What would you use in the streets

[ralphmcpherson]

I think others have kind of touched on this, but to me it's more about "what would your philosophy be on the street?" Along those lines I wonder...am I the only one that has ditched the "never throw the first punch" philosophy? I think that old adage goes along with the "never start a fight, but if you have to finish it". I'm really confident in my cool head and my ability to interpret the situation as it's happening and when a fight becomes immanent and just walking away is not a possibility, I don't see the point of letting the bad guy strike first and possibly incapacitating me or landing enough of a blow to basically ensure him the victory.

I read a good article in Black Belt magazine a few months ago that was titled "Get to the hit". Basically the premise was when you are backed into a corner and/or forced into a fight get to your best and most effective technique ASAP. The longer you posture, pose, dance around throwing a jab etc. the more time you give the bad guy to set up and land an effective and/or lucky shot.

Very good points there. I agree wholeheartedly about being the first one to strike. I imagine the odds on the first person striking being the winner would be unbackable. I would never start a fight and will always do whatever is necessary to avoid a fight but if it gets to a point where a fight is inevitable then I would much rather strike first and get the upper hand. I believe that by black belt you should know enough techs well enough to the point where if you go first you should win, a really powerful, fast kick to an unsuspecting opponent should win a fight instantly, so as long as you dont telegraph the fact that you are about to strike you should go a long way towards winning the fight.

 

[myusername]

Very good points there. I agree wholeheartedly about being the first one to strike. I imagine the odds on the first person striking being the winner would be unbackable. I would never start a fight and will always do whatever is necessary to avoid a fight but if it gets to a point where a fight is inevitable then I would much rather strike first and get the upper hand. I believe that by black belt you should know enough techs well enough to the point where if you go first you should win, a really powerful, fast kick to an unsuspecting opponent should win a fight instantly, so as long as you dont telegraph the fact that you are about to strike you should go a long way towards winning the fight.

Agree totally about pre-emptive striking being important in situations where violence has become inevitable. However, I would perhaps question whether a powerful fast kick would win a fight instantly in all situations. I believe that the difficulties with employing a kick in such a situation is that if a pre-emptive strike is indeed needed then it is highly likely that the attacker will be very much in our personal space and getting range for a kick may become difficult and require excessive movement to find range. A hand technique would likely be the more achievable option for pre-emptive striking.

Also, going back to my post on high percentage targets for finishing fights (airway, blood supply and conciousness) all of those targets are throat to head height. Throwing a kick with the aim of instantly winning requires kicking at head height. Potentially this may leave the defender vulnerable if this goes wrong.

If we are thinking of throwing a powerful kick to the ribs, stomach, groin or legs then be aware that a very determined attacker pumped up on adrenaline or pain numbing drugs could still fight on through that. I believe that these are all valid targets but should be used with the aim of opening up the more high percentage targets such windpipe, carotid artery, chin, jaw, temples, base of the skull. All more accesable by hand.

Therefore throwing a kick as a pre-emptive strike is all very well but it shouldn't (in my opinion) be thrown as a single strike but should be thrown at low targets as part of a combination to set up the striking of the primary "knockout" targets.

However, like I said in another thread I have met a few martial artists who can throw a kick faster than I can throw a right cross! You might be one of those people thus making my suggestions a little redundant in your case! But I think for the majority using a hand technique rather than a kicking technique is a much more achievable and safer option for pre-emptive striking.

I also suggest that when the decision to strike has been made to blitz the opponent with continous strikes until the threat is neutralised.

 

[Tez3]

Agree totally about pre-emptive striking being important in situations where violence has become inevitable. However, I would perhaps question whether a powerful fast kick would win a fight instantly in all situations. I believe that the difficulties with employing a kick in such a situation is that if a pre-emptive strike is indeed needed then it is highly likely that the attacker will be very much in our personal space and getting range for a kick may become difficult and require excessive movement to find range. A hand technique would likely be the more achievable option for pre-emptive striking.

Also, going back to my post on high percentage targets for finishing fights (airway, blood supply and conciousness) all of those targets are throat to head height. Throwing a kick with the aim of instantly winning requires kicking at head height. Potentially this may leave the defender vulnerable if this goes wrong.

