Multiple opponents

iv'e read most of the posts, everyone has their own version of how to deal with multiple opponents. we shou shu people know full well how to deal with almost impossible odds, it's been tested in real life situations time and time again. shou shu is designed especially for multiple opponents. da shifu al moore actually had to take on 12 opponents at once many many years ago, 8 of them had to go to the hospital and the rest of them needed first aid. an absolute true story from da shifu al sr. himself. this is the man that taught thousands of people his techs. picture this.... 5 or 6 guys jump a shou shu student or for that matter anyone who can handle multiples, the first guy gets 4 fingers in the eyes and a skull seperated from his spine, the 2nd guy gets his knee dislocated and a pulverized jaw.... do u think the next 4 guys will want to rush in and get some of that? if it's me taking on multiples that means i'm fighting for my life, no barganing, no pleading... it's a life threatning situation which means no rules. anyone of the non-believers are more than welcome to visit any shou shu school in california to see for yourself. iv'e read alot of the posts by the sceptics and u all have the right to be sceptical, i would to if i were in your position. salute

 

If you’re not sure your correct, how do you know if you’re incorrect? To know what’s incorrect you need to know what’s correct and as you say, you now sure? Who or what do you observe and imitate.

I think that’s a bad way to learn martial arts, and can quite frankly be dangerous. You don’t take driving lesions on you own because you wanna find the pros and cons yourself.

Are your sparring partners martial artists? Why not join them in their class and after gaining tuition in some fundamentals of MA, it'll be easier to create you own.

 

id like to visit a shou shu school someday, not because i disrupte anything you guys are claiming, i just think it would be a really good experience for learning . dont spose you know of any schools in england? lol..well if im ever in california ill try and drop by .

going back to main topic i reckon i could take on at least two people (non- MAists). but if i felt my life was threatened in anyway when i was being attacked i wouldnt give any mercy. i do have no idea why one or two people have been so quick to dismiss what the Shou Shu'ers are claiming having probably not even seen or tryed Shou Shu ...i like to at least try or witness something before i completely dismiss as total rubbish..

 

Tangentially I might be visiting England this coming fall. I wouldn't mind meeting some MAP'ers while I'm there to compare notes.

 

cool , where abouts you thinking of visiting?

 

London, that is of course if my girl moves there and not someother city-pending we're still together. From the looks of it, not a prob. We may even be visiting sooner than the fall though to do some sightseeing. I've never been and she wants to show me around. Love travelling.

 

Sir, your generalization of "average street thug or bar fighting patron. everday life type of opponent" is totally subjective. Unless you start naming and listing abilities to exact specifications, there is no way to say anything accurate about the matter.

As for me, I have been studying WC for 4yrs, BJJ 3yr, TKD3yr, Shotokan2yr, 5 Animals 1yr and I don't even know how to answer that hypothetical question of yours. It just depends on the abilities of the "average" opponent. I would be safe to say that I could probably BARELY take on ONE opponent, much less any more than that!

In my opinion, combat is so fundamentally complex and fluid that it is difficult to deal with just one opponent. There are almost infinite things that could happen. To multiply that by 3 or 4 fold factor is mind boggling. Also, I personally think that arts that concentrate on multiple attackers are imagining their opponents in a more superficial level and do not take the potential abilities of said opponent(s) into consideration. Sure you can take steps in training like footwork scenarios to deal with multiple attackers and such, but in reality, your attackers aren't going to follow that scripted training pattern that you might have practiced. It might even give the practitioner a false sense of security!

Just my opinion folks.

Viet

 

By all means your ?'s have been valid.

Our training methods arent scipted for multiple attackers. its a controlled free for all in training. we crawl, walk, run. eventually we get to a point where after we make contact with the first attacker the second comes in or we have to chose from more than one coming in at the same time. where from dont know have to keep your head on a swivel. if you get clocked in training you know you must train harder.

this type of training isnt an option, it is a given. we train on this part as much as one on one training.

Salute,

Blue

 

Hello Sphyerion, I don't mean to sound belittling to your claims of self teaching. But, if you are truly self taught, then you would not have to look at any clips of any art. Now, since you learn from looking at clips or reading etc... one can logically say that you are not self taught. On the contrary, you are learning from those instructors, only in this case, you do not even have the benefit of verbal or tactile interaction and feedback from those instructors. Indeed, it would seem that you are learning from the instructor while being twice removed from him/her. I would think that the students who have contact and communication with those instructors that actually have an advantage over you in this case. Especially if the student is intelligent enough to ask and ponder over movements or techniques after learning them. You however, do not even have the benefit of first hand demonstration(s) of these techniques that you claim to refine or discard after your own experience with them.

How do you know that you are performing them correctly if they were not demonstrated on you in the beginning? If you tried a technique and it failed, it might be because you might have performed it incorrectly. I don't believe it is possible to look at a technique on a video, read about it and then do it correctly without first hand experience of the technique done by a master. That way, you can feel what it feels like to be on the receiving end of said technique. Yes, imitation alone is quite inadequate, but a good teacher knows that there are steps to mastering a technique. And I believe that most students follow these steps if they are in a reputable school.

