Defending against multiple opponents? Possible?

The way I always saw things go was that "multiple opponents" was a two way street.

Thinking of fighting without a single buddy present was equal to contemplating suicide.

I don't claim to be a SD authority so I'll leave it to the better guys here to answer your questions.

One thing I will add, however, is that students need to be informed they will get clocked without even realising it (been times when I/we "won" and I still walked away with a bloody nose without knowing I'd been hit).

 

Review DARTs video clips....

see the chaos and who doesnt get hit

usually the guy or gal who hits one opponent and creates some good distance..

look at the knife clips specifically and see how many people get cut..

Sucker punches are easy to throw in multi assailant situations...

noone is infallble ..not even the pope when it comes to SD and multiple attackers

Smurf

 

Escape is always possible - BUT - the best chances arrive at the begining of an encounter when they think you are a sucker.

Once they realise you are not a sucker, it boils down to how much they want to beat/rob/whatever you.

Once an avenue of escape opens up (which can include some contact on you to them e.g. a push - because they are blocking your path), its best not to antagonise the situation and de-escalate the encounter - you have escaped - good ridance to the scum-bags - but don't give them reason to want more.

I have gotten out of such encounters on a few occasions - for me it has been evasion and on 2 occasions some small contact to remove them. Very recently 2 street punks tried to rob me in the Paris metro - to which I took great exception and exploded back at 1 of them who really scarpered, the other who was not directly involved came back provoking me, but I did not rise to his bait i.e. I did not antagonise him - I was too busy making sure my backpack was intact and visually informing him of this. Thus he would have to had directly attacked me, which in my opinion 1 on 1 (the other had had enough and was off), is relatively easy to deal with.

I do not fancy all-out confrontations with more than 1 kiddo.

 

My strategy - which is not perfect or water-tight - is to inform the kiddos with my body-movement - and not words or raised fists - that it is probably not worth their efforts bothering with me.

 

Multiple attackers is a problem - it's more about psychology than fighting - you have to be willing to do what it takes to make yourself an unattractive target...

One of the basic techniques I teach (When your LIFE is actually at risk - not when you got your sorry drunk butt into stupid teenage trouble) is to take a bite out of the throat of an attacker... YES you read that right... If the situation is extreme you need to know how to do extreme things... Parry or attack, get to the rear and side, control the head, expose the neck, be a WOMPIRE - ENJOY IT... Spit the chunk of flesh (big or small) at your 'new found friends' and tell them (With ABSOLUTE certainty) that you are happy that they came here to die... [Yes of course the actual 'threat' will vary depending on the situation] - If the situation is life threatening (to you) you have to turn it around... And YES of course if there was an easier or less extreme option you will have used it... But a gang attack is - to me - people trying to beat and kick me to death...

Most people don't know how to inflict serious damage QUICKLY and even if they know, they don't practice it regularly - you can't do what you don't practice...

Using one person as a shield is an excellent SHORT TERM tactic, but then you have to know how to incapacitate someone so they can't fight back BUT keep them on their feet so you can use them... YES it is doable and YES it is tricky to get right and YES they are going to get hurt (if you do it right).

BTW - I'm teaching in 25 minutes time - think I have decided on tonight's theme :evil:

 

It generally happened to you because under pressure against a dominant striker you tried to go for a takedown without a pattern interrupt on the striker. As a result you were still being hit as you went for your takedowns which resulted in an ineffective takedown and you now being in a poorer position than when you started and getting hit while on the ground. That's in part a reflection of your training weighting at the time, in part a reflection of your experience versus the person you are fighting. It's a matter of tactic appropriateness.

Want me to upload the video of the last time?

 

This is my tack more or less.

This does escalate the encounter.

 

If 1 fully commits towards you, he is potentially making himself a shield, provided you can get round the side of him, before he knows whats what - and you have to pivot him around you to form the barrier.

I can do this in training fairly easily. Real-life I would not like to have to try.

More that 2 determined kiddos , I can't see what can be done. Even 2 determined kiddos is 1 too many.

Momentary surprise is your only avenue. Once they realise you are not a sucker, then it gets much nastier - if you antagonise them and/or they really want to have you for breakfast.

I see no harm in training this type of stuff, but being realistic about the contrived situation is vital IMHO.

 

> 1 vs 1 is and will always be a losing proposition. Any system that pretends to teach people how to beat multiple opponents" is full of it. There are things you can do to slightly increase your odds but that's all you're doing - you're slightly increasing your odds. Same is true of knife/gun defense btw. Nothing's guaranteed. You're just taking steps to slightly increase the odds in your favor. As for the WHAT to do, there'll be a few schools of thoughts though each will have overlapping rules/principles, the biggest one being to always keep everyone in your field of vision. Obviously there are things you should never consider doing against multiple opponents e.g. try on your awesome flying armbar. I personally think that sticking and moving is only to be considered if you are an excellent striker. For SD purposes, I'd never advise John Smith to do that. It is pretty much for sure that he'll be taken to the ground and beaten to a pulp. Best option in my book is to pick the guy closest to you and attempt to take his back and use him as a buffer. Threaten the other guys with their buffer's life and order them to back off as loudly as you can.

 

It's important to remember that the dynamic of multiples in Fight Quest is going to be different to that of any multiple person SD event. The foreknowledge of the fight, the tactics of either/both group, the rules, the environment, the different pre fight all set that up.

That said, as with any event where people are trying to knock out or hurt each other, there will be overlaps.

