Cheap Shot

[shihansmurf]

Unless you're in a ring with a dude in a striped shirt enforcing the "rules" then there isn't any sort of cheap shot.

There is a lot of great input in this thread especially considering the consensual fight, legal ramifications from fighting, and social pressure(when and if if is present) in reference to the application of our skills in a self protection setting. Ultimately, I think that its better to use a "cheap shot" and be alive to face those reprecussions then "fight fair" and possible not.

I am past the point where I engage in fights as a matter of ego and pride(or I like to think I am), and aside from using force in the line of my profession as a soldier, any conflict in which I engage in violence is of the sort where my life, safety, or that of my family is at risk. Given that, I will do whatever I must in order to "win" the encounter.

In the ring its a game, albeit a rough one, and the rules should be adhered to.

Just my view,
Mark

 

[Touch Of Death]

I think there are Cheap Shots.
But they either have to;
A: Occur before any Fighting initiates, when the other Person is Unaware.
B: When the Nature of that Fight dictates that it would be 'Cheap'. For example, if You were fighting to assert Yourself over someone else (Especially common with <20 Year Olds), its more about proving that Youre better than them. Not that You can maim them. Thatll only make both Him and His Friends upset. But winning with baseline Striking, would communicate that Youre just better than He is.
C: A Strike delivered after the Fight has ended.

That said, if this is plain old 'some guy comes over and attacks you', of course there arent any cheap shots.

Who said the fight was over?
Sean

 

[Nomad]

If we look at the mutual fight, let me ask: do you think that those people will really adhere to those 'rules' of no cheap shots? IMHO, I'd think that due to ego, each person involved will want to do what they have to, to win, even if that means a cheap shot. As for other people joining in, again, IMHO, I think thats a very real possibility even if no cheap shots are being thrown.

No, I think that each person involved will make a choice, either consciously or subconsciously, to break or adhere to these "rules". In addition, the rules are not set in stone, or often verbalized, and will vary depending on the region, country, or culture involved. I was simply pointing out that there are indeed "rules", and that breaking them may have consequences beyond the immediate. Recognizing this is, IMHO, important.

I don't agree with this statement at all. The only time there are "cheap shots" even in heirarchy fights is when the crowd watching doesn't like the outcome. If it is the person they are rooting for and he kicks the other guy in the balls, that is fine. If the underdog does it, then it is dirty. There are no societal norms even in high school fights, that type of thinking will get you hurt. That might have been true at one time (look at all the old John Wayne movies) but not in today's culture.

Absolutely agree that the crowd can play a significant role in what's considered fair game and what's a cheap shot, and that they're as likely to judge afterwards as anyone involved in the altercation itself. I don't agree 100% that it always goes in favor of the person they're "rooting" for; I've seen before where the bystanders can turn on the person they wanted to win specifically because he "broke the rules" of the fight, or went too far in hurting the underdog. And yes, I've also seen the reverse, when someone who was severely disadvantaged in a fight (much smaller, less popular, etc) broke the rules to hurt the bully, and the crowd called foul because he used a "cheap shot". I think it can work in both directions.

 

[jks9199]

If we look at the mutual fight, let me ask: do you think that those people will really adhere to those 'rules' of no cheap shots? IMHO, I'd think that due to ego, each person involved will want to do what they have to, to win, even if that means a cheap shot. As for other people joining in, again, IMHO, I think thats a very real possibility even if no cheap shots are being thrown.

Predatory violence has no rules, in attack or defense. The predator will use any advantage available (whether that predator is a good guy like a cop or SWAT unit taking someone down, or a criminal) and the defender had better do the same to survive.

A monkey dance or status fight most definitely has rules. They're largely cultural, and violating them will cause problems. It can rob the victor of the status they hoped to gain -- or inspire what several people call an educational beatdown. Picture what would happen were a Brock Lesnar type to try to prove his status by beating up Betty White... If he's lucky, he'll get laughed at. Same thing if someone of reasonably comparable size doesn't play the monkey dance, and just immediately kicks the opponent in the crotch while they're at the chest bump stage.

An educational beatdown also has rules, in the amount of damage done, and in how it's received. Again, the rules vary from group to group -- but they're there. Violate them, whether by giving a beatdown you aren't entitled to deliver, or fighting back the wrong way, or crossing the limits on what's acceptable -- and the group sanctions you.

So -- do people really adhere to the "rules" of fights? Absolutely, in appropriate circumstances.

 

[Nomad]

Predatory violence has no rules, in attack or defense. The predator will use any advantage available (whether that predator is a good guy like a cop or SWAT unit taking someone down, or a criminal) and the defender had better do the same to survive.

