Weapon and Multiple Attacker Defense

[Sapper6]

Name some you've trained at that didn't...

Most do, but as has been said, recognize that in those situations, it doesn't matter what you got, you're odds suck.

odds suck, so it doesn't matter?

you guys can argue all day long about the facets of BJJ until you're blue in the face. like it or not, phil is correct. BJJ has nothing against multiple attackers. weapons, some.

BJJ's emphasis is the ground. that's what makes it different than traditional jujitsu and other manipulation systems. do some research.

i'd be more than happy to name several in missouri.

 

[MardiGras Bandit]

In an attack by multiple people you are likely looking at a beating, especially if you can't escape. In that case the only thing that is going to protect you is knowing how to fight, and BJJ schools do an excellent job teaching this. The focus on takedowns involves dodging and blocking strikes, and stoping others from taking you down. The ground work will give you the best odds of not getting your head stomped if you are put on the floor and of getting up while protecting yourself. The conditioning BJJ gives will help keep your body working when it most needs to.

Saying BJJ has nothing to do with multiple attackers is like saying boxing has nothing to do with multiple attackers. Boxers don't train to take on four guys at once, but they can certainly use their training to protect themselves against them. The fact that BJJ schools don't roleplay multiple attacker scenarios does not diminish the value of the art in that situation.

 

[Andrew Green]

odds suck, so it doesn't matter?

If self-defence is your goal, then it matters. Still, best admit the truth up front. If there is more then one you are in big trouble.

you guys can argue all day long about the facets of BJJ until you're blue in the face. like it or not, phil is correct. BJJ has nothing against multiple attackers. weapons, some.

Many schools propably ignore it, grappling is also not restricted to BJJ.

BJJ's emphasis is the ground. that's what makes it different than traditional jujitsu and other manipulation systems. do some research.

No, what makes it different from traditional jujitsu is it's emphasis on sparring and fighting, which leads to more groundwork. Chicken and the egg thing maybe, but it is a important difference.

 

[Don Roley]

In an attack by multiple people you are likely looking at a beating, especially if you can't escape. In that case the only thing that is going to protect you is knowing how to fight,

Or learning how to run. Learning not to spend so much time on one person that you leave yourself open to being blindsided by another.

Or you could learn some sort of weapon to even the odds. Pepper spray works on crowds very well. How many schools deal with this idea?

There is more than one way to skin a chicken. And to declare than no one can deal with a problem and thus you should ignore it just seems defeatist to me.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Or learning how to run. Learning not to spend so much time on one person that you leave yourself open to being blindsided by another.

Or you could learn some sort of weapon to even the odds. Pepper spray works on crowds very well. How many schools deal with this idea?

There is more than one way to skin a chicken. And to declare than no one can deal with a problem and thus you should ignore it just seems defeatist to me.

Yes, if one trains with improvised weapons, and also sometimes in street clothes including winter jackets and gloves, one learns that there are limitations, and that is not adding in wet grass or snow or etcetera.

 

[RoninPimp]

Yes, if one trains with improvised weapons, and also sometimes in street clothes including winter jackets and gloves, one learns that there are limitations, and that is not adding in wet grass or snow or etcetera.

-This is a benefit of training in the various grappling styles. The judogi imitates street clothing to an extent. Small MMA gloves restrict grabbing to an extent too.

 

[Echsos]

I'd just like to point out that no art can really defend against weapons and multiple attackers, really. People train and develop techniques to defend against knife attacks but the downfall lies in the fact that the way they simulate the situation in class is nothing like that on the street. The knife attacks are usually done one at a time and precise while on the streets a knife slashes will be more erratic and spontaneous. The best defense against a knife, I'd have to say, is to find a chair or some other improvised weapon of some sort and fight with that.
As for multiple attackers, let's face it, no one can win against multiple attackers. Not Fedor Emelianenko, not Bruce Lee, not Mas Oyama. When the opponents are lunging at you from different directions and all at once then you're pretty much ****ed no matter what. The only 'art' that can save you then would be a combination of 'Track and Field" and "Cross Country".

 

[Selfcritical]

Name some.