You seem to be reaching towards a pretty obvious conclusion. Is fighter more than one person harder than just one person? Almost always yes. The reason why the 'almost' applies is that because in groups people sometimes create greater escape opportunities because they are watching or reacting to others, because people get in each other's way, and because they can be intimidated by what happens to others.

Is it possible to beat more than one person? Yes. Is it likely? The odds are less in your favour. Is there anything I can do to improve those odds? Train it regularly and adopt a proactive approach.

How does Sampsi do in multiples? He doesn't get hit much and they are pretty decisively in his favour. He does have problems chasing fleeing/retreating targets though.

 

More than One Determined Individuals will get the best/upperhand against one sole

 

I have trained with people who have had success with multiples and I hAve been in one situation with two people. That started against one but his mate came in from the side and it turned into two on one. That's was more my lack of awareness and not dealing with the original person quick enough, in my opinion.

I would say that there is no special way to deal with multiples and that the foundation of being able to do so,if possible, is still based on being able to,first,beat one skilled individual. It is not the case that a person will magically be able to beat two or more people ,yet can't do well in a one on one. I concentrate on that ,and doing it as quickly as possible whilst trying to be aware of what's going on around.
I think it's a good idea to treat all training ,when it comes to being specific to real situations, like they will turn into multiple attacks and that they might have a knife. It brings urgency to everything and keeps it all similar rather than doing one thing for this, then another for that.
What's most likely to be effective, to my knowledge so far if your unarmed and can't get away, is dirty boxing whilst being able to rapidly move in all directions, especially to hit repeatably and aggressivly while moving backwards, push, shove and fend off grabs and attempts to pull you down.

 

Worlds apart IMO. There are overlaps, but the fight dynamic is as different as the one on one fight dynamic between the two environments.

 

I also, hAve been in one situation with two people....:evil:

On a serious note....if there are multiple people with knives...you better have a multiple shooting firearm and at a safe distance

When there is about to be multiple unarm individuals:

1.) Note the easiest exist or space to run

2.) Have your own multiple to back you up

 

I would say it's possible, but it's not wise unless there is no way out. If that's the case... hurt one as badly as possible and perhaps that may deter the others. I'd do a Tyson and bite the guys ear off or a piece of his face and then spit it at his friends and if that doesn't work... well I guess you have to fight until you go down and the ball up and hope for the best lol.

 

I've dealt with this on occasion at work. You see a fight on the dancefloor, but there's a server or barback suddenly caught in the middle, so waiting for the backup you've just called is insufficient.

Even if you weren't wearing club-security wear and gear, you can be recognized as a bouncer if you've worked at the same venue for some time, so as soon as you go and try to fish the server/barback out of there, you'll be a target--and the only one until the other doormen and floormen get there (remember, they're pushing through tight-packed crowds of patrons).

There's no magic solution. Whatever your MA base, condition yourself by training in hard-hitting standup where you learn to duck, slip and--as a last resort--withstand, learn to stick and move, stick and move. You will get hit, something which you may or may not notice until you're writing up the incident report afterward.

If you can move in fast, get the trapped staffer and move away by pounding straight out through the least crowded part of the brawl, the confusion and lighting situation can cause your adversaries to get in each others' way as they try to zero in on you/each other/the other staffer. If you have to KO anyone, try to make it the most belligerent individual and then charge through over his fallen form with the server/barback close by you. Douche #1's buddies, by hemming and hawing about whether or not to step over their fallen big-bro and come after you, will likely be unable to do anything decisive before the rest of your team gets there.

Obviously, if there's no noncombatant caught in the middle of the brawl-of-idiots, just wait for backup while the imbeciles bash away at each other, and just keep others from watching from too close (or joining in).

 

A very informative thread with some excellent points and views , very rarely addressed but it is good skills to always train with the focus that you may be facing more than one opponent but our training by gravities often fall into the trap of training to defending against one opponent. I think there are principles that generally apply against multiple opponents and they have been excellently covered in this thread but when I cover the subject I tend to dissected it, then apply the general principles shaping them to the specific situation one may find oneself in .
To me dealing with two youths who are about to attempt to Rob you of your phone at 2pm in the afternoon I believe is slightly different to sharing a train carriage with a load of Soccer Hooligans who team as lost and are picking on anyone to hit. Your fighting space is different and the intent is totally different; one wants to rob you and get away and violence for them is the last resort and the threat of it the first resort whilst for the other fighting is a release of that frustration and aggression and you are the punchbag for it.
A pair of street robbers might be put off by an effective strike i.e knocking one of them out with one hit, in the other situation fighting back may edges them on(that’s not to say one should not fight for ones life). Ones response is the same but the effect on the opposition can be different.
A few years ago I did some research for an article on a London street gang who used to rob people on the tube. Looking at the CCTV I think it was a point made by someone in the thread that because of the confirmed space in the tube if someone fought back the gang could not all hit at the same time. Although the assaults were very violent; thankfully the victims were not seriously hurt physically at least. Interestingly they picked on a wide variety of people not always those that came across as victims some people were picked on because the gang assessed that the victim would fight back.
Defending oneself against multiple opponents is extremely difficult at best seizing the initiative, luck and the ability to hit hard and move quickly, an example of which is the youtube clip of the Kurdish Boxer who from memory knock six of them down if not out. A classic boxing principle hit and move, hit and move which he had the space to do so in and used it to his maximum advantage.