Best martial art?

[geer]

What is, in your opinion, the best martial art? This includes any style of unarmed fighting, not only asian stuff.
By the best i mean its proficiency in no-rules one-on-one fighting.

[Fred Hansen]

Ching ching pow

[psssniper]

fook yu too:D

[Visith]

Long Tin Wang

[Visith]

but really, most martial arts suck and are just businesses,
this group includes Karatee , TaeKwon Doo, Krav Maga, Kung foo, etc...
The only really useful stuff for one on one would be Brazillian Jiu Jitsu and for multiple attackers Muay Thai.

[Glock40]

You have to know how to defend yourself on your feet and on the ground.

BJJ or Judo teaches good ground skills. The untrained person on the ground will be at your mercy after you have had 6 months to a year of BJJ. BJJ emphasises groundwork more than Judo. However, Judo will give you enough ground skills to dominate an untrained person.

You can't always go to the ground. Multiple opponents would be suicide to go to the ground. Find a good striking art. Each individual school will be more important than the style. A punch is a punch. The way they train is more important.

That is my opinion after 15 years in Shotokan, BJJ, and Judo.

[hdm25]

Second most of what Glock40 said...

It's not the style, it's not the school (though that starts to matter)...it's the student and the instructor.

There are plenty of schools and instructors out there that aren't worth crap. If you get an instructor that's good and YOU (or whoever) are willing to learn and have the right attitude, then things will work out. You can take someone who has no aggression and teach them the physical skills and they won't be able or willing to use them (no "warrior spirit") when they are needed. You can take someone who does have the aggression within and teach them and they'll do great.

I am a big believer in the spiritual aspect of the martial arts but not in the way that most people think of it. Inner peace comes from no fear and no anxiety. The baddest MF on the block should, therefore, have plenty of inner peace.

[Glock40]

Some of the most dangerous individuals I have ever met in BJJ have been the nicest guys you will ever meet. It's funny, in BJJ, everyone knows who is tough and who is not. There is absolutely no reason to put on a show. It all is proven on the mat.

In karate, I did not notice the same thing. Perhaps, in the process of trying to develop the warrior spirit through endless repetitions with loud kiais, some people can fall into believing they are tougher than they really are. I don't know exactly why.

Just opinion and my experience. The most humbling day of my life was, after reaching black belt in Shotokan, I went to a BJJ studio. This little Brazilian guy said we could go on the mat and spar. I put some lightweight gloves on and he promised not to hurt me. I thought that he was being a little condescending? We started to spar. Within 5 minutes, he had taken me down a dozen times and my arms were bent in these strange ways. He was choking me gently and I couldn't get away. 10 years of kata meant nothing on the ground.

I am so glad he did those "mean" things to me. I have trained in BJJ for about 4 years ago and now have a game plan on the ground. Sometimes it is amazing that you don't know what you don't know.

[hdm25]

I've always found that someone willing to do harm to another has a distinct advantage over someone who is timid, whether trained or untrained.

I have gotten to the point where I dislike practicing any very "traditional" martial art because the majority of instructors in such schools aren't up to a true test of their abilities. There ARE notable exceptions, of course.

I have trained in hapkido, tang soo do, shorin-ryu, silat, escrima, and muay thai (and bastardized versions of most of the above). In the 15 years or so that I've been involved in the martial arts, I've yet to see anyone do well in a real fight or in full-contact sparring without having that "something" that denotes what I assume most would call "warrior spirit". Loud yells sure don't matter.

I, too, have had the experience that some of the best martial artists ("best" meaning most effective) are some of the nicest guys around. I feel that it just goes to show that, if you are able to stand up for yourself and know it, you don't have a problem with anyone else unless they're messing with you.

I have been wanting to study BJJ but haven't been around much of it. I moved away from Indiana right when someone started teaching near my home. Where I live now there is a guy who is supposed to be very good but doesn't currently teach. I'm sort of hoping to buy him into taking a new student.

[stick]

Best for defense... for a moment skip the hang-ups on a style's name and focus on what happens in the training session. For defensive purposes you should be training with appropriate simple, gross motor skills and cover the full contact range. The pratice needs to be with less than cooperative partners. Full force work on bags and pads as opposed to fighting the air. Hopefully Red Man, Bullet Man or High Gear suits for "full contact" on a regular basis. Inclusion of improvised weapons.

Back to names...though it depends on the instructor, from observation some that meet this criteria would be Krav Maga, JKD, and Muay Thai. I would also like to supplement with some sessions with instructors like Tony Blauer and Steve Tarini.