Silat is primarily a grappling style focued on takedowns and groundwork, along with submission and breaks. Weapon defense is taught from day one.

Sambo is a submission wrestling style somewhat similar to BJJ. Devloped originally for control and detainment of prisoners, defense against improvised blades is a highly focused element.

The Straight Blast gym is a competition-oriented martial arts gym whose STAB program has been extremely well recieved in bladed weapon defense.

As a kali and silat practicioner, I have a hard time thinking of an unarmed bladed weapon defense that doesn't fall into one of two categories

1) step off the line of attack
2)control the attacking arm

the second one is grappling, and one would expect people with a lot of expierience in clinch range to be better at it than someone who isn't.


This is not to say that some schools reccomended techniques aren't worse than others....royce gracies weapon defenses in his book are fairly poor....but I think the SBGi has demonstrated pretty well that it's the guys with previous expierience in the clinch range who praticed with high levels of resistance who will be best able to APPLY the proper defense technique once it's been shown to them.

 

[Don Roley]

I'd just like to point out that no art can really defend against weapons and multiple attackers, really.

Yet some people have done well against exactly that. Strange thing. Of course, if you are thinking of making someone submit then trying to deal with multiple folks is a bit beyond anyone I know. But defending is not the same as defeating. I know folks who have survived multiple attackers and against knives.

Contrast that with the case I was recently made aware of. Some guy I know started a job as a bouncer. He found out why there was an opening. The previous guy had taken someone to the ground and got so wrapped up in dealing with the guy that some vicious piece of filth walked over and started kicking him. He was not a friend of the guy, he was just a piece of scum that went looking for someone to beat up and had worn steel toed shoes for the occasion.

Now, maybe the guy could not have put two folks in a submission hold, but he could have done things so he could have reacted to the other guy and jumped away. I do not know the details, but I have been shown holds that take a few seconds to disengage out of. Those are the types of things that I avoid since someone might be willing to jump in on the dance.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

I'd just like to point out that no art can really defend against weapons and multiple attackers, really. People train and develop techniques to defend against knife attacks but the downfall lies in the fact that the way they simulate the situation in class is nothing like that on the street. The knife attacks are usually done one at a time and precise while on the streets a knife slashes will be more erratic and spontaneous. The best defense against a knife, I'd have to say, is to find a chair or some other improvised weapon of some sort and fight with that.
As for multiple attackers, let's face it, no one can win against multiple attackers. Not Fedor Emelianenko, not Bruce Lee, not Mas Oyama. When the opponents are lunging at you from different directions and all at once then you're pretty much ****ed no matter what. The only 'art' that can save you then would be a combination of 'Track and Field" and "Cross Country".

I think it would be more accurate to say that, under those circumstances, the odds are against you. I had a friend that I've know since high school who had his car break down in a very, very bad area. A group of young men decided to take the opportunity to beat him up or worse simply because he's Korean. He was able to keep himself from being taken down or knocked out. A couple of things about him - one, he had been a semi-professional body-builder and was very well built with an extremely high pain tolerance, and secondly, he had been a black belt in the older, non-sport style of Tae Kwon Do and had years of very hardcore training. He did end up in the hospital, as did two of his attackers. However, if he had not had training and an excellent physical shape along with great strength, he probably would have been maimed or killed. Would I have survived the same situation? No, I don't think so. Part of his survival was based upon simple, brute strength and the fact that he had grown up as a young orphan in a pretty rough orphanage in Korea before being adopted by American Missionaries.

 

[MJS]

I'd just like to point out that no art can really defend against weapons and multiple attackers, really. People train and develop techniques to defend against knife attacks but the downfall lies in the fact that the way they simulate the situation in class is nothing like that on the street. The knife attacks are usually done one at a time and precise while on the streets a knife slashes will be more erratic and spontaneous. The best defense against a knife, I'd have to say, is to find a chair or some other improvised weapon of some sort and fight with that.
As for multiple attackers, let's face it, no one can win against multiple attackers. Not Fedor Emelianenko, not Bruce Lee, not Mas Oyama. When the opponents are lunging at you from different directions and all at once then you're pretty much ****ed no matter what. The only 'art' that can save you then would be a combination of 'Track and Field" and "Cross Country".

