Shorinryu Sensei Posted November 24, 2003 Posted November 24, 2003 TKD is an example of the worst approach to mutliple attackers I can think of. I've yet to see any with regard to relative position, focus on a long range, no real grappling skills, deliberately unbalanced techniques, etc. I thought I'd never see the day, but I have to agree with JerryLove on this. Or at least, from the numerous TKD black belts from various organizations I have seen anyway. You try to pull that spinning, jumping and high kicks one one person is questionable, but on multiple opponents..it's almost commiting suicide. The TKD classes I've seen (and I've seen a lot of them) put very little emphasis on much to do with the hands let alone grappling, take downs, etc. I hate to sound like I'm bashing TKD, but in this scenerio, then yes, I'd have to agree that TKD is a pretty poor art to chose when talking about fighting multiples. My nightly prayer..."Please, just let me win that PowerBall Jackpot just once. I'll prove to you that it won't change me!"
Reklats Posted November 24, 2003 Posted November 24, 2003 Pepper spray is some ninja magic that I can agree with. That stuff is nasty.
Treebranch Posted November 24, 2003 Posted November 24, 2003 Anything goes baby! "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Bdaze Posted November 25, 2003 Posted November 25, 2003 in my class sensei emphisizing using locks and manipluations so you can get an opponent into a "human sheild" position. for instance a blood choke from behind off of a punch can not only knock out your targeted opponent, but it will also make his buddy think twice about attmpting to punch at you and risk hitting his friend If in your journey you encounter God, God will be cut ~Hatori Hanso (sonny chiba)
Treebranch Posted November 26, 2003 Posted November 26, 2003 Exactly! "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Synaesthesia Posted November 28, 2003 Posted November 28, 2003 But you can't run and leave them behind.... You should at least study multiple attacker scenarios to have enough knowledge to get you the hell out of there. First of all, I agree that scenarios are important, and everybody involves should independently be trying to split and not freeze up. That being said I think that it is badly mistaken to rule out leaving sombody behind. It seems like a crappy thing to do, but perhaps getting the police/ambulance may be better than trying to escalate a fight you cannot win.
Treebranch Posted November 29, 2003 Posted November 29, 2003 Well if it's a loved one, I guess I'll tell them to run while I deal with them. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
SevenStar Posted November 29, 2003 Posted November 29, 2003 That's tactically a bad idea. Let's say you are fighting four attackers. you tell your loved one to run. 1. you are creating too much space between you and her. you can't protect her if she's not close to you. 2. since there are more of them than you, one of them can run after her and get her anyway. They will grab her while you are fighting the others. IMO, you should keep them close to you. As long as she is close, the attackers are close also, giving you a better chance of hitting them when they get close to her.
pmh1nic Posted November 29, 2003 Posted November 29, 2003 I think the advice linked to in JerryLove's first post is excellent. Keep moving, keep the attackers in front of you, use an attacker as a buffer and inflict as much pain as quickly as possible on the closest attacker. A lot of non-martial artist, having watched some guy take on ten attackers who nicely line up in single file or patiently wait while the first attacker is taken out before attacking, think that taking on 3 or 4 attackers should be a piece of cake. In reality you're most likely going to get swarmed. It probably helps to have studied an art that has an arsenal that includes not just distance but mid-range and infighting weapons as well. A couple of 28" escrima sticks my help also . "The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?" Benjamin Franklin
delta1 Posted November 30, 2003 Posted November 30, 2003 I'm interested in what everyone thinks would be the best martial art to face two or more attackers in a street fight. The real tricks are the art should remain mobile, have a real sense of position in relation to more than one attacker, and be able to deal with upright grappling; because you need to control your position relative to your attackers and it's pretty assured that if you are not grappling with one, you want to be. Agreed, and I'd add to Jerry's comments that you need a full arsenal of natural weapons and a solid grounding in self defense techniques. Also, the art you need should have a realistic potential for quickly destroying an opponent. I'm talking about killing, maiming, destroying joints, and every 'dirty' trick in the book. With all that in mind, I'd recomend American Kenpo.It's a reality based art, excellent for the 'street'. Extremely mobile, emphasizes relative positioning, a lot of stand up grappling, trains all natural weapons and all ranges, and is known for both its effective self defense techniques and its potential brutality and devastation. Freedom isn't free!
Recommended Posts