# Taking the back on the street



## trevorama (Aug 31, 2006)

Is there any advantage to taking the back on the street from a standup position? 

In MMA this is a superior position because you can throw/pull your opponent to the ground. But in a street fight, where you don't necessarily want to go to the ground, are there any advantages to being in this position (i.e. standing up behind your opponent, head against your opponent's back, arms wrapped around your opponent's waist)?

If you find yourself in this position on the street, what's the best move?


----------



## searcher (Aug 31, 2006)

I would say that it depends on the surface that you are on.   If it is some nasty rough gravel I try to avoid it, but most of the time I prefer to not go to the ground on the street.   It just seems like ther eare to many unknowns to get tied up with somebody on the ground.   JMHO.


----------



## trevorama (Aug 31, 2006)

searcher said:
			
		

> I would say that it depends on the surface that you are on.   If it is some nasty rough gravel I try to avoid it, but most of the time I prefer to not go to the ground on the street.   It just seems like ther eare to many unknowns to get tied up with somebody on the ground.   JMHO.


I agree with you Jon. That's exactly my point -- you don't want to take it to the ground. But what happens if you find yourself in this position behind your opponent (for whatever reason)? What do you do next? Do you just push him away or can you utilize this position to your advantage?


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Aug 31, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> Is there any advantage to taking the back on the street from a standup position?
> 
> In MMA this is a superior position because you can throw/pull your opponent to the ground. But in a street fight, where you don't necessarily want to go to the ground, are there any advantages to being in this position (i.e. standing up behind your opponent, head against your opponent's back, arms wrapped around your opponent's waist)?
> 
> If you find yourself in this position on the street, what's the best move?


 
The same rules apply standing or on the ground here.  Being behind someone is a good place to be.  But the whole "rear bear hug" or "hooks in" part is something I wouldn't consider advisable if you don't want to go to the ground.  Think about it.  Your standing on your two feet so two weapons are used and your holding him with your two hands so the other two weapons are used.  So what can you do from here that doesn't involve (A) going to the ground or (B) removing one or both of your hands?  I advocate getting behind them and then i*mmediately* destroying the base with a hard kick or sweep to limit their mobility and possibly drop them.  Then put the hands to work if necessary...


----------



## John Brewer (Aug 31, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> The same rules apply standing or on the ground here.  Being behind someone is a good place to be.  But the whole "rear bear hug" or "hooks in" part is something I wouldn't consider advisable if you don't want to go to the ground.  Think about it.  Your standing on your two feet so two weapons are used and your holding him with your two hands so the other two weapons are used.  So what can you do from here that doesn't involve (A) going to the ground or (B) removing one or both of your hands?  I advocate getting behind them and then i*mmediately* destroying the base with a hard kick or sweep to limit their mobility and possibly drop them.  Then put the hands to work if necessary...


That's what I'm talking about! Why tie yourself up? Use the opponents position against him. I really love the sweeps. There are so many positions you can work them from. If you go to the ground what about his friends? Puts them in a great position to beat your head in.


----------



## trevorama (Aug 31, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:
			
		

> I advocate getting behind them and then i*mmediately* destroying the base with a hard kick or sweep to limit their mobility and possibly drop them. Then put the hands to work if necessary...


 
I really like this approach -- as far as destroying the base. But what about defending against a possible rear elbow or backfist from your opponent. You would need to tie up their arm(s) while delivering the leg kick/sweep wouldn't you?

What about this approach?... Say you've ducked under the person's right arm and have moved around to their back. With your right arm you underhook their right arm, and with your left arm you palm strike them on the left side of their face, then hook their nose or jaw and crank it to the left, while instep kicking behind their left knee. 

Sound good? Anything better?