If we are thinking of throwing a powerful kick to the ribs, stomach, groin or legs then be aware that a very determined attacker pumped up on adrenaline or pain numbing drugs could still fight on through that. I believe that these are all valid targets but should be used with the aim of opening up the more high percentage targets such windpipe, carotid artery, chin, jaw, temples, base of the skull. All more accesable by hand.

Therefore throwing a kick as a pre-emptive strike is all very well but it shouldn't (in my opinion) be thrown as a single strike but should be thrown at low targets as part of a combination to set up the striking of the primary "knockout" targets.

However, like I said in another thread I have met a few martial artists who can throw a kick faster than I can throw a right cross! You might be one of those people thus making my suggestions a little redundant in your case! But I think for the majority using a hand technique rather than a kicking technique is a much more achievable and safer option for pre-emptive striking.

I also suggest that when the decision to strike has been made to blitz the opponent with continous strikes until the threat is neutralised.

Spot on! Punches to the head with the intention of KO ing them. All techniques after that are ones you use if they don't go down first time and things have gone pear shaped.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Agree totally about pre-emptive striking being important in situations where violence has become inevitable. However, I would perhaps question whether a powerful fast kick would win a fight instantly in all situations. I believe that the difficulties with employing a kick in such a situation is that if a pre-emptive strike is indeed needed then it is highly likely that the attacker will be very much in our personal space and getting range for a kick may become difficult and require excessive movement to find range. A hand technique would likely be the more achievable option for pre-emptive striking.

Also, going back to my post on high percentage targets for finishing fights (airway, blood supply and conciousness) all of those targets are throat to head height. Throwing a kick with the aim of instantly winning requires kicking at head height. Potentially this may leave the defender vulnerable if this goes wrong.

If we are thinking of throwing a powerful kick to the ribs, stomach, groin or legs then be aware that a very determined attacker pumped up on adrenaline or pain numbing drugs could still fight on through that. I believe that these are all valid targets but should be used with the aim of opening up the more high percentage targets such windpipe, carotid artery, chin, jaw, temples, base of the skull. All more accesable by hand.

Therefore throwing a kick as a pre-emptive strike is all very well but it shouldn't (in my opinion) be thrown as a single strike but should be thrown at low targets as part of a combination to set up the striking of the primary "knockout" targets.

However, like I said in another thread I have met a few martial artists who can throw a kick faster than I can throw a right cross! You might be one of those people thus making my suggestions a little redundant in your case! But I think for the majority using a hand technique rather than a kicking technique is a much more achievable and safer option for pre-emptive striking.

I also suggest that when the decision to strike has been made to blitz the opponent with continous strikes until the threat is neutralised.

a fast powerful sidekick to the top of an opponents knee (thrown from your front leg) takes a fraction of a second to do and even if the contact is not great it will be leaving them in need of a full knee reconstruction. This, however, will only work when done by someone who really knows what they are doing, I wouldnt be recomending it to one of my non martial arts mates as it could get them in real trouble.

 

[Tez3]

a fast powerful sidekick to the top of an opponents knee (thrown from your front leg) takes a fraction of a second to do and even if the contact is not great it will be leaving them in need of a full knee reconstruction. This, however, will only work when done by someone who really knows what they are doing, I wouldnt be recomending it to one of my non martial arts mates as it could get them in real trouble.