[geer]

http://www.russianmartialart.com/html/thesystema.html

i plan on staring that. Any thoughts? i mean i can do it for free, so...but it better not be a bunch of bull****

[jpd82]

I agree with Glock 40 on BJJ. I trained in BJJ, this was the only style I ever trained in where, I knew the moves would work for real. I mean, if I punched the air, or heavy bag, I dont know if it will hurt someone. But, if I put someone in an arm bar, I know I what its doing. The only thing I didnt like was, it was impossible for me to beat another BJJ fighter with more experience.

[hdm25]

I really think that the biggest reason BBJ fighters have such a good reputation is that the techniques DO get practiced in a more realistic environment. You can grapple and do locks and chokes more "for real" than you can with full-power strikes to vital areas. It's all in the training and the attitude. The Gracies have done an excellent job over the decades making sure that their stuff works and making sure that the training reflects reality. The VAST majority of other arts can't make that claim.

Another poster mentioned protective suits...a great idea for strikers but it still doesn't give them everything that they need. It's basically impossible for someone to train in open-handed striking arts to the level that grapplers can train. You can't just gouge eyes, punch throats, kick knees and unprotected groins, etc. in a martial arts class. A striker ends up learning, at best, how to throw punches and kicks to areas which are actually NOT the best areas to attack.

The best instructors that I know teach thusly:

The first used to run classes in which several things were taught (no katas or anything "traditional"...this was a hard-core class). Physical conditioning was foremost followed by mastering the basic punching, kicking, and blocking techniques. Other things (knives, firearms, sticks, various "one-steps" or "street defenses") were after you had the basics down WELL. Full-contact sparring was done once a month. There was no protective gear other than cups, gloves, and mouthpieces. Other than that, it was about as close to a "street fight" as you could get. Cups were used more to cushion blows that were thrown to your groin than as protection in case someone accidentally hit you there (more than one cup was broken by groin kicks...ouch). Fights would go until one of the combatants couldn't go anymore. Bones were broken and blood was shed in this class. Needless to say, the school was not a commerical success, but it produced students who were TOUGH. As brutal as this training was, it still didn't allow a striker to learn and practice everything that might be done.

The second is/was a student of the first. He has broken things down even further and really teaches nothing but physical conditioning and basics (plus firearms). He sees no use for complicated aspects of the martial arts because he is a "no-nonsense" kind of guy. He doesn't feel that there is a NEED for anything but being able to land the hardest kick, punch, elbow, or knee possible to a moving, resisting, and/or evading target.

Neither of these men is anyone to mess with but the potential of what they practice is STILL not fully realized because you just can't cripple and kill people in practice. Both have fought BJJ and other grapplers and won and lost. In the losing cases that I have seen, the men have had the OPPORTUNITY to land blows on the grapplers which would have ended the fight but they could not due to the rules and just sheerly for the fact that the fights were friendly. You just don't shin a guy in the throat in a friendly fight.

I don't really believe in fighting multiple attackers unarmed. More than one guy and you're very liable to be beaten. Better to fight your way OUT of the situation. One on one, you would be better served to go with a grappling art because of the reasons that I cited above...the training is just FAR more realistic. Striking is fine but, one on one, you can always take the fight to the ground.

I'm sure that I'll getting flamed a little on this, but it's my experience and my belief. I love the martial arts, but learning anything complicated or anything that you can't train at 100% (or nearly) is just exercise for mind and body and not necessarily what you want if you want the best fighting art around.

My only complaint is that I can't find anything in my area where they train in grappling. Everything is traditional martial arts and people not fighting full-contact. If anyone can point me to someone in the northeastern Arkansas area who trains realistically, please do so.

[wingnutx]

I studied Kenpo (Connors/Parker) and western boxing for about 3 years, and now Krav Maga.

I learned a lot about the mechanics of striking and balance from kenpo, but it didn't do me a whole lot of good when I really needed to learn to defend myself. I supplimented it with boxing, which did wonders towards conditioning me to be able to stand up in a fight, take a punch, and aggressively fight back.

15 years later I am learning krav maga. It is perfect for my needs, and I wish I had been able to do this from the outset. What a previous poster said about full impact, aggression, and gross motor skill development is right on the money.

If someone is already a competent and aggressive striker, go take some bjj. If you haven't done much in the way of actual fighting, choose training where you will have to actually trade blows, i.e. krav maga, muai thai, boxing. If you can't take a punch, your skills may fail you, whatever they are. Flinching has cost me many an asskicking, once upon a time.

Fighting against a "bullet-man" suit is a great training tool to help you master your own adrenaline. I would suggest IMPACT type adrenaline-stress training to anyone studying any technique.

Responding to the comment about k.m. being a business, hell yes it is, as are muai thai and bjj. It is also very effective. How many people here own firearms made by a non-profit organization?

The best martial art is the one that works for me.