----------



## zDom (Aug 31, 2006)

I don't honestly know what I would do (we can tell ourselves we do, but adrenaline and circumstances often elicit unexpected actions) -- but here is what I've trained to do in thousands of repetitions as part of our curriculum, so either is likely -- you fight like you train:

a) punch to the neck just below the edge of the skull

It would have to be a very serious situation to do this. It could cause longterm problems for the recipient.

b) stomp the back of the knee while pulling backward and down on the shoulder to throw them to their back, kneel on their chest and punch them in the philtrim or another target of opportunity on their head.

Better option as you could throw them hard or not so hard, depending on the situation. Can also opt not to punch them as followup.


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Aug 31, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> I really like this approach -- as far as destroying the base. But what about defending against a possible rear elbow or backfist from your opponent. You would need to tie up their arm(s) while delivering the leg kick/sweep wouldn't you?
> 
> What about this approach?... Say you've ducked under the person's right arm and have moved around to their back. With your right arm you underhook their right arm, and with your left arm you palm strike them on the left side of their face, then hook their nose or jaw and crank it to the left, while instep kicking behind their left knee.
> 
> Sound good? Anything better?


 
Sounds good to me.  My point is that the hands should either be in a guarding postion or they should be doing something ACTIVE, like what you described. Just hugging him for position is preparatory to something else (usually a takedown in this instance).  When you're grappling you can slow things down a bit and afford to hug to improve postion.  When standing things are more dynamic and them hands need to be working


----------



## tradrockrat (Aug 31, 2006)

Holy schmoly!

This is exactly what I want to have happen.  If I can get behind the guy I have effectivly cut him off from most of his weapons and defenses.  If I find myself behind a guy I look for one of two things usually - a solid punch to the base of the head / neck or a snaping kick to the grion / anus.  After that I would look for an entry to the head to take him down hard without going down with him.  This is of course just a sample of what I might do - it would depend on the situation.  I might just go with a cross over side kick to the lower back to knock him away from me - you never know... so many options


----------



## Adept (Sep 1, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> What about this approach?... Say you've ducked under the person's right arm and have moved around to their back. With your right arm you underhook their right arm, and with your left arm you palm strike them on the left side of their face, then hook their nose or jaw and crank it to the left, while instep kicking behind their left knee.
> 
> Sound good? Anything better?



I'd put my right arm under their chin, put my left elbow on their left shoulder, grab my left bicep with my right hand and put my left hand on the back of their head. Then squeeze/twist/snap/push as appropriate to choke them out and control their movement.

With regards to the initial post, where you find yourself with your head pressed against someones back and your arms around their waste, it depends on sizes. Against someone I can heave around, I'd attempt to pick them up and drop them on their side/head, followed by stomps and kicks to keep them down. Against someone larger, I might try and slip up their body for a choke or some other form of head control, or just push them forwards and follow up with strikes as they present themselves.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 1, 2006)

It is simply a great place to be.  If you are behind someone then their options are limited while you have quite a few different things that you can do.  If I can get there then I definately would, after that well it would depend on what my opponent is doing and the situation.  

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


----------



## SFC JeffJ (Sep 1, 2006)

It's a great place to strike from as well as being a wonderful place for throws or standing grappling.  Being behind someone gives you a plethora of targets.  In the kenpo jitstu I study, we spend a lot of time working on how to get there and it's come in handy for me in the past.


----------



## MJS (Sep 1, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> Is there any advantage to taking the back on the street from a standup position?
> 
> In MMA this is a superior position because you can throw/pull your opponent to the ground. But in a street fight, where you don't necessarily want to go to the ground, are there any advantages to being in this position (i.e. standing up behind your opponent, head against your opponent's back, arms wrapped around your opponent's waist)?
> 
> If you find yourself in this position on the street, what's the best move?


 
Theres a ton of stuff you can do from this position while you're standing.  Of course, keep in mind that they're not going to be standing still, so you have to keep active.  A few options:

Knees and stomps to the legs and instep of the foot.

Throw the person to the ground and escape.

Use the environment around you.  Slamming them into a wall, car, etc., and then following up with some strikes.