IMHO, I think that this is a pretty broad assumption. The majority of this is going to come down to how someone trains. Unless you've seen how everyone in the world trains, its not a good example to say what you've said above.

I started this thread to talk specifically about BJJ, regarding their use of weapons and multiple attackers. For the sake of the discussion, lets try to stay with this particular art.

Mike

 

[liuseongsystem]

arts that traditionally claim to provide defense against multiple armed attackers stereotypically stress two cardinal points, mobility and throwing technique. strikes are unreliable because a punch or kick only hits one person, and it may not debilitate them. in the mean time, you get attacked by the other opponent's.

a successful throw will neutralize the opponent, at least for as long as it takes him to get back to his feet. if he is injured he may be slowed significantly, or not get up at all.

mobility is key because a moving target is harder to hit and if you stop moving everyone will hone in on you and no can block or parry multiple incoming punches, and kicks, much less grasping or grabbing attacks.

mobility and throwing are tied together for multiples defense as you must throw one man into the path of the others, hopefully knocking down one or more of the others in the process.

most multiples training i have seen is not true multiples, it is sequential. everyone takes turns coming from different angles. they might come in very quickly with little interval, but there are gaps in the 'multiple' attack

true multiples training is when you are attacked by everyone simoultaneously. and , theoretically, four opponents is the optimal number to train against. any more and they get in each others way to a certain extent. each person gets one 'quadrant' of you to strike at.

you need to take hold of one the attacker and change places with him by using a standup throwing/grappling technique, hopefully achieveing some measure of a domino effect. then you must immediately followup on any advantage you may have gained.

imo, any art that advocates going to the ground in a multiples scenario is giving very bad advice. notwithstanding guard, the time is takes to go down and come back up again is far too long to evade an additional attackers. chances are you would never get back up to your feet in time.

theorectically speaking of course...

thanx.

 

[MardiGras Bandit]

Just to set the record straight:

No one in BJJ advocates going to the ground if fighting multiple people.

Yes, BJJ is a groundfighting art. Yes, people train for takedowns and pull guard. But no one is out there claiming that taking a fight to the ground in a multiple attacker situation is a good idea. The first thing most BJJ people say when talking about multiple attackers is the first thing everyone says; run away.

But if you can't run away, the skills BJJ teaches are the best set of unarmed tactics you could have to fall back on; takedown work, strike defense, and ground work. It's not the only option, but it is at least the equal of anything else.

 

[Selfcritical]

Just to set the record straight:

No one in BJJ advocates going to the ground if fighting multiple people.

Yes, BJJ is a groundfighting art. Yes, people train for takedowns and pull guard. But no one is out there claiming that taking a fight to the ground in a multiple attacker situation is a good idea. The first thing most BJJ people say when talking about multiple attackers is the first thing everyone says; run away.

But if you can't run away, the skills BJJ teaches are the best set of unarmed tactics you could have to fall back on; takedown work, strike defense, and ground work. It's not the only option, but it is at least the equal of anything else.

To defend a multiple attack scenario, almost no martial art will approach the effectiveness of attributes developed in american football or rugby.

 

[Don Roley]

No one in BJJ advocates going to the ground if fighting multiple people.

Yes, BJJ is a groundfighting art. Yes, people train for takedowns and pull guard. But no one is out there claiming that taking a fight to the ground in a multiple attacker situation is a good idea.

The problem is that it is not as clear cut as looking at a situation with multiple guys coming at you and making a choice. As in the example I gave, there is always a chance that someone joining the dance.

And if you can't run, your best bet is to not get tied down with one person but to keep moving.

arts that traditionally claim to provide defense against multiple armed attackers stereotypically stress two cardinal points, mobility and throwing technique. strikes are unreliable because a punch or kick only hits one person, and it may not debilitate them. in the mean time, you get attacked by the other opponent's.

Huh???? :uhyeah:

And during the time you are setting up a throw the other guys can't hit you.:idunno:

Trips, pushing a guy to the ground and into others, now that is something I can agree with.