[wingnutx]

Ahhhh, of course a National Socialist disparages krav maga. How about American Combatives? They worked great against your buddies in WWII :D

[4V50 Gary]

Gun-fu, bomb-fu, nuke-strike fu, attack-bear fu, wolf-pack fu, all beat hand to hand combat.

[Christopher II]

The best martial art? Good physical condition, constant situational awareness, proper mindset. Asking which MA is the best is like asking which gun is the best.

- Chris

[Glock40]

Christopher, you are partially right. Comparing various striking arts vs. each other is pointless. Comparing a striking art vs. a grappling art is a different thing. The average grappler with 1 year of BJJ will dominate a striker with 10 years of experience in a one on one situation.

However, not all situations are one on one. Sometimes going to the ground would be suicide. Sometimes people have weapons. The value of my Karate training would multiply ten fold if I had a 6 Cell mag light in my hands.

Learn to strike and learn to grapple. They are both required to be a complete martial artist. Two sides of the same coin.

[ronin308]

I agree with ChrisII. I believe that you have to have a well-rounded skill set, but you have to know when to grapple, strike, run away, shoot, use da ASP, do verbal judo, etc. You can't respond to every attack/situation in the same manner. Therefore, I believe that building your defensive strategy around a single martial art is folly.

[Christopher II]

Agreed re. being well-rounded.

Now my personal favorite MA is still The Way of the Receeding Foot...

- Chris

[LawDog]

You know, I've worked Law Enforcement for 10 years and I'm currently in a city of something over 100,000 warm bodies.

In dealing with all those years worth of the worst elements of society, I've come to the conclusion that the critters just aren't all that good at stand-up one-on-one scrapping.

Your average critter is good at pack tactics, and he's a whiz at ambushes, but when it comes down to brass tacks and he's face-to-face with a calm, cool and wary opponent, a critter would just rather be drinking a root-beer somewhere else.

The Gracies aren't out mugging people, and I seriously doubt if their students are out mugging people.

It is my opinion and observations that someone who has the time, patience, dedication and discipline to master a martial art in anything is not going to be out robbing/raping strangers on the street.

Life isn't a UFC match, ladies and gentlemen. The chances of you stumbling into a an episode of Ginsu Theatre and needing to disable 12 consecutive Masters of Various Animal Gung-Fu on the way to work in the morning is fairly non-existant.

Find a martial art that you like. As you study it, teach yourself that when you need it, you will use it explosively and with 100% commitment. and then run. Hurt the pedator quickly, and then get out of the area. Or transition to a weapon.

Either smash-and-scoot, or smash-and-shoot.

Find something that you like. Not what I like, not what he likes, but what you like. Something you like well enough to study long and study hard.

The confidence that you gain as you progress will show in body language. Carrying yourself like a warrior, instead of some critters next meal, will save your butt more than a certificate from the Martial Art du jour.

Just my humble opinion.

LawDog

[Demi Barbito]

I could start typing a long paragraph or... You could just check out:

http://www.demibarbito.com

Demi

[kungfool]

here we go again.......my kung fu is better than your kung fu..........As a longtime TKD practitioner and instructor I have seen the proof of the pudding so to speak. TKD is blasted over and over again because of it's popularity....(can you say petty jealousy?)....Because it has become the most practiced art in the world, and because it has become an olympic sport, then naturally it's the art that every other art seems to want to knock off that popular pedestal.

Are there instructors that misrepresent themselves are sell the art of TKD short, or even focus nearly entirely on the sports aspects of the art? Of course.....same with every other style of martial art at least to some degree. TKD gets mentioned most often because of the above mentioned reasons. But to say it is not an effective striking art is absolutely ridiculous.

Sure, there are plenty of Mcdogos out there, and plenty of instructors who teach false confidence for profit, whether it be striking arts OR grappling arts.

Also, as Lawdog so profoundly stated...Life is not a UFC championship....(I'm a name dropper and have a relationship with Russell Hughes, who is the father of Matt Hughes (He lives basically right down the cornfield from me) ...Matt Hughes is of course the welter weight UFC world chanpiojn and an boy from illinois who helps out on the family farm and wrestled in high school. What is his approach? Ground and pound accented with powerful upper body strength and overall physical conditioning.

I have seen him three times, and in all three matches he won by picking up his opponent and slamming him to the ground, supplemented by any punches he could throw in the interum.

THAT'S THE UFC...........In real life 99% of fights one will encounter on the streets will be by assailants with little or no stylized fighting system. they may be adept at a few dirty tricks. In almost all one on one fights that occur on the street, the assailant will not want to go to the ground either, and anyone proficient in striking arts , balanced with good physical conditioning, who does train for the common street attacks will usually prevail, without going to the ground.