Work your way up to the neck and go for a choke.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Sep 1, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> I really like this approach -- as far as destroying the base. But what about defending against a possible rear elbow or backfist from your opponent. You would need to tie up their arm(s) while delivering the leg kick/sweep wouldn't you?


 
If the base is destroyed properly, they should be so far off balance (bent back) that any of the possible strikes they may throw would have little to no effect on you.



> What about this approach?... Say you've ducked under the person's right arm and have moved around to their back. With your right arm you underhook their right arm, and with your left arm you palm strike them on the left side of their face, then hook their nose or jaw and crank it to the left, while instep kicking behind their left knee.
> 
> Sound good? Anything better?


 
Sure, that is a possibility!   If you didn't want to duck under the punch, think along the lines of parrying the punch with your left, as your right arm shoots up around their neck.  You now have them in a pretty good choke.  This is along the same lines as applying from the guard position, only difference is that you're standing.

Mike


----------



## Jimi (Sep 1, 2006)

I agree with everyones statements about being in position behind someone is a great place to work from. What I would absolutely not do , is go to the ground with him trying to apply a rear naked choke UFC style. LOL. If I can help it, I'd stay off the ground, especialy in an alley (Broken Bottles, Crack Pipes, Needles you name it- could make it costly for you) as well as in a bar (Broken Bottles, Glasses, Eating Utensils Ect...). Never wrestle/grapple in a junkyard. When you take the trash to the curb, you don't throw yourself out with it do you? (Right Tradrockrat?) LOL. I used to bounce in a few clubs in DC and have seen UGLY things happen to people on the ground. One club I worked in had it's entrance from a backalley between 19th & 20th and L & M St.s From the club floor to the alley surface, the ground was very hazardous. We all worked to get the assassins point of view on someone we needed to take outside. We even used to kinda frisk them to check for any possible weapons that may have slipped by us on the door while we escorted them to the alley. We were lucky that we had an off duty DC K-9 Cop moonlighting as security. PEACE


----------



## trevorama (Sep 1, 2006)

Thanks to everyone for all the great suggestions! 

Some random thoughts/comments...



			
				zDom said:
			
		

> a) punch to the neck just below the edge of the skull
> 
> It would have to be a very serious situation to do this. It could cause longterm problems for the recipient.
> 
> b) stomp the back of the knee while pulling backward and down on the shoulder to throw them to their back, kneel on their chest and punch them in the philtrim or another target of opportunity on their head.


 
I like the concept of a punch to soft part at the base of the skull. In a live situation though, with an uncooperative opponent, it seems to me that that type of accuracy may be difficult to achieve. Maybe an elbow to that approximate area instead?

Oh and "Philtrim" is my new favourite word! 



			
				Adept said:
			
		

> I'd put my right arm under their chin, put my left elbow on their left shoulder, grab my left bicep with my right hand and put my left hand on the back of their head. Then squeeze/twist/snap/push as appropriate to choke them out and control their movement.
> 
> With regards to the initial post, where you find yourself with your head pressed against someones back and your arms around their waste, it depends on sizes. Against someone I can heave around, I'd attempt to pick them up and drop them on their side/head, followed by stomps and kicks to keep them down.


 
The rear naked choke you describe is a great option. My only problem with it though is that it takes a while to work and leaves you exposed to attacks from behind.

I like the idea of being able to pick someone up from this position and throw them -- without going to the ground with them. But what are the chances that you wouldn't end up on the ground with them? Perhaps throwing them into a wall, car, etc. (like what MJS - Mike indicated) would be a better solution (if available), as it doesn't require the same amount of full body commitment on your part. 

Mike I also like your idea of a standing arm triangle -- it's very effective -- especially when your left arm can rest on your opponent's eyes. But sometimes muscle memory kicks in and I've already scooted around back of my opponent, so I'm more interested in a decisive move from this position.



			
				JeffJ said:
			
		

> It's a great place to strike from as well as being a wonderful place for throws or standing grappling. Being behind someone gives you a plethora of targets. In the kenpo jitstu I study, we spend a lot of time working on how to get there and it's come in handy for me in the past.


