good perspective, as it prevents you from acting from a position of overconfidence. The problem appears when you attempt to apply this logic to a multiple-attacker situation. As the old "could you defeat two of yourself" argument goes, the chance of prevailing against two or more opponents under that assumption is so low that many martial arts have chose to ignore that line of training all-together. That said, let's make some new paradigms. We don't know how good our opponent or opponents are; we shall assume from a tactic standpoint that they are as good or better as we are; this encourages us to only fight in situations where we would fight even if we knew we were going to loose. Since I think this is a good acid test for "should I fight or run", this works well. Though we have decided to train with that mentality, we recognize none-the-less that we, as martial artists, have devoted our time and sweat to becoming better fighters, and the reality is that our opponents on the street are likely to be less-capable fighters than we are. Therefore, it is quite possible to win the multiple-opponent situation. Further, since the fight has been forced, we have no real option but to try to win, so let's move on. The Setup So how do we accomplish it? Well, all situations and artists are unique. Let's get the obvious out of the way. Don't be there. That is, attempt escape or de-escalation from the moment you realize the danger. Start trying to position yourself near the exit, near the wall, near the bouncer, whatever from the beginning, even as you are trying to end the situation. I'll start with the assumption that this has failed and combat has started with you surrounded; if you start already at the outside, then you will have accomplished the first few steps anyway. Rule one of all fights, especially multiple-attacker fights, is "keep moving". Be in motion before the fight starts and don't stand still. When you stand still, that allows your opponents to choose to hit you on their terms and all at once, you will go down and you will loose. Rule two, you want to be able to see all of them. This means that you don't want to be in the "middle of the circle". You want to move to the outside of your opponents so that all of your opponents are in the smallest arc in-front of you that you can manage (a 360 degree circle is bad, all lined up in a 5 degree arc is good). How you will move from the inside to the outside will vary based on your art and situation. The first, easiest, way, is if there is an opening in their group that you can run through. If there is a wall (or better, an exit) there wonderful. A wall makes sure that they cannot get behind you again. Be wary, however of corners for they are mixed blessings, you limit your opponents to a 90 degree arc, but you are also immobile. (remember rule one) The Fight If there is not a hole already there for you, you are going to have to make one. There are a couple ways to do so, and your training will determine which you can use: you may be able to charge through someone close, or grapple and reverse position; the details of how any individual should best accomplish this is beyond the scope of this article. Once you have some sort of tenable position the fighting begins. You usually want to fight the most aggressive opponent; one good reason for this is he will be the closest to you (being the most aggressive) and therefore the most convenient target. It's important to keep moving (rule 1) and to make sure they don't get behind you again. I find that baiting attacks is useful for this; offer a target and withdraw it in order to lure your closest opponent into committing to an attack at your prompting. If someone gets in real close, beat them around and use them as a shield against the others; but if they manage to make a good-effort escape or someone gets past them, let go and move to the next guy; you don't want to let yourself get tied up with one person when another has moved into position (remember you need to remain mobile). Keep looking for that escape position, while you may exhaust all of your opponents, that's unlikely enough that you should be really using this as a tactic to escape. If that's really not possible, look to clutter the battlefield as much as possible, make them work to get to you, so you can have less to deal with at a single time. If there is no way to maneuver to escape, then you should look at relatively quick methods of removing opponents from the fight. What that is will vary based on available weapons and your skills and tactics. Mechanical disables (hyperextensions of knees and ankles), rendering unconscious or dead, and virtual disables (blinding) are all effective methods of removing someone from pursuit and effectively fighting you. If you disable one attacker then move, you are fighting that many less; disable enough and the fight is over.

Hrm... I think, if I just wanted to train a brawler out of one CMA, I'd probibly go for Xingyi... though there are several excelling fighting arts in the group.

I generally agree with what has already been said... though what you are describing is similar ot several single-leg takedowns, the fact that you are taking your face from upright, straight towards his knee, would invite a knee to your head. I can think of some ways to protect this, but it would seem simpler to push higher (hip or abdomen), then drop to the position you wnted on his leg once he starts the fall.

Firstly, I think it's a mistake to so limit your range/weapon combinations. You assume grappling range is on the ground, you assume you are safe from hand-attacks at kicking range (you are not), you seem to ignore that range-changes can occur simultaniously with movements. You also seem to make some assumptions about comprehensivenss when it comes to "combative". If I teach (for example) how to use a knife, even if that's all I teach, I've taught a (presmably) combative art. What I have not taught is a particularly comprehensive one. Look similarly at your a'fore-mentioned Infantry school. The CQB taught there is basic at best, as is the knife work. You were taught a great deal around your rifle, how much were you taught with a flexable weapon (like a billiard ball wrapped in a washcloth)? I think, to be a combative art, the art must contain material realistically focused on combat... though, quite frankly, I can think of several non-combative arts (martial sports) which make pretty good combative fighters. Jerry

I have Chas Clemets "Cane Combat for Cripples". It's "kinda common sense", but I like it.

I think you might be right... but I'm too lazy to look it up right now

Yes, though the only one of those that isn't simply a different anglicization of the Chinese (the great thing about standards is how many there are) is "Bauguazhang", which simply adds "zang" (also "chuan") which means (IIRC) "boxing".

I agree, I was establishing the principle, not the application... but this is the wrong thread.