 

[RoninPimp]

The problem is that it is not as clear cut as looking at a situation with multiple guys coming at you and making a choice. As in the example I gave, there is always a chance that someone joining the dance.

And if you can't run, your best bet is to not get tied down with one person but to keep moving.



Huh???? :uhyeah:

And during the time you are setting up a throw the other guys can't hit you.:idunno:

Trips, pushing a guy to the ground and into others, now that is something I can agree with.

-He can try. Hopefully you would have a good clinch game to shut down his strikes. And as far as I've learned over the years, trips are a type of throw.

 

[RoninPimp]

To defend a multiple attack scenario, almost no martial art will approach the effectiveness of attributes developed in american football or rugby.

-I agree with this. Team contact sports = team martial arts imo. It also helps to be 6'8" and 300lbs of muscle, which unfortunately, I am not.

 

[liuseongsystem]

'Trips, pushing a guy to the ground and into others, now that is something I can agree with.'

perhaps i should have been more clear, i am not referencing o goshi or hip technique, but rather 'trips', as you state.

in particular i was think of tenchi-nage style movements.

with trips.

standard silat.

peace.

 

[bujuts]

I'd just like to point out that no art can really defend against weapons and multiple attackers, really.

This would Sir, this would imply you have a good understanding of "all" systems enough to make this statement. I'm guessing this is not really the case?

People train and develop techniques to defend against knife attacks but the downfall lies in the fact that the way they simulate the situation in class is nothing like that on the street. The knife attacks are usually done one at a time and precise while on the streets a knife slashes will be more erratic and spontaneous.

True, some do train this way, and its a shame when they feel it makes them safe in reality. Again, you are making statements about training you have not witnessed. 10th Group Special Forces, as only ONE example, trains a system that is rich in just that - multiple assailants with weapons. They have to. I've laid hands with those boys, they don't play around, their intent in a confrontation is the real deal, and they don't let their comrades walk away with something that will not work. So, yes, its multiple weapons at the same time, against big fast dudes who all kick **** in their own right (cage fighters, boxers, kickboxers, spec ops, and the general steel jawed drill seargent types, you name it). And yes, the system does work. One thing is emphasized, though - stay on your feet. The ground is not a good place to be when people want to kill you.

The best defense against a knife, I'd have to say, is to find a chair or some other improvised weapon of some sort and fight with that.

Give me a knife against a chair any time. I'll may take a lump on my arms on the way in, but there'd not be a second swing.

As for multiple attackers, let's face it, no one can win against multiple attackers. Not Fedor Emelianenko, not Bruce Lee, not Mas Oyama. When the opponents are lunging at you from different directions and all at once then you're pretty much ****ed no matter what. The only 'art' that can save you then would be a combination of 'Track and Field" and "Cross Country".

Only in the movies would someone attempt to stand in the middle of an enclosing circle. Again, you jut haven't seen what all is out there. I encourage you to keep looking.

This has been a good topic, I'm interested to hear more. Thanks in advance,

Steven

 

[RoninPimp]

This would Sir, this would imply you have a good understanding of "all" systems enough to make this statement. I'm guessing this is not really the case?



True, some do train this way, and its a shame when they feel it makes them safe in reality. Again, you are making statements about training you have not witnessed. 10th Group Special Forces, as only ONE example, trains a system that is rich in just that - multiple assailants with weapons. They have to. I've laid hands with those boys, they don't play around, their intent in a confrontation is the real deal, and they don't let their comrades walk away with something that will not work. So, yes, its multiple weapons at the same time, against big fast dudes who all kick **** in their own right (cage fighters, boxers, kickboxers, spec ops, and the general steel jawed drill seargent types, you name it). And yes, the system does work. One thing is emphasized, though - stay on your feet. The ground is not a good place to be when people want to kill you.



Give me a knife against a chair any time. I'll may take a lump on my arms on the way in, but there'd not be a second swing.



Only in the movies would someone attempt to stand in the middle of an enclosing circle. Again, you jut haven't seen what all is out there. I encourage you to keep looking.

This has been a good topic, I'm interested to hear more. Thanks in advance,

Steven

-So what are these magical techniques that allow people to take on multiple armed opponents empty handed? Sounds like BS to me.