So while I encourage my students to stay up on their feet and use their hapkido techniques to stay up on their feet if forced to grapple, I also encourage them to cross-train in grappling arts (I have froend from other grappling schools that would accomadate any of my stuents who would like to cross-train).

If you are an expert in any martial art, be it striking or grappling, you will have an advantage over almost any street thug, taking into consideration realistic training (and full contact TKD matches may not be the real thing but to say it is "foot tag' at the men's blackbelt level would be like saying wrestling matches in high school and at the college level are just" rolling around".

You learn from any art what you are willing to put into it.

To master grappling and think that is all you need to protect yourself on the street is as ridiculous as mastering only a striking art. They both have their strong points and their weak points, so some knowledge of both as well as emotional/mental and psycological awareness is a must.

Find a good instructor that suits you, (make sure it's a good instructor and/or school) and then give it your all. It truly is important to build confidence and not act like a victim.

There is no one art that is best for everyone. To be truly proficient in self-defense one must devote a lot of time (and blood, sweat and sometimes tears) in all ranges of fighting. That, as lawdog points out, is not something you do for a short while, it is a way of life. Otherwise, maybe one should practice running really fast, (which incidently is sometimes what self-defense requires)

Train hard and you will be hard to beat.

[mercop]

Traditional Ju Jitsu is a tri-phasic art that was intended to protect the Samurai if he lost his sword on the battlefield. Phase one is punches and kicks. Two is takedowns and throws and third is ground control. BJJ concentrates on the third phase. As a street cop the ground is not where I want to be due to multiple attackers who may not attack me when I am on my feet but if I am on the ground have no problem kicking me in the head. Locks done on the ground can be done standing. I like to use walls and cars for vertical stuns instead of going to the ground. Ju Jitsu also allows for a measured response. You can go from control to death. It is also a circular art instead of being linier. This plays into the human response where punches and kicks become roundhouses when the fine motor skill deteriorate. My depts DT program is based on Ju Jitsu and I feel it is the best for most people. You may one day have to kill someone with your art however from my experience you are far more likely to have to control a drunk. Check out the dojo I train at @ Reddragonjujitsu.com

[youngun]

I've seen a number of videos of BJJ tournaments, and had the chance to spar with a guy for an hour or so, and I want to reinforce something hdm25 said.
Regardless of how realistic the training seems, it's still within certain parameters.
You simply aren't "allowed" to try to kill your opponent.
No blows to the throat, no eye gouges, those two alone are very seriously effective techniques.

And I have to agree with pretty much everything Lawdog said.
You shouldn't be looking for the art that's going to allow you to beat anyone else in any other art. What is needed is a fun, serious, worthwhile and regular training setting where you can get some time in dealing with H2H situations. Any of the major arts, and some of the minor ones will do this for you, providing you like the teacher and students.

I would add that there simply isn't enough time to get great at everything.
I studied aikido pretty extensively for 10 years, with a little kung fu and t'ai ch'i, but I did nothing else. Now I'm spending my time developing my shooting skills, meditation, and relationship with my wife and child.

These guys who are kicking everyone's ass - a) do they have a life? b) can they draw and put two shots COM in less than 2 seconds?

[LASur5r]

I've been assessing my 54 years on this planet and when I first started in m.a. in 1960, I was always taught that it was the man and not the art that made a true martial artist.
I was lucky, I got to meet Bruce Lee, Chuck Norris, Ed Parker, Mike Stone, Fumio Demura, Gordon Doversola, "O-Sensei,"Taky Kimura, etc., etc...too many other folks to mention who are considered "great"now. They were considered good then....all of them were from different "martial arts."
Recently I have had the good fortune to meet and talk with Jet Li and Jackie Chan ...again, they are considered "great" in what they do."

These men are all products of their training, I don't think it was a specific m.a. but it was the one they chose to practice in that gave them the tools to become what they are.

It is like the question, which gun, which caliber, etc...which is the best------that will make you a master? It is practice, practice, practice, until you have great confidence in yourself. Then go into competition to see how you compare to others....then it is practice, practice, practice again, until you master that part....someday, you will reach a high enough level to see that it was the practice and your willingness to train that made you good, not which martial art.

[mercop]

Will they let someone get close enough to get their hands on them?

[youngun]

Will they let someone get close enough to get their hands on them?

The best martial art is to have ten bodyguards.

[shy_man]

The Best Martial Arts is the one you're trained for, plus your determination to fight and win at all cost. Remember, many kinds of martial arts never work at all in real fight but are all good in movies only. In my early teens and 20's I am a damn fanatic of martial arts and have learned several of it, but in the end, the one that counts is the head on how to avoid a fight if someone can.