 
Brian R. VanCise also said basically the same thing and was equally vague. I would love to hear more about the plethora of targets?

The difficulty I've found with training for targeting sensitive areas from the back, is that you have to give up the control position (i.e. tight grip around your opponent) to give yourself enough distance for the strikes to be effective. That's why destroying the base, rear-naked choke, shoulder pull, head crank, throw into wall, etc. seem to me to be the way to go. Otherwise, if you release your opponent to give yourself space, won't he immediately start spinning around to face you -- rendering your shots less effective?


----------



## tradrockrat (Sep 1, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> What about this approach?... Say you've ducked under the person's right arm and have moved around to their back. With your right arm you underhook their right arm, and with your left arm you palm strike them on the left side of their face, then hook their nose or jaw and crank it to the left, while instep kicking behind their left knee.
> 
> Sound good? Anything better?



We've got two really good entries from this position in the Python style.

On one you shoot your right arm under the opponents right arm and wrap it around the head / neck as you hip check (step right behind opponents leg) and toss the opponent to the ground.  You go with him and use the triangular choke to control the opponent.  A great disarm / takedown if you are with friends / coworkers - pretty stupid if you're by yourself.


In the other version you enter across the chin above the opponents right arm, wrap the head / chin area and hip check and throw while remaining standing.  It snaps the neck and ends the fight.

EDIT:  who you calling trash, Jimi?!?!  LOL


----------



## zDom (Sep 1, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> In a live situation though, with an uncooperative opponent, it seems to me that that type of accuracy may be difficult to achieve. Maybe an elbow to that approximate area instead?



That's the benefit of repetitious training of specific techniques (TMA) and stand-up sparring: you develop accuracy with moving, uncooperative targets.

Why do you think an elbow is more accurate than a punch?

If it is a technique you personally are more comfortable with, it may be true for you, but generally speaking, a punch is just as accurate as an elbow.

Here's another one we do, but one I wouldn't break out unless it were truly, without a doubt a life-or-death situation:

Wrap arm around neck, similar to setting up rear naked choke, pull and lift while thrusting forward with hips to swing their feet off of the ground.

Then, step back and pull down and inward with the arm -- likely to break their neck.

Wish I had a video of this technique -- not sure I'm describing it well enough.


----------



## trevorama (Sep 1, 2006)

zDom said:
			
		

> Why do you think an elbow is more accurate than a punch?
> 
> If it is a technique you personally are more comfortable with, it may be true for you, but generally speaking, a punch is just as accurate as an elbow.


 
Scott, I actually believe that a punch is more accurate than an elbow. I just think that in a situation where you have an uncooperative opponent, in conjunction with stress, close range, etc., the less accurate elbow leaves more room for error, as it's a longer weapon. Know what I mean? Maybe you're right though -- I'll conduct some tests.



			
				zDom said:
			
		

> Wrap arm around neck, similar to setting up rear naked choke, pull and lift while thrusting forward with hips to swing their feet off of the ground.
> 
> Then, step back and pull down and inward with the arm -- likely to break their neck.
> 
> Wish I had a video of this technique -- not sure I'm describing it well enough.


 
This one sounds pretty effective (and similar to tradrockrat's nice move above). I think I understand your technique, but are you facing the same direction as your adversary, or do you turn your hips in and thrust in a backward direction? I'm going to have to try this one out (very carefully) with some training partners and then report back to you.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 1, 2006)

Oh boy I hate to be considered vague,

Where do we start.  If I get your back on the street and want to strike I can strike at some of the following plethora of targets :
Back of Head
Back of Neck
Spine (all the way from the neck on down)
Kidneys (ever seen someone dropped from a kidney shot it happens like lightning)
Underneath Buttocks to Groin
Back of Thigh
Knees 
Calf 
Ankles etc. (remember most people probably have a tool, at least I do.  Oh and I would definately break their balance and base before I started striking. (if I could that is)

