Hooks in = Bad defensive tactics

[Bubble Boy]

I was watching a military defensive tactics training dvd series last night.
The core of the training in this particular dvd set is wrestling, with a little bjj and judo thrown in.
Some of the obvious is dealt with: don't go to closed guard if your opponent's buddies are standing around, etc.

But I learned something about getting hooks in too. In the dvd the instructor gets his hooks in and is going for a choke. The "bad guy" then lays out flat and pins the instructor's legs to the ground while they are hooked in. Two other "bad guys" from the side of the mat then begin to attack the instructor (of course, this was a demonstration only).

The alternative that the instructor showed was to kind of grapevine the legs without going inside for hooks. That way if he needed to disengage quickly he could.
He still had some control over the subjects legs with the grapevine thing, but he had to really go for the arms to get better control. Also, he couldn't really go for the choke for fear of losing positioning, so he went for control of the arms. The end goal wasn't a submission, it was control, or the ability to disengage and get away from the attackers.

It was fascinating to see how grappling changes when taken out of it's sporting context and is applied to a self defense / defense tactics situation.

Seems like we could all learn a lot by having a third person standing there ready to attack during our "self defense" training. I'm sure nobody does it. But it might be something to check out sometime in your training. It will change the way you look at grappling.

 

[naantje]

Groundfighting with other people around is dumb, period.

 

[Bubble Boy]

Groundfighting with other people around is dumb, period.

Agreed. However, there is always the possibility of being put on the ground against your will. At that point you have no choice but to ground fight. Knowing some things NOT to do once there might be helpful.

 

[randomg1t]

we actually do two on one grappling with some guys at the gym from time to time.

it changes the game quite a bit, yes.

 

[FistInFace]

Groundfighting with other people around is dumb, period.

Any kind of fighting when theres other people around is dumb, unless of course you have other peoples too. Multiple opponents = run, because you're likely going to end up on the ground anyway, but not under your own terms...

 

[Jiu-Jitsu Cop]

I like to see different ideas when it comes to fighting. I agree it is not best to go to the ground if other people are around. In a street fight I would try to stick with the knee in the belly or other top mount position. I also tend to punch more then go for a submission.

 

[wildcard_seven]

I will never cease to be amazed at the people who say, "going to the ground in a multiple attacker scenario is stupid." Okay, well if you are implying that to keep it standing is the best, I hope you only mean that you're in a better position to run away.

If you are fighting one of my buddies and me and a couple friends decide to jump in, I don't care if you are standing or on the ground. You're not going to be able to defend six fists and or legs coming at you simultaneously and from different angles. And if I'm the guy behind you, I'm going to do one of three things: A. Run up and punt you between the legs. B. Club you with the nearest hard object. C. Grab you, probably in a full nelson, with my legs one in front of the other and between yours, surf-board style, so you won't be kicking me in the nads--and my friends will promptly beat you into hamburger with an assortment of fists, objects, etc.


I've said it once, and I'll say it again, the only solution to fighting multiple attackers is not to, unless they are drunk, small, or obviously not game to fight. Track and field is the best training for multiple attackers.

In another thread similar to this one, there is a story about Urijah Faber being attacked by some locals in an Asian country. He ducked, dived, hit and ran, and barely got away with his life. And the vast majority of the story is about him dodging and running. There were ten guys, not easy for anyone, but it should be noted that he didn't take out one of them. Whenever he had a split second to throw a strike or semi-throw one of his attackers, it only served to create an opening for him to run. In the midst of dodging blows and trying to keep track of multiple people in various positions, he couldn't manage to land any solid, finishing blows.

If he had been anything less than an accomplished MMA fighter in the best shape of his life, he would have been toast. Imagine one of us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOQLg7Kc8So


Sorry about the rant, and I know no one has directly stated that you can out-strike multiple attackers. But that's what many people mean when they say, "I wouldn't go the ground in a street fight." But, it's very possible that you are all knowledgeable, sensible people and nobody meant that. This is for the goofballs who will inevitably show up and say that their brother KO'd six people in a streetfight--some of them armed, or "you can do it, you just have to...blah, blah, blah."

 

[Soid]

If you EVER take the guys back.. then instead of controlling him period just get off and run away. Sounds dumb.. but I'm also a retard myself.

 

[WarChild]

The only real tactic for multiple attackers is called a concealed carry permit.

 

[gringobling]

in a street fight or in a battle situation knee on belly is the best position because it is painful, easy to disengage if needed and there are a ton of things u can do from there.

 

[Astroth]

I will never cease to be amazed at the people who say, "going to the ground in a multiple attacker scenario is stupid." Okay, well if you are implying that to keep it standing is the best, I hope you only mean that you're in a better position to run away.

Exactly. People are often delusional when it comes to this kind of thing. The truth is that going to the ground against multiple attackers isn't that much worse than trying to keep it standing; and either way you're going to end up on the ground in that situation.

If it's one on one and no weapons, treat it like the UFC and play to your strengths. But those situations are rare. You will likely never find yourself in a "safe" environment for real one on one fighting.

 

[Bubble Boy]

I think I was originally thinking of this thread in terms of people who HAVE to engage and control other people: law enforcement, bouncers, military personel, security officers, jailers, loss prevention agents, concert security, etc.

In the context of a street fight, then of course fighting in a crowd is stupid, as is fighting at all. Street fights are fucking stupid.
But doing it as a job is a totally different scenario, and that's what I originally intended to address with this thread.

Don't put your hooks in if your trying to subdue and control (cuff or escort) a bad guy.


...

 

[Astroth]

I think I was originally thinking of this thread in terms of people who HAVE to engage and control other people: law enforcement, bouncers, military personel, security officers, jailers, loss prevention agents, concert security, etc.



Don't put your hooks in if your trying to subdue and control (cuff or escort) a bad guy.


...

I disagree with this. This situation is very different from a street fight. When a cop subdues a bad guy he generally has the numbers advantage. Watch Cops. It is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. The arresting officer is never in danger of being attacked by other people--it's a controlled situation ideal for ground control tactics. What police and security people deal with in their jobs is generally very different from what they might face during their off-duty hours.

 

[Poseidon9]

Matt Hughes/Rampage-style slams on concrete = Game over.

 

[Jiu-Jitsu Cop]

I disagree with this. This situation is very different from a street fight. When a cop subdues a bad guy he generally has the numbers advantage. Watch Cops. It is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. The arresting officer is never in danger of being attacked by other people--it's a controlled situation ideal for ground control tactics. What police and security people deal with in their jobs is generally very different from what they might face during their off-duty hours.

On the TV show Cops there is always backup there because everyone is following around the unit with the camera in it. I guess they all want to be on TV. We used to get drunk and watch that show just ot make fun of the tactics and how Officers ham it up for the camera. I also like how many supervisors go to the calls when they are on TV.


To answer a different persons response here, I believe standing is better when fighting multiple attackers as you can turn and run back if necessary. Or in my case retreat backwards until I am able to upgrade my force options depending on how amny people are attacking.

i would like to thank Bubbleboy for posting these ideas for it someting to consider. As always no technique will work all of the time but every technique can work if used at the right time.

 

[pbnation]

imo I would never take someone's back if there are multiple attackers. At that point, it would probably be more advantageous to stand up or runaway