[kungfool]

Remember, many kinds of martial arts never work at all in real fight but are all good in movies only.

Huh?.....name them.....it's never the martial art, it almost always comes down to either the instructor, the student, or both.

In many MA movies you will see poorly executed techniques, (usually by blond-haired blue-eyed female actors) or you will see someone take a falwlessly executed flying sidekick straight to the jaw by someone like ballet dancer Van Dam..(sp?) and hardly be fazed by it. I don't think the average BG would get up so easily from such a kick. Then of course there are always the multiple attackers that cannot seem to figure out to attack all at once rather than wait their turns........*g*

[mercop]

I have used Ju Jitsu at work several times with good results. I have found out there are not very many things you can do to another human that are not Ju Jitsu techniques. For me while working anyway I can't punch somebody hard enough to put them in handcuffs. Joint locks followed by pressure points that have a mechanical as well as pain compliance advantage seem to work well for me.

[.45&TKD]

I have a Black Belt in Tae Kwon Do and I competed full contact as an amatuer heavy weight at the national level 12 years ago. My instructor incorporated anything proven to work from other styles.

I'm prejudiced, but I think that Tae Kwon Do, taught properly, and incorporating boxing and other styles is the best way to go.

I also wrestled successfully in high school, which I would fall back on in a grappling situation (no pun intended).

The advantage of having a variety of back up styles/techniques available to you; kicking, hand techniques, boxing, wrist locks, and grappling techniques, is that you never want to play an opponent at their own game.

My first strategy in a self defence situation that I could not avoid, would be to fight standing up, punching and kicking. Unless my opponent was a better kicker than me, in whcih case I would go inside and box him, and if his hands were faster than mine, I'd go to grappling (wresting). The different styles are useful at different ranges and against different opponents, and different numbers of opponents.

It's like deciding which you like best, handguns, shotguns, long guns. It depends on the situation, its nice to have a choice, it's nice to have something else to go to. But if you focus in on one and always have it with you, that's pretty good, too!

[Erick Gelhaus]

Law Dog hit it on the head. The only amendment I'd make to his is that there are a few who do train. Realize that, before you have Smash and Scoot or Shoot.

**********

Demi-
Check your PM's.

[Shmackey]

You can't always go to the ground. Multiple opponents would be suicide to go to the ground. Find a good striking art.

This logic has always been flawed. Yes, if you're grappling someone and his buddies decide to kick your ass, they will kick your ass. Guess what--if you're fighting someone standing up, and his buddies decide to kick your ass, they will kick your ass. Anyone who tells you that they can take on three people determined to hurt you, Kung Fu movie-style, is full of crap.

To answer the question: jiu-jitsu or Hapkido. Both teach throws, grappling, and striking.

[.45&TKD]

Shmackey
"This logic has always been flawed. Yes, if you're grappling someone and his buddies decide to kick your ass, they will kick your ass. Guess what--if you're fighting someone standing up, and his buddies decide to kick your ass, they will kick your ass. Anyone who tells you that they can take on three people determined to hurt you, Kung Fu movie-style, is full of crap."

Nothing personal, but you don't know what you're talking about. Your reference to movies is probably the extent of your martial arts experience.

There's nothing wrong with having a strategy for the disadvantage of multiple opponents, STANDING UP!

[LawDog]

If I'm fighting a guy standing up, and four of his buddies show up, I have the option of running like a scalded ape for the hills.

If I'm rolling around on the ground grappling with a guy, and four of his buddies show up, first I've got to get him to let go of me/get off me. Then I've got to get to my feet. I've probably got to shake him loose one more time. Then, and only then, can I run.

LawDog

[Shmackey]

Your reference to movies is probably the extent of your martial arts experience.

I'll tell my instructors to stop wasting my time then.

There's nothing wrong with having a strategy for the disadvantage of multiple opponents, STANDING UP!

Read the previous posts. It was stated that ground fighting is problematic because of the multiple-attacker scenario. I'm saying that stand-up fighting shares that same problem. You want to have a strategy, that's great. You're right--there's nothing wrong with it. But you'll still be in a world of trouble.

If you seriously think that you can defeat a handful of opponents in a street fight, I hope you do have that .45 to go along with your TKD.

[Shmackey]

LawDog's argument is much more reasonable. I'm not convinced that it's very plausible to run away from a handful of people (are they standing in a chorus line in front of you?) but it's fair to say that there are more steps involved if you're tangled up.

I would still like to hear from one MA instructor that they will prepare you to take on (ie, do anything but run away) from a handful of attackers. That's one instructor I would stay away from.

[.45&TKD]

I would still like to hear from one MA instructor that they will prepare you to take on (ie, do anything but run away) from a handful of attackers. That's one instructor I would stay away from.