Okay all of these places can be targeted emptyhanded but since I am a tool based person if I have someones back then I am going to be using a tool to amplify a strike. (like a stick, knife, force amplifier)

So those are just some of the areas that could be striked and that does not include if you decide to bend the guy over backwards, or strike from the side, etc. (lots of targets)

Then we are simply into maybe just taking the guy down by locking up a leg from the side or blowing out his knee from the back.  What about a rear double leg takedown or a single leg takedown using forearm or shoulder.  There are more ways to get them down from here. (that is for sure)

Never forget though the simply and genuinely nice way of a standing or prostrate rear naked choke. (that would be my preferred method, just putting them to sleep:rofl

I have used this technique more than once from behind to handcuff someone:  Forearm across Throat and opponents arm behind their back to break their balance with my foot then going to the back of their knee to bring them backwards and down.  Roll them on their belly and begin the handcuffing procedure. (very effective)

Bottom line if you can break their balance you can then do multple things like control, takedown, strike.  Lots of options if you do it right!

The list from behind is a lot longer than this and your opponent is in a very vulnerable position because he/she cannot see you or what you are going to do. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  Your big tools are ready to go and the opponent is vulnerable.  So if you can be behind them good for you!

I hope this is a little less vague and a little more helpful.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 1, 2006)

Yes, it is still a great position.

You got some potentially fight ending throws available, you can strikem he can't.  You have some standing submissions if the guy is untrained.  If you can pin him into a wall you got even more control.

It does take practice to be able to hold though, without that guys will just turn into you as soon as you try and strike.  But being behind someone in a fight is almost always to your advantage and leaves them very few viable options.


----------



## Jimi (Sep 1, 2006)

Hey Brian, I like the kidney shot, it can cause the back to arch and the chin to rise some,offering the throat to a strike or choke. I like it, I like it. Hey  Tradrockrat, like I haven't been called trash before growing up behind TIC TOC Liquors in Langley Park. TIC TOC you don't need a clock to know what time it is! LOL.  BTW Tradrockrat, the Python ain't nothin' but the Boa Constrictor, LOL! PEACE


----------



## Adept (Sep 2, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> The rear naked choke you describe is a great option. My only problem with it though is that it takes a while to work and leaves you exposed to attacks from behind.



Depends on how well you sink it in. In my experience, if you put it on properly and crank it on hard, they will be unconscious in perhaps four seconds.



> I like the idea of being able to pick someone up from this position and throw them -- without going to the ground with them. But what are the chances that you wouldn't end up on the ground with them?



Depends on how big you are, and how big they are. I'm a reasonably stocky guy, and not too tall (5'10" 220lbs) so I feel comfortable heaving around a tall skinny guy. Against someone approaching my own size or bigger, it's not an option.

 Perhaps throwing them into a wall, car, etc. (like what MJS - Mike indicated) would be a better solution (if available), as it doesn't require the same amount of full body commitment on your part. 

Mike I also like your idea of a standing arm triangle -- it's very effective -- especially when your left arm can rest on your opponent's eyes. But sometimes muscle memory kicks in and I've already scooted around back of my opponent, so I'm more interested in a decisive move from this position.



Brian R. VanCise also said basically the same thing and was equally vague. I would love to hear more about the plethora of targets?

The difficulty I've found with training for targeting sensitive areas from the back, is that you have to give up the control position (i.e. tight grip around your opponent) to give yourself enough distance for the strikes to be effective. That's why destroying the base, rear-naked choke, shoulder pull, head crank, throw into wall, etc. seem to me to be the way to go. Otherwise, if you release your opponent to give yourself space, won't he immediately start spinning around to face you -- rendering your shots less effective?[/quote]


----------



## MJS (Sep 2, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> Mike I also like your idea of a standing arm triangle -- it's very effective -- especially when your left arm can rest on your opponent's eyes. But sometimes muscle memory kicks in and I've already scooted around back of my opponent, so I'm more interested in a decisive move from this position.