A monkey dance or status fight most definitely has rules. They're largely cultural, and violating them will cause problems. It can rob the victor of the status they hoped to gain -- or inspire what several people call an educational beatdown. Picture what would happen were a Brock Lesnar type to try to prove his status by beating up Betty White... If he's lucky, he'll get laughed at. Same thing if someone of reasonably comparable size doesn't play the monkey dance, and just immediately kicks the opponent in the crotch while they're at the chest bump stage.

An educational beatdown also has rules, in the amount of damage done, and in how it's received. Again, the rules vary from group to group -- but they're there. Violate them, whether by giving a beatdown you aren't entitled to deliver, or fighting back the wrong way, or crossing the limits on what's acceptable -- and the group sanctions you.

So -- do people really adhere to the "rules" of fights? Absolutely, in appropriate circumstances.

I hate it when someone else says what I was trying to say more concisely and elegantly.

 

[Grenadier]

Even in a controlled setting, there are techniques that push the borders of what is and isn't allowed. It's when these particular techniques change the balance of the game, is when they're evaulated, and either affirmed as allowed, or disallowed.

In a self-defense situation? Survive the encounter first, using whatever your best means available to you. Shoot the bad guy, gouge out the eyes, stab 'em, throw whatever hazardous materials you have in your hand, etc.

After you survive, then we can discuss the merits of taking or not taking cheap shots. If someone thinks that I'll get upset at having a discussion about using my firearm to stop the bad guy, I'll simply be grateful that I'm alive to have such a discussion.

 

[Cyriacus]

Who said the fight was over?
Sean

Ive seen one or two fights where the victor more or less backs off after the loser is on the ground in pain. Its not entirely unfathomable that a fight doesnt need to end in battery

 

[MJS]

I think it depends - Not on who, but why, there is a Fight in the first place.
And we're assuming its One on One.

A Drunken Brawl for example, is more likely to descend into senseless Violence than an arguement where someones finger becomes a fist. That is to say, more likely. Nothing is certain, and I would NOT take the chance, Myself.

I wouldn't take the chance either. Drunken brawl, mutual idiots, or SD, way to unpredictable.

 

[MJS]

Absolutely agree that the crowd can play a significant role in what's considered fair game and what's a cheap shot, and that they're as likely to judge afterwards as anyone involved in the altercation itself. I don't agree 100% that it always goes in favor of the person they're "rooting" for; I've seen before where the bystanders can turn on the person they wanted to win specifically because he "broke the rules" of the fight, or went too far in hurting the underdog. And yes, I've also seen the reverse, when someone who was severely disadvantaged in a fight (much smaller, less popular, etc) broke the rules to hurt the bully, and the crowd called foul because he used a "cheap shot". I think it can work in both directions.

Speaking only for myself, I tend to avoid potential problem areas, ie: bars, clubs, etc, so those odds are lower for me. I try to avoid bad areas or town, but of course thats not always possible. So, IMO, the majority of situations I'm going to potentially find myself in, would be SD, in which case, I'm doing whatever I have to do, situation depending, to save my rear, and if that means a 'cheap shot' then so be it. But you're right....being aware of all of the ramifications is important.

 

[MJS]

Predatory violence has no rules, in attack or defense. The predator will use any advantage available (whether that predator is a good guy like a cop or SWAT unit taking someone down, or a criminal) and the defender had better do the same to survive.

A monkey dance or status fight most definitely has rules. They're largely cultural, and violating them will cause problems. It can rob the victor of the status they hoped to gain -- or inspire what several people call an educational beatdown. Picture what would happen were a Brock Lesnar type to try to prove his status by beating up Betty White... If he's lucky, he'll get laughed at. Same thing if someone of reasonably comparable size doesn't play the monkey dance, and just immediately kicks the opponent in the crotch while they're at the chest bump stage.

An educational beatdown also has rules, in the amount of damage done, and in how it's received. Again, the rules vary from group to group -- but they're there. Violate them, whether by giving a beatdown you aren't entitled to deliver, or fighting back the wrong way, or crossing the limits on what's acceptable -- and the group sanctions you.

So -- do people really adhere to the "rules" of fights? Absolutely, in appropriate circumstances.

Yes, I've read about those in Rorys book. Like I said, I don't engage in those, so like I said, in a SD situation, I'm not playing by the book, and IMO, anyone who does, is foolish. That cheap shot may just save your ***. I'd expect a woman to bite, scratch, pinch, gouge, spit, etc, a guy who was trying to rape her. Those things just may save her life.

 

[Josh Oakley]

If by "cheap" we mean "easy to pull off, with low cost" then sure! There are all kinds of cheap shots in SD! Also, ears are pretty easy to pull off...

 

[chinto]

well if sparring, ya you have rules. on the street you have one rule... SURVIVE!! AND WITH MINIMUM INJURY TO YOU!!! so no there is no such thing as a cheep shot.