We do tactical pistol scenarios against multiple targets or attackers. What's the difference for martial arts training against multiple attackers? There is no difference. It happens, so its prudent to train for it.

Of course, avoidance is best.

[MrAcheson]

Provided you stay standing and can maneuver it is possible to come out ahead fighting multiple opponents. Its hard and requires a lot of skill, but it is possible. Most people never learn to fight as group. They fight as individuals and so they get in each others way a lot. You can use this to your advantage if you are properly trained. Your still an underdog, but your not as much of an underdog as you might think.

[hdm25]

I can see both sides, but I do have to say that multiple opponents is not a "fight" situation when you can choose "flight". I know very few people who really have much of a chance against multiple opponents in an unarmed fight. Most people just can't do enough damage unarmed to take someone out quickly. Multiple someones striking YOU can take you out rather quickly. In addition, there are very few fights against multiple opponents (unarmed) where it will be a stand-up contest. You will be held and/or grappled and then held while someone kicks the s**t out of you. This is not to say that defeating multiple unarmed foes is impossible, it's just not very likely.

The difference between training for multiple attackers in an armed scenario vs. unarmed is that you CAN do enough damage with a firearm to drop multiple attackers. Even in this case, though, it's assuming YOU have the drop on them (which is not a defensive scenario). The old El Presidente drill, when done with Simunitions against real opponents, just doesn't work out. Generally the best anyone can do against three foes is to place good enough shots to drop two before he is hit "fatally". If he manages to put a single shot on each, the shots are usually not good enough to assume that they would ALL be "stops" in reality.

Again, I can see both sides, but I lean toward NOT being able to do much against multiple attackers if they have any amount of skill or organization at all. I am an exception, but I know that myself and any one of two or three different friends of mine can take pretty much any single person that we've ever trained against. Again, though, this is guys who have trained together and practiced together, not a group of thugs who might act as individuals rather than part of a team.

Train how you will...I DO train against multiple opponents unarmed but this just shows me not to have much faith in being able to beat multiple opponents. I have more faith in my ability to place good hits with a handgun on multiple opponents than I do in my ability to take on multiple opponents unarmed and beat them. In either case, flight is preferable.

[geer]

Talking about multiple opponents, it depends on what you learn.

Let me tell you 2 somewhat similar stories.
3 years ago, in highschool, I had a health teacher who happened to be a karate-do 5th degree blabk belt and won multiple tournaments, I think even a national one back in the early 90s. One day he got in a fight with 2 marines(he didn't know it though) at the bar. He broke first guys leg and turned to the second guy, but as he was taking him out, the first one, who was laying on the ground, threw a knife at him which went through the kidney and he had to have it removed, although he survived.

I told this story to my russian friend, who is an ex-spetsnaz operative and now resides in houst, tx (i am getting into a little detail so you wouldn't think i am another 8 year old making up bs)
I told him this story; he smirked and said he got in fight with 14 teenagers who were trying to rob or rape some girl. He got stabbed through the liver with a screw-driver and had to walk to the police station because as the girl ran away she apparently didn't even bother calling 911. Whenever police came to the scene, 5 of the attackers were still there, 3 of them were dead, another four crippled - all together 9 out of 14 were completely disabled, the rest ran away.

When I asked him whether he was THAT good, he said that in a one-on-one fight on the ring with a referee an average black - belt would probably beat the crap out of him; however, he said that even a guy like my health teacher would not stand a chance against him in a street-fight. Why? Because martial arts focus on competitions and self-defence rather than on fighting for your life. He said that in the russian hand-to-hand combat. "systema", there are actually 4 sub-styles: Classical, which deals with tournaments, Self-Defence which deals with real-life situations, such as fights in the bar,on the stair-case, etc. Weapons, where the usage of regualar objects such as news-papers and pencils is studied as well as defence and attack styles with various types of melee weapons, and the last one is the Combat style. It is taught only to the special units and the secret police. It is separated form all other styles because the main purpose of it is not taking someone down or stopping the offender; the ultimate goal is to incapacitate the enemy, i.e. get to the point where your opponent(s) is either paralyzed, dead or in a pain shock.

Now if you are fighting 4 opponents you can run or use 2 them as a shield in your advantage....or you can punch the first one directly in the heart...now you got 3 opponents....2nd one gets a straight kick in the throat wich smashes the bone through the spinal cord...two opponents left...then grab the 3rd one's neck and squeeze for 2-3 seconds while letting the 4th guy do whatever he wants to you...

You have a one-one one, fair fight now; unfotunately, you will be facing an assault, a lethal weapon and three manslaughter charges in the near future.

