I was once around some idiots at a party held by a bunch of people I didn't know in a house I didn't know in an area I was a total stranger to with no backup. I was completely drunk and got into an argument with some irritating guy and his mates in the garden/concrete hole out back. It got a bit physical and I ended up picking him up and slamming him on the floor from a standing back take. He didn't get up and his mates backed down. That was physical self defence (real SD would have been not being there at all), jujitsu and multiples. My overall point being that self-defence isn't a monolith and due to that BJJ has plenty of utility. edit - the Gracie's (Rener etc) are mostly full of rubbish.
I'd never deny that utility. Though it is variable, and BJJ isn't a monolith either: for instance I've seen some good stuff from Kestling, but also some bad stuff from Eli Knight, even though both were claiming to be "street" BJJ. Your example above demonstrates the psychological aspect of SD and multiple opponents. Sometimes you smash one and the rest back down. Often in MA people forget they are dealing with human beings who have emotions and motivations, rather than movie ninja cannon fodder.
You want to strike and be mobile, with an accent on being mobile. As a matter of fact against multiple guys I'd take parkour or being a 800m state champion over any martial art. Regardless, BJJ's quasi-entire approach to fighting is to close the distance, take down and submit. Cue the "but if you don't have no choice and are FORCED to go to the ground" argument. Well of course then you want to know what to do and of course has its applications. Though if it's just to learn the technical standup, you can drill that by yourself without ever stepping in a BJJ gym. But all that doesn't change the fact that vs multiples stillness is death and your priority is to be mobile. You don't even have to RBSD this whole scenario with protective gear. opr anything Just have one guy start a simple roll from stand up vs 2 or 3, even with his only goal to get back up as quickly as possible if he's taken down and/or stay on top if he takes someone down - and see how that works out for him.
Standing back take slams and technical standups aren't bjj trademarks. Core concept is to close the distance, take down and submit. Terrible idea vs multiples and that's that imo.
Thanks - makes sense In addition to the "strike and move" skill set I feel that developing the ability to grapple with the objective of damaging/controlling whilst retaining freedom of movement (& awareness of the surroundings) is important for these kind of situations And I agree that this is different to the core idea of "grapple to take down into a dominant position for a submission"
I also feel that sometimes combat sports people fall into the same trap they deplore in complaint arts - that they make proclamations about fighting more than one opponent without ever actually training it comprehensively under pressure.
Except they are a part of BJJ. Whether you consider them trademarks is irrelevant. The strategy vs a single assailant is as you stated but context dictates tactics and I think you'd be reasonably hard pressed to find anyone advocating it against multiples unless they were being particularly stubborn, or disingenuous. I don't think BJJ is some panacea, I believe in being functional in all ranges. I think the biggest thing in fighting multiples is being tough and being smart/tactical. Any athletic training can help somewhat with the former, the rest is on you/me or the subject of specific training. BJJ has its utility even against multiples and it's just willfully ignorant to suggest otherwise. It's also ignorant to suggest it is infallible and provides an optimal or even complete answer to physical defence.
I think what you mostly get is the acceptance that it's not a focus of their training and an acknowledgement that it's a tough situation which they have to find their own responses too if necessary. My personal approach is the same whether it's one or multiples and that's use soft skills and social intelligence to avoid or subvert conflict. I test it in reality and it works 99℅ of the time. The few times it hasn't I've just had to tuck my chin and go with the flow. My physical training has worked well enough thankfully though I don't delude myself it cant fail
actual the technical standup is a very bjj specific movement. Circumstances always dictate tactics, anyone who says otherwise is lying.
Well, I'll take your word for that because I'm not plugged-in to that culture. Going by the internet I see just as many combat sport proponents saying "I'd do x" as TMA proponents, rather than "because of training y, I'd do x", when applying their training to real world violence. Although on the internet sometimes distinguishing between people who practice combat sports, as opposed to just watching them, is not always easy. Personal experience trumps all else, but I'm sure you'd agree that a syllabus needs to be built on more if someone is claiming the ability to teach these things.
Undeniably, if someone is claiming to teach SD and specifically multiple opponent functionality then they will need to show how they do that before I take them too seriously.
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixDXD44_yA"]Fight 1 of the TFC Event 1 LPH (Poznan, Poland) vs Wisemen (Gothenburg, Sweden) - YouTube[/ame] [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L98XNNSFuws"]Jeff Curran & Rich Clementi Tag team MMA match! - YouTube[/ame] [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR5vXLK_GAw"]EGO - 4 vs 4 Tag Team Submission Wrestling - YouTube[/ame] [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dx3NKDt-dU"]BJJ Games : Tag Team Rolling - YouTube[/ame] Do any of these count? We often do 2 vs 1 grappling rounds, as well as 1 vs 1 ''get the hell up rounds'', and ''Hold them down rounds'', all for sports specific and gym entertainment sake, but its likely there's some SD crossover too.