 
Yes, chances are, we're going to be reacting to whats presented to us at the moment.  That being said, I think that everyone here has provided a large amount of info. to work with. 

Great suggestions everyone!!:ultracool 

Mike


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 2, 2006)

Sometimes you do not have to give up total control to strike.
Take this for instance.  If I am behind someone and they have
hair I could grab the back of their hair and yank backwards which'
will off balance them and leave them vulnerable for a second or two to strike.  Another instance is if I am behind them I can reach around to their face and slap my hand over their face so that I can use a finger
on their nose to again bend them backwards.  Once agin breaking their
balance.  Another option would be to have my forearm go across their throat and the other one grabbing the opposite side bicep and pull on the arm/thoat while I push my chest into them then I could strike their knee using a stomp kick and either take them down forward or pull them back.  They would be on their knees anyways and I could then strike while they are vulnerable.  Just some thoughts.


----------



## zDom (Sep 2, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> I think I understand your technique, but are you facing the same direction as your adversary, or do you turn your hips in and thrust in a backward direction? I'm going to have to try this one out (very carefully) with some training partners and then report back to you.



Still facing same direction, so thrusting forward with hips.

The way we train it actually starts from in front, facing them, then we transition to behind them, left arm holding their right arm behind their back, our right arm around their neck.

As there really isn't a way to safely practice the full technique full speed, we usually just launch them as high as we can and then let them drop back to their feet.

In the "real" version, by stepping back, means they land (hard!) on their butt or back.

Please be careful with this if you play around with it. I really wish I could get a video clip to show you how we safely practice it.


----------



## trevorama (Sep 2, 2006)

Wow guys, some awesome responses! I really think I have a good feel for what would be effective from this position now. Thank you all for your posts.

Some random comments...



			
				Brian R. VanCise said:
			
		

> Oh boy I hate to be considered vague,
> [snip...]
> What about a rear double leg takedown or a single leg takedown using forearm or shoulder.
> [snip...]
> ...


 
Definitely -- thank you! Breaking the balance is obviously key, then you have your pick of targets, especially if you still have control with one arm. 

I'm very intrigued by the thought of a double leg or single leg takedown from behind. I think that's brilliant! For some reason that never occurred to me. I'm definitely going to practice some variations on that theme.



			
				Andrew Green said:
			
		

> If you can pin him into a wall you got even more control.


 
Another great addition -- use a wall, not just as a target to throw your opponent into, but as a device to help corner and control them!



			
				Adept said:
			
		

> [Re: Rear-Naked Choke]
> Depends on how well you sink it in. In my experience, if you put it on properly and crank it on hard, they will be unconscious in perhaps four seconds.


 
You're right. And it's a great control technique to arch your opponent back, bring them to the ground etc.



			
				Brian R. VanCise said:
			
		

> Another instance is if I am behind them I can reach around to their face and slap my hand over their face so that I can use a fingeron their nose to again bend them backwards. Once agin breaking their balance.


 
OKay, now you're just copying me!  



			
				zDom said:
			
		

> Still facing same direction, so thrusting forward with hips.
> 
> The way we train it actually starts from in front, facing them, then we transition to behind them, left arm holding their right arm behind their back, our right arm around their neck.
> 
> As there really isn't a way to safely practice the full technique full speed, we usually just launch them as high as we can and then let them drop back to their feet.


 
Thank you for clarifying. I'm looking forward to practising this one (safely -- don't worry).


----------



## tradrockrat (Sep 2, 2006)

trevorama said:
			
		

> This one sounds pretty effective (and similar to tradrockrat's nice move above). I think I understand your technique, but are you facing the same direction as your adversary, or do you turn your hips in and thrust in a backward direction? I'm going to have to try this one out (very carefully) with some training partners and then report back to you.