[ronin308]

Multiple opponents...bad situation. If there were multiple opponents I would do as LawDog said: Way of the Receding Foot.

TKD kicking techniques are almost useless against multiple oppenents. Any savvy fighter knows that as soon as they see a high kick they can go low and destroy the kicker. If there are multiple people, the kicker will get taken even if he connects high on one person. And this opinion comes from a person with a 1st degree black in TKD.

That said, if I had to fight multiple opponents I would go for the psychological advantage. That is to immediately do as much damage on the closest person in the shortest amount of time possible. Most wolfpacks don't expect their prey to go on the offensive in a ferocious manner. This may deter the others, even if it doesn't you should have incapacitated at least one person for the rest of the fight. After that, I would try to get their attacks to interfere with each other and get them all on one side of me.

[kungfool]

If you seriously think that you can defeat a handful of opponents in a street fight, I hope you do have that .45 to go along with your TKD.

My Grandmaster took out three guys in about three seconds. In fact, he has done so on two occassions.



In the case of my GM, though he won't talk about it, the story still lingers around town. (It happened about 12 years ago)

many times people who fight in a group do so because they are not good fighters on their own. That's not to say that there aren't thugs around who can fight (trained or not), but to say it is impossible to defend yourself against multiple attackers (without that 45) is not true. My first choice, and it's what I tell my students, is to run away if possible, but as they are running they should also keep glancing behind them to make sure they are not being out "hotfooted".


TKD kicking techniques are almost useless against multiple oppenents. Any savvy fighter knows that as soon as they see a high kick they can go low and destroy the kicker. If there are multiple people, the kicker will get taken even if he connects high on one person. And this opinion comes from a person with a 1st degree black in TKD.

I'm only a 4th degree blackbelt in TKD myself but if all your instructor is teaching you are "high kicks" you need another instructor. The same sidekick that would be foolish to throw at someone's face would be very effective when aimed at their knee instead.

It's not what you train with but how you train in it.

[krept]

just a comment:

The Gracies aren't out mugging people, and I seriously doubt if their students are out mugging people.

A couple aryan gang members were arrested for beating the crapola out of a guy around the Phoenix area several years ago. They took mixed martial arts and turned the guy into spam. Yep, the tough looking guy (gang poser) might actually have some skills that surprise you.

You should see some of the people going to local mixed martial arts matches, or some of the guys that train in MMA gyms around here. The teardrops on the eyes, spiderwebs on elbows and symbols on the web of the hand are just a couple of the clues...

In the same vein, gang members are reading G&W for LEO, Handgunner, etc. etc. They are getting informed, using quality ammunition, etc. A little bird told me that a local indoor range was becoming frequented so much by gang members/thugfolk that they owners decided to sell and members were not renewing their memberships because they are feeling threatened.

The BGs are getting badder. Some are training too.

This should just serve to make your resolve to train that much stronger.

[ronin308]

kungfool- I'm only a 4th degree blackbelt in TKD myself but if all your instructor is teaching you are "high kicks" you need another instructor. The same sidekick that would be foolish to throw at someone's face would be very effective when aimed at their knee instead.

My instructor taught me a little more than high kicks. I knew someone would make a comment on the high kicks...high kicks are the meat of TKD, otherwise the techniques can be found in every other striking martial art from the U.S. Combatives Manual to JKD. Low kicks are not exclusive to TKD. Thus my comment that TKD kicks would not be effective. I'm referring only to those kicks that are exclusive to TKD.

Call me a pessimist but I think its tough to kick a guy in the knee effectively while his buddies are circling/punching/kicking/tackling/stabbing/shooting/etc.

[Danger Dave]

To beat multiple opponents you need to be more skilled than the best they've got, big enough so they can't simply outmuscle you, in good enough shape to fight all of them consecutively without a break, mobile enough to not get cornered & have to fight more than one at a time, have enough power/technique to improve the odds quickly, and be tough as nails and meaner than a mad dog.

In short, you've got to be better, stronger, faster, more mobile, better conditioned, harder hitting, tougher, and meaner than all your opponents combined. And maybe just a bit lucky. Style isn't much of a consideration - it's whether you're a fighter or not.

See, it's simple in principle. It's doing it in real life that's hard.

[qkrthnu]

I've never taken any kind of MA training. That said.... I would think that in a real fight two feet on the ground would be preferable to one foot on the ground.

[ronin308]

qkrthnu- I agree. The only time I like to lift my feet is when I'm attached to the person. For example, I have a hold of them with my hands behind their head, then I might lift my feet to throw some knees.

[hdm25]

There are always going to be stories of how someone took on "x" number of people and won in "y" number of seconds or some such, whether true or not.