Won't stop a lot of people I know, I've seen Fijian rugby players carry on for a few steps after such an injury ( saw one with a dislocated knee get up and run for quite a few steps before sitting down), they stopped but if in a fight they would have had plenty of time to knock you out. People on certain drugs feel nothing and even adrenaline can carry you through long enough to knock you out. My instructor carried on fighting (defending himself of course) after dislocating and breaking his ankle in three places, wasn't till the attacker was down and out that he realised that he himself was hurt, it wasn't till he got to hospital he realised he'd also been stabbed. I've seen MMA fighters carry on fighting with a broken arm again not realised until after the fight, even with a broken leg/knee whatever there is still time for them to KO you before they go down. Often fights have to be stopped by the ref because the fighter hasn't realised his injury at the time. The only surefire way to ensure you are 'safe' is to KO them, all other techniques to be used as failsafe if and when the KO goes wrong.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Won't stop a lot of people I know, I've seen Fijian rugby players carry on for a few steps after such an injury ( saw one with a dislocated knee get up and run for quite a few steps before sitting down), they stopped but if in a fight they would have had plenty of time to knock you out. People on certain drugs feel nothing and even adrenaline can carry you through long enough to knock you out. My instructor carried on fighting (defending himself of course) after dislocating and breaking his ankle in three places, wasn't till the attacker was down and out that he realised that he himself was hurt, it wasn't till he got to hospital he realised he'd also been stabbed. I've seen MMA fighters carry on fighting with a broken arm again not realised until after the fight, even with a broken leg/knee whatever there is still time for them to KO you before they go down. Often fights have to be stopped by the ref because the fighter hasn't realised his injury at the time. The only surefire way to ensure you are 'safe' is to KO them, all other techniques to be used as failsafe if and when the KO goes wrong.

I agree that there is no 'one shot kills all' technique that will work every time on every opponent, but there are certainly high percentage shots that will work 99 out of 100 times. The other 1% is when being attacked by a fijian rugby player. Most fights I have seen on the 'street' have been virtually finished after the first strike, if someone knows what they are doing, but then it all comes back to the old question of 'how good is the average guy on the street?' From what Ive seen most are not very good, not all, but most.

 

[Tez3]

I agree that there is no 'one shot kills all' technique that will work every time on every opponent, but there are certainly high percentage shots that will work 99 out of 100 times. The other 1% is when being attacked by a fijian rugby player. Most fights I have seen on the 'street' have been virtually finished after the first strike, if someone knows what they are doing, but then it all comes back to the old question of 'how good is the average guy on the street?' From what Ive seen most are not very good, not all, but most.

Actually the percentage here of being attacked by Fijian rugby players is high. A while back the MOD decide that as we were short of manpower to recruit from Commonwealth countries, the infantry regiments being keen on rugby recruited from Fiji so we have a lot of Fijians here. When sober great guys but prone to violence when out for the night. makes policing a bit of a nightmare, there is also a high incidence of domestic violence. totally pointless kicking them, you need a team to take them down or a couple of Gurkhas. fighting is quite common round my way s it is in the surruonding towns. We have the likes of that killer in Newcastle so recently in the news to deal with, there's more like him out there, they are the ones on FB saying hes a hero etc.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Actually the percentage here of being attacked by Fijian rugby players is high. A while back the MOD decide that as we were short of manpower to recruit from Commonwealth countries, the infantry regiments being keen on rugby recruited from Fiji so we have a lot of Fijians here. When sober great guys but prone to violence when out for the night. makes policing a bit of a nightmare, there is also a high incidence of domestic violence. totally pointless kicking them, you need a team to take them down or a couple of Gurkhas. fighting is quite common round my way s it is in the surruonding towns. We have the likes of that killer in Newcastle so recently in the news to deal with, there's more like him out there, they are the ones on FB saying hes a hero etc.

Yeah, living in australia and growing up playing rugby I know many fijians, samoans and tongans and they are lovely people. I wouldnt want to fight one though.

 

[Tez3]

Yeah, living in australia and growing up playing rugby I know many fijians, samoans and tongans and they are lovely people. I wouldnt want to fight one though.

Trouble is many want to fight! Makes life difficult sometimes.
My instructor is the head doorman for a number of Newcastle clubs and there is also a lot of trouble, he is very pragmatic and will use what works in those frantic situations, his kicking is excellent but he won't use kicks then. He goes straight for the knock out punch. My point about the Fijians was that I have seen many people being injured as badly as you would have with that sidekick, still carrying on long enough to do you some damage back. One needs to go for the best chance of a knockout which is a punch to the head.

 

[jthomas1600]

I've always had second thoughts about the front leg side kick to the knee. Namely you're aiming at a pretty small target with a tech that seems pretty easy to defend. I may be wrong, but it seems all your opponent has to do is take the weight of that leg. It might still hurt, but it seems if his foot is not planted with his weight on it then you're not likely to damage the knee. I go under the assumption that the bad guy knows how to fight and this would come natural him. Of course those that are advocating this tech may be thinking in terms of countering something like an overhand right thrown by a right handed fighter. In that case they will be coming forward onto their left leg and a good shot to that knee could really be devastating.