1. Introduction/Explanation
2. Mechanization (imitation of technique)
3. Elaboration (by teacher and questions by students)
4. Refining (practice, practice, practice)
5. Application (try to use it in sparring or a fight)
6. Evaluation (is it good for my body type, strength, speed levels etc..)
7. Adoption or Rejection

I hope that you realize that you sound arrogant when you claim to be self taught and you don't own the fact that your knowledge was created before your birth. What's more, I hope that you give credit to any sifu or sensei that you happen to do your research on. There's an old saying that everyone's heard before..."it looks easy on paper..."

Good sir, please do not take this as an attack. I just want to be very frank with your and want to show you what went on in my mind. Feel free to speak in your defense. Best wishes.

Viet

 

5 dead bodies...

Excellent, Sir, excellent. A well thought out response without any sense of defensiveness in tone! Thank you for your martial way of replying. I will say this in reply...I hope that you are successful in this method of training and realize the goal of your studies. In the meantime, think about this:

"What would you do if five already dead bodies tumbled on top of you simultaneously?"

 

i would move out of the way since they have no motor skills to redirect the fall. since they are dead they fall in a linear pattern on top of each other to the line of the original target. me being the original target i would move out of the path of them.

just drunken statement. Man that was good BBQ we hand tonight.

Salute,

 

didn't read the whole thread...stinks too much of HORSE POO POO

 

LOL, that's a good answer!, But I meant 5 dead bodies at multiple angles, heck, let's just say you're surrounded by the dead bodies and some crazy mad scientist launches them at you simultaneously. (you're probably cracking up by now...'cause I am just thinking about the scenario!). Anyways, my point is that, if that happened, even though they are dead, it would still be at least a little difficult to deal with them initially. They would momentarily overwelm you by coming at all 5 angles simultaneously. Now just imagine turning up the juice and giving them senseless wailing movements while they are coming at you simultaneously. Then if you can deal with that, add on basic intelligence, then add on the desire to demolish you. Hmmm, sounds pretty harsh to deal with no? Give them good size, and strength. I would just run.

Best wishes.

Viet

 

the thread was meant to spark ideas not closed opinions of a post.

Do you train multiple opponents and if not why??

 

The idea behind fighting multiple opponents is not to have them all coming at you from every different direction simultaneously. It is that YOU even up the playing field by whatever means necassary.
This means using whatever weapons are at hand. It means using your terain to the best of your advantage. It means positioning yourself so that fewer people can attack you at once. It means taking whatever steps are necessary to finish the conflict as quikly as possible (and this is the only stage that cannot be trainded for). And yes, it means getting the hell out of there as soon as you can. This seems to be the only point at which I disagree with the Shou shu boys.

Hakko-ryu, if you didn't read the entire thread, how can you hope to benefit from it? Why even bother to post???

 

ah london cool, but i live about 200 miles from london lol...unfortuantely. Yeah i see, well its a nice place for the most part, very big and crowded though . yeah i mean to travel lots of places more when im a bit older

 

if you come to the UK u should check out my local pub

Prince of Wales Cheltenam, they'll soom set u straight about multiple attackers !

Might bring u lot back to reality !!

 

Realisticly , i could take on 1- 3 depending on mood , time of day , how awake i am , it all depends on timing , and of course it depends on how the oppenents react ,
most people do not fight often enough to know how to react in a fight and untill they do they would have a shock coming to them

 

Well, basically what you just said here is that just because I observed someone else's style, I can no longer be considered self-taught? That simply is not true. What your'e saying here is that in order to be self-taught, I can not make any contact with any other martial artist. lol. Self-taught simply means to teach yourself. No more, no less. And in that regard. I am self-taught.

Whether or not you think it is possible is unimportant to me. I've met three types of reactions to my choice of learning method. 1> Respect
2> Disinterest 3> Claim impossible

the first, is usually one who understands how it is possible.
the second doesn't care because he realizes that how I learn does not effect his successful way of learning.
the third, claims the method impossible simply because he cannot acheive it or does not know how.

and ONCE AGAIN, i need to point out IMITATION is NOT What i am doing!! i do NOT imitate. I study the essential philosphy, and find the merits, and place that philosphy in my style. When I see someone punch, I dont' copy his punch. For example: watching a tai chi practictioner, I might point out his structure is good, seek to understand why his posture is good. And after discovering that his posture's goal is to have balance, I would understand the importance of balance and proceed to apply the concept of balance into my art.

To call me arrogant is to show your ignorance. You dont' even understand what I do, and you presume to point out my flaws. I DO own the fact that what I do was created before my birth. I can teach myself a new language from a book. Doesn't mean that I think the language was invented by me. And I do not give any credit to any teacher, simply because I have no teacher. I do however always give credit to each philosophy and where I discovered that philosophy from.

For example> Tai Chi in regards to bone structure and balance

To know what's incorrect, you dont' need to know what's correct. You know what's incorrect simply by seeing that it doesn't work. To know what's correct, you must first know what is incorrect. i do NOT imitate. please, stop saying that. I explained that above ...

Driving lessons isn't about perfection. MA is. And to attain perfection, it is best to understand things to the utmost degree of perfection.

And, i'd like to point out that Miyamoto Musashi was self-taught. If you'd like to say that being self-taught is difficult, I would more than willingly agree. But it is possible, contrary to what many of you seem to believe.

 

You just totally contradicted you self there:
- To know what's incorrect, you dont' need to know what's correct.
- To know what's correct, you must first know what is incorrect.

Ying & Yang, you cant determine one with out knowing the other. If a technique doesn’t work, it may be that you performing it wrong.