Practice by going under the arm and going to the ground with your partner first - until you've got the hang of the check / lift - it's much safer to your training partner  

1. Dodge / slip right cross by steppping forward to the left with left foot.  you are now on a line with your opponent - actually to his side, not back.
2. Step into and across the back of your opponent with right foot.  This should put you in a great position to hip check.
3. Simultaneously with the step, shoot the right hand under the arm (or over to kill the poor sod) across the chin (should be a strong blow across the point of the chin to move the head)
4. Wrap the right arm around the head and lock it in  by grabbing your left arm with your right hand while pivoting  through the hip check and transfer your weight to the left foot - this should lift your opponent off the ground and throw him if you allow your weight to sink during the shift.
5.  go down to the ground with him as he falls and triangle your legs (spread them out) for better control and leverage.
6. Tighten the choke and tuck your head into your opponents head for a three point choke which isolates the right arm as well.

Important note - because you've isolated the arm inside the choke, it allows some wiggle room that a strong assailant can eventually escape if it's not perfect - which is why its simply a restraining move that you don't want to do if it's just you and you're unsure of the environment (does he have friends???  Are you good on the ground if he gets out???)

If you go above the arm, stay standing and skip steps 5 and 6 

I don't usually think it's a good idea to "teach" over the internet.  Please don't make me regret it - be safe.



> BTW Tradrockrat, the Python ain't nothin' but the Boa Constrictor, LOL! PEACE


Tell that to Doc... :0


----------



## IWishToLearn (Oct 12, 2006)

Haven't heard this point of view mentioned yet - so let me be the one who throws the oil in teh water . How many times on the street is it a true one-on-one encounter? Where I come from (Rancho Cucamonga, CA and now Salinas, CA) it's almost always a one on one STARTING situation...until the dude who starts getting the short end of things' buddies realize they better jump in. Unless of course you happen to absolutely decimate the poor sap, that tends to make his buddies slightly more discretionary - or they just pull the guns out. I hate going to the ground (granted I haven't been in a street altercation since high school - that's actually why I started training) for that reason - you never know when his friends might jump in. I'd hate to be on the ground as a target of opportunity for multiple foot attacks hehe. *Foot hits head, head hits pavement. Ew.*


----------



## IWishToLearn (Oct 12, 2006)

I did however see one multi person fight where one of the attackers pulled a taser and things were going great until one of his buddies got thrown AT him...his reflex was to put his hands out to catch his buddy - and he completely forgot he had the taser in his hand until he zapped his friend. *Kerplunk* - cue stunned look - cue target of opportunity - cue incoming right hand he never saw - cue taser clattering out of his hand as he hit da ground. That one was funny.


----------



## searcher (Oct 12, 2006)

IWishToLearn said:


> Haven't heard this point of view mentioned yet - so let me be the one who throws the oil in teh water . How many times on the street is it a true one-on-one encounter? Where I come from (Rancho Cucamonga, CA and now Salinas, CA) it's almost always a one on one STARTING situation...until the dude who starts getting the short end of things' buddies realize they better jump in. Unless of course you happen to absolutely decimate the poor sap, that tends to make his buddies slightly more discretionary - or they just pull the guns out. I hate going to the ground (granted I haven't been in a street altercation since high school - that's actually why I started training) for that reason - you never know when his friends might jump in. I'd hate to be on the ground as a target of opportunity for multiple foot attacks hehe. *Foot hits head, head hits pavement. Ew.*


 

The point you bring up on the one to one is true alot of the time.   If it is multiples I back into a corner or a flat wall to cover my own back.   Most MAists don't care for this approach since it leave no escape route, but it is better than getting blind-sided.   If you assume that it is going to be a one on one then you are living in a dreamworld.

Multiples is the reasoning behind my use of "nastier" techniques and higher levels of brutality.   But that is another thread for another day.


----------



## IWishToLearn (Oct 12, 2006)

searcher said:


> Multiples is the reasoning behind my use of "nastier" techniques and higher levels of brutality. But that is another thread for another day.


Aww


----------