 

[Earl Weiss]

If you are talking about shots with a high % of success of stopping the opponent you can talk about theories or look at real world examples.

We know professional MMA guys are probably some of the most conditioned to not just take a shot, but to take one from a skilled opponent.

How many leg kicks have stopped a fight?

How many are stopped by other techniques and what are they?

Hint - Three of them are illegal in MMA rules.

 

[jthomas1600]

If you are talking about shots with a high % of success of stopping the opponent you can talk about theories or look at real world examples.

We know professional MMA guys are probably some of the most conditioned to not just take a shot, but to take one from a skilled opponent.

How many leg kicks have stopped a fight?

How many are stopped by other techniques and what are they?

Hint - Three of them are illegal in MMA rules.

Not sure what three you're thinking of, but don't forget the good old head buts and elbows. These can be devastating at close range.

 

[Tez3]

If you are talking about shots with a high % of success of stopping the opponent you can talk about theories or look at real world examples.

We know professional MMA guys are probably some of the most conditioned to not just take a shot, but to take one from a skilled opponent.

How many leg kicks have stopped a fight?

How many are stopped by other techniques and what are they?

Hint - Three of them are illegal in MMA rules.

If you are saying that MMAers won't be able to use them outside competition because they are conditioned to fighting by rules, I'd have to disagree, they aren't stuck in one mind set and can change mindset to use 'illegle' moves just as easily as anyone who doesn't fight MMA.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I've had to use Taekwon-Do to defend myself twice. Both times I used techniques most "experts" would tell you were impractical. Both times the conflict was over in seconds. The secret, besides being able to deal with the adrenal dump, is having techniques in your arsenal that fit the occasion and knowing them well enough that you know when to use them and how.

What is simple and practical for one person is sometimes not simple and practical for another.

Generally, what 'experts' consider simple and practical likely is for about 80% those who train. That does not change that the remaining 20% have trained to a level where they can use more advanced material in a practical application. This 20% may simply have greater dedication, a better instructor, greater athleticism, or a combination of the three.

What really makes a technique practical or no is the ability of the practitioner to know when to use it and to have trained in the technique to a point where they can use it consistently well and deal with adrenal dump.

More important that that is to know whether or not you're in the 80 group or the 20 group for a given technique.

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

More important that that is to know whether or not you're in the 80 group or the 20 group for a given technique.

Good post. High kicks/spinning kicks are like pressure points in that respect. If you can make them work, great. Less skilled people (the 80% group) should stick to the basics.

 

[Manny]

If you are facing more than one guy, Kicking like hell, is not the safest course of action; when in the streets, use the streets; as in, run like hell, seek cover, or pick up an equalizer. If you do end up on your back surrounded by thugs, by all means... kick like hell.
Sean

Kicking like hell= keep distance using the legs with low kicks. Yes, it's better to run than kicking like hell.

Manny

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Good post. High kicks/spinning kicks are like pressure points in that respect. If you can make them work, great. Less skilled people (the 80% group) should stick to the basics.

Even highly skilled people stick with the basics most of the time. The advanced stuff gets pulled out only when the opportunity presents itself and the conditions are right. Part of what makes such moves effective is that they are used sparingly and shock the tar out of an unsuspecting opponent.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Another thought is that of those 80% folks, the ones who know that they are in that group and practice what is practical for them relentlessly to the point that they can do it effortlessly and with immediacy and have adrenal dump completely under control when doing so are perceived as highly advanced.

Daniel

 

[jthomas1600]

Speaking of the basics, I heard somewhere (and I paraphrase) "you don't get to be an expert by practicing hundreds of techniques a dozen of times, you get to be an expert by practicing a dozen techniques hundreds of times". Not sure if that makes sense to anyone else, but it does to me.

 

[Earl Weiss]

If you are saying that MMAers won't be able to use them outside competition because they are conditioned to fighting by rules, I'd have to disagree, they aren't stuck in one mind set and can change mindset to use 'illegle' moves just as easily as anyone who doesn't fight MMA.

Not what I am saying at all and I am sorry anyone got that impression.