 

[Cyriacus]

It occurs to Me that there is perhaps one serious flaw with using Cheap Shots in a Street Fight.

If its a Reputation Fuelled Fight, yeah, survive.
Problem is; Say You win by a Leg Kick. Now, everyones gonna be talking about how well Leg Kicks work, and suddenly Youve second handedly Trained Thugs.

 

[Josh Oakley]

It occurs to Me that there is perhaps one serious flaw with using Cheap Shots in a Street Fight.

If its a Reputation Fuelled Fight, yeah, survive.
Problem is; Say You win by a Leg Kick. Now, everyones gonna be talking about how well Leg Kicks work, and suddenly Youve second handedly Trained Thugs.

That's a reason I don't get into reputation fueled fights.

 

[Cyriacus]

That's a reason I don't get into reputation fueled fights.

Unfortunately, You dont always get to choose when someone things youve made them look less Superior.

 

[jks9199]

Sure you do. You just have to walk away. A status fight only happens if both players feel like they have something to lose; if you're willing to walk away, you have nothing to lose.

 

[Cyriacus]

Sure you do. You just have to walk away. A status fight only happens if both players feel like they have something to lose; if you're willing to walk away, you have nothing to lose.

So, if someone feels like Youve offended them in some ridiculous way in front of their friends, and suddenly they need to put You in Your place for daring to do so for their precious Reputation; And this can range from daring to look slightly anxious around them, daring to linger near them, etc etc etc; You walk away? And You seriously think Theyll just go, "Oh. Hes walking away. Oh well, back to hanging around doing whatever we do."

Im sorry, but I disagree.
Itd be nice if that did work, but Ive yet to see it. Ive seen it the way Im suggesting, however. Especially at School, but also once by a Publicans Years later.

 

[punisher73]

Ive seen one or two fights where the victor more or less backs off after the loser is on the ground in pain. Its not entirely unfathomable that a fight doesnt need to end in battery

I would check your state's statutes on the legal definition of "battery". In most places, "assault" is the threat of the violence and "battery" is the unwanted physical contact. So, if I tell someone "I'm gonna kick you butt" that is assault. If I walk up and push you, then that is battery. In Michigan, for one, they are combined as "Assault and Battery".

If I pull a knife on someone and threaten them, I don't actually have to cut/stab them or injure them in anyway to be charged with a Felonious Assault (called other things in other states). The threat is the assault.

 

[punisher73]

So, if someone feels like Youve offended them in some ridiculous way in front of their friends, and suddenly they need to put You in Your place for daring to do so for their precious Reputation; And this can range from daring to look slightly anxious around them, daring to linger near them, etc etc etc; You walk away? And You seriously think Theyll just go, "Oh. Hes walking away. Oh well, back to hanging around doing whatever we do."

Im sorry, but I disagree.
Itd be nice if that did work, but Ive yet to see it. Ive seen it the way Im suggesting, however. Especially at School, but also once by a Publicans Years later.

Unless you attempt to walk away and remove yourself how do you know? How willing are you to avoid the fight? If it is an "ego thing", what can you do to allow him to save face? Most people aren't really willing to do that. I know my instructor had a young 16 year old kid try to pick a fight with him while he was out raking leaves. He tried to talk the kid down, but knew it wasn't working, so he faked a heart attack and the kid took off running. Would you be able to do that? Are you willing to do that? I'm not judging or pointing a finger either, because honestly, I don't know if I could have that much control to do that all the time.

 

[Cyriacus]

Unless you attempt to walk away and remove yourself how do you know? How willing are you to avoid the fight? If it is an "ego thing", what can you do to allow him to save face? Most people aren't really willing to do that. I know my instructor had a young 16 year old kid try to pick a fight with him while he was out raking leaves. He tried to talk the kid down, but knew it wasn't working, so he faked a heart attack and the kid took off running. Would you be able to do that? Are you willing to do that? I'm not judging or pointing a finger either, because honestly, I don't know if I could have that much control to do that all the time.

Attempting to Walk Away is well and good, but it doesnt exactly put You in a good position. Of course, if can be avoided, avoid it. Circumvent it. But assuming You can always do that is perhaps assuming too much. But in any case, were not too far off the same conclusions. Im perhaps just more inclined towards being prepared to fight, rather than being prepared to avoid it whatever it takes.

I would check your state's statutes on the legal definition of "battery". In most places, "assault" is the threat of the violence and "battery" is the unwanted physical contact. So, if I tell someone "I'm gonna kick you butt" that is assault. If I walk up and push you, then that is battery. In Michigan, for one, they are combined as "Assault and Battery".

If I pull a knife on someone and threaten them, I don't actually have to cut/stab them or injure them in anyway to be charged with a Felonious Assault (called other things in other states). The threat is the assault.

I did mean Battery - In a Physical sense. I was more referring to battering someone more after they were down and out.