The fact is, very few people have any chance of taking on multiple opponents and winning in an unarmed fight. It depends on many, many factors, not the least of which is sheer luck. Training and conditioning of the multiple attackers and the attacked, experience of everyone involved, terrain, starting distances, etc.

I am big, strong, fast and have a fair amount of training and experience in some rougher martial arts schools but I still don't feel that I could completely overcome more than two or three attackers at the very most. More than anything, I think I could hurt them enough to make them back off or let me escape.

Another thing, though...the human body is capable of amazing things in terms of durability but is also very fragile. I have serious misgivings any time someone tells me anything about taking someone down with one strike of any kind, whether it be fist, foot, knee, elbow, or head. That's the thing about multiple attackers. For example (not even a good one, though), let's say it takes three strikes to take someone out of the fight. You face three attackers. You are twice as fast as they are (a stretch, but let's say it). You need to strike nine times to take them all down but they only need three to take you down. You can only take one guy down and start on another before you go down yourself. I know that's EXTREMELY simplistic, but it demonstrates the point.

Another point...corrections officers. Anyone ever been one? If not, anyone ever seen them on TV? They KNOW that multiple cons are GOING to take them down, even if they have an impact weapon or something. They KNOW that they have to outnumber or "outforce" (i.e. with firearms or something) the prisoners. Do you ever see a single convict taken down by one officer? No. They team up because they do KNOW that a single guy MIGHT be able to hurt two or even three of them. Mostly they dogpile the guy and take him down. That is exactly what will happen to someone who tries to fight multiple assailants in most cases.

Multiple unarmed attackers CAN be beaten, it's just not very likely.

[wingnutx]

A couple aryan gang members were arrested for beating the crapola out of a guy around the Phoenix area several years ago.

I've seen a few aryan "skinhead" types running around in Buell Fighting Systems shirts, a local MMA fighter/trainer. I'm going to assume they have some training and not just the shirt.

[krept]

Interesting...

I could be very mistaken, but I think these guys (Devil Dogs? - gang NOT USMC) trained out of Roland Sarria's BRAUSA school when it was on the Tempe/Scottsdale border. For the record, Roland has said that he won't train gangmembers or anyone with a bad attitude. I don't know if that's true, but from what I heard and gather from speaking to him on the phone, Sarria is a great guy and it's a bummer if he was associated from training these people.

[Don Gwinn]

Re: Multiple opponents, I have two observations.

First, I know Kungfool's Grandmaster did in fact take on three young men who considered themselves formidable bar brawlers in their own right. I know one of them well, having worked with him this summer. His name is Dennis and he's from the Springfield, IL area. He told me the story about Grandmaster Perry whupping him and two of his friends in Pawnee, IL when a coworker was spouting about her TKD expertise.
Apparently, they did attack singly. Dennis' heart was not exactly in it, but his friend attacked the GM and got hurt, so he felt honor-bound to jump in. He now regrets it.


Geer,
I say this with all respect, but I think you should take your Russian friend's boasting with a grain of salt. Very few men who have killed three people with their bare hands are so glib, and his ultra-secret Combat Subset Systema seems pretty simplistic. Grab him by the throat and squeeze for 3-4 seconds? I think most people could figure out that sort of technique without a lot of training, and letting someone beat on you at will for a few seconds while you squeeze his buddy's throat isn't going to work well for most people (Darth Vader and the Terminator are notable exceptions.) Besides, have you ever taken a straight punch or kick to the heart? I have. It didn't kill me. I'm sure there are people out there (probably in KF's dojang) who could stop my heart if they could get a perfect, straight shot over the heart, but I wonder how Combat Systema gets that kind of shot?

[catechism]

To answer that questions I would have to say that such a subjective question can have no correct answer.

Furthermore IMO MA is simply a hobby. No brand of MA makes you any more lethal than the other. In no way I'am I implying its a waste of time but it does cost in terms of time management.

I've done MA for a number of years and these days I don't have time for it. One day I will pick it up again.

Sometimes the best course for defense is that of self discipline and knowing when to keep your mouth shut. I have the greatest sparring partner for that, my wife. :D

[kungfool]

martial arts a hobby?..............for some people maybe....for others it is a way of life...a way of staying in optimal physical condition.....a way to keep a warrior's mindset......a way to keep your self-defense skills honed (without having to go around looking for fights)........a way to keep your mind sharp as to the aspects of self-defense.........as you say IYO martial arts is just a hobby........but a good one........*g*

My wife is my sparring partner as well.....literally!.....we practice wrist locks and arn bars on each other.......cuts down on those verbal disagreements we have from time to time........(her tongue is sharper than my ginko!)

[Erick Gelhaus]

Well, once again, I think we've run this into the ground.