Only if you (general you) actually train in them. Otherwise it's like someone who does BJJ thinking they can beat everyone in the world up because Royce Gracie did. TFC is an absolute joke though. Anyone trained to work as a team would annihilate them. Reminds me of how the Romans did so well against the tribes of Europe because they were uninterested in going mano-a-mano and used impersonal group tactics to slaughter them. Maybe in a few years time they might figure out some group tactics, or maybe it is deliberately like that because they think it makes better television. The scantily clad women dancing at the start also reminded me of some of the off-putting aspects of combat sports Sounds fun!
I think there is something more important than the specific art. I think what is more important is the self defense skills that needed to be used before any BJJ skills should come into play... namely awareness and avoidance. How did you get into a multiple attacker scenario and were there any options to escape before violence started? To me, that is the more important notion... how do you avoid the trouble in the first place? Now, that said, in a multiple attacker situation, I sure would want some skills in fighting. BJJ provides excellent ground skills and practice under pressure. At some point against multiple attackers, unless you can break away and run, you will probably end up on the ground... in that case, I think I'd be grateful for the skills.
Yeah, that part goes without saying. Although we shouldn't be too myopic about it; sometimes people have justified reasons for choosing to enter that sort of situation. Of course the skills are good to have, but let's not get caught in the "90% of fights end up on the ground" myth. Even by the modern standard of "it's only true if I can see it on YouTube", the examples of successful engagement with multiple opponents show that employing high mobility and accurate punching without going to the ground is the way to go.
Just throwing in a though on this I'm not saying this is what you meant by the comment, but often I hear people advocating that running away is very much "Plan A" in dangerous situations I'm not sure that that's the case..... there are numerous incidents of people being chased by mobs only to hit an obstacle and get caught with their back turned, the concept of routing and so on A student of mine is an A&E surgeon in London (that's an ER Doctor to those of you across the pond) and he has had to deal with a crazy amount of knife injuries. His experience is that knife wounds to the front are typically less serious than those received to the back despite the additional protection provided by clothing and anatomy. There are other factors at play of course, but it's an interesting data point I think I'm not saying that running not an option, but in some arts they have the concept of cause damage (typically targeted to reduce their ability to chase you) then escape. Which is a little different from just legging it
Couldn't be more wrong imo. When determining whether martial art X is good vs Y (the question here btw), we're looking at the art’s core tactical approach and not merely whether it offers a few usable techniques, especially when those aren’t specific to that art. The technical stand up and whatever else applicable to SD bjj offers does not make its conceptual approach any better suited for multiples. Again, vs multiples you want to be able to stick and move. Being mobile is key and any fighting style whose core concept leaves you tied up and exposed is a horrible idea. Circumstances always dictate tactics? Well of course - and by that very token bjj’s tactical approach to fighting vs multiples is bad. Sure you can be trained in bjj and choose a tactic different from the close-the-distance/takedown/submit vs multiples – but then are you doing bjj? If you think its core approach is sound though have at it. Like I said just start a roll standing vs 3 and let us know how that worked out. One of the most usable things you can do is probably to try and put one of the assailants in a choke hold and use them as a shield while formulating an exit or de-escalation strategy. That’s if you’ve even learned how to get to the standing choke during your bjj training you in the first place, which I’d venture to say the overwhelming majority of bjj students have never done. Original question is whether bjj is good vs multiples. It’s a pretty clear no as far as I am concerned. To anyone believing it’s fine, well let’s agree to disagree and best of luck in any future multiples endeavors.
Agreed - Reminds me of one of my instructor's favourite sayings on the matter: "If you are going to run, just be prepared for the fact that you may have to fight tired!" An important distinction. Travess
You can make the optimal decision and still have a negative outcome. Just ask any serious poker. Turning your back in stabbing range is not only stupid, it's obviously a major SD blunder. The alternative to fleeing is staying and engaging that same mob. Your pick.
It would have to be a very good reason to choose to enter a multiple attacker situation. If it's from a military or police reason, then I imagine there will be some sort of escalation and team usage of weapons or other tactics. As an individual, escape should be the first recourse. I can think of few reasons why I would willingly enter a multiple attacker scenario if there were any sort of possible escape. Even then, the goal would then be to escape... I didn't mention anything about the old 90% number and do chuckle over the notion of a predominantly 'stand-up' guy (Taekwondo and Hapkido) defending BJJ. My philosophy on the topic is that having BJJ ground skills > having no BJJ ground skills in a multiple attacker situation. That said, if you remain in a multiple attacker scenario, there is a good chance of ending up on the ground, especially if you get surrounded or trapped, and even if you deploy some sort of weapon. Are you arguing that in a multiple attacker situation that it is more likely that you will keep your feet? Yes, option 1 is being "aware" of where you are, the potential escape routes and so on and option 2 is AVOIDING that place period. Option 3 is de-escalation and trying to get away from the situation through verbal skills and walking/running away. The next options are where it gets ugly and why I used the term "break away"... if it gets physical then I need to use my distance, footwork and strikes to open up an escape route. I may have to deploy a weapon to open up an escape route. I also have to consider that I may be taken to the ground, and if I am, then I need to have to plan to get back up or survive on the ground until I can get back up and escape. My ultimate goal is to escape... not necessarily win. I have to get out and get home to my loved ones. The more skills that I have, the better... and that includes ground skills.
