Are all MAs BS at SD cos of Multiple Opponents?

**CanucKyokushin** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 9:38am

I probably looked at the chart wrong. But it did seem to show your more then likely to get into a one on one fight then multiple.

What are the situations that you might find yourself in a multiple attack of fight you'd have a lot to do with what the Hell you think your trying to do.

-Chances are your more then likely to get jumped in a bar my 2 or more guys for mouthing off to someone (This is from my personal experience). :new_all_c

-You are probably going to get your ass kicked for deciding to take a short-cut thru the park that is frequented by drunken teens that are looking for something to do. :tard:

-You are more then likely to get your ass kicked for trying to be something chivalrous by helping out a women who is being harassed by some punks on street. :angel2:

-You are more then likely to get your ass kicked at a sporting event by wearing the visiting teams Jersey and deciding to walk down a street full of home town fans. :qcheerlea

Whatever situation that might bring you stupid ass into fighting multiple opponents may have a lot to do with your decision that got you there in the first place.

**Strong Machine** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 11:03am

Fighting 2 or 3 guys is risky.But if they're untrained average athletes and you are fit and train hard and correctly, you got a very good chance of winning.
Some think beating 5 guys is easy.
Others think beating 2 is almost impossible.They are both wrong.

**kevinbjjplayer** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 11:36am

okay i see just **** in a dark alley or somethin. Hey what about one of those cool pimp canes with a sword in them.

**bodar** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 11:58am

My problem with the poster's premise is that there's still about a 60% chance that you'll get into a one-on-one fight. How does that make MA's USELESS for self-dense? And it's already been said that good training is far better than none at all. Maybe you won't completely own the 3 guys that jump you, but your training might allow you the opportunity to minimize your injury and get away, whereas someone without such conditioning might be screwed. You will never be completely prepared for every situation, but it doesn't hurt to try.

**patfromlogan** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 12:07pm

Originally Posted by I aint punchy!?

...is the study of martial arts worthless as a means of self defense????[for multiples]

Well, no. Like anything else, it's a matter of skill. My Kyokushin sensei was willing to take on three guys who were hassling a woman and they decided not to fight him. A wise choice since he was a karate champ at that time and he'd have destroyed them. I've never fought multiples myself. I'd dial 911! I did step up to help a guy in a three on one and tried hard to look dumb, fat, and non-agressive. Let them yell, played stupid (it WAS a reach) and waited, planning a osoto gari and smash fucker's head on concrete, side kick guy in middle etc... But they decided getting high on meth and yelling was as far as they wanted to take it.

**kevinbjjplayer** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 12:12pm

hhhmmm I like your game plan PATFROMLOGAN

**Niloc** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 2:14pm

Originally Posted by kevinbjjplayer

What kind of weapon would you use in a street fight? Like a katana or nunchukas?

I've trained for a lot of years and been in a lot of fights and more often than not I find that losing it works best in multiple situations. Your goal is to be as vicious as possible. The correct attitude is that they'll get you eventually, but you'll make them pay dearly for it. They'll stop fighting if you hurt a couple of them pretty badly.

And for weapons, anything that you can launch someone into makes a great weapon. Other retards, walls, cars, parking meters, or windows. I don't have weapons handy at work and the police would frown on me cracking some kid with a jo.

**Niloc** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 2:16pm

Originally Posted by kevinbjjplayer

okay i see just **** in a dark alley or somethin. Hey what about one of those cool pimp canes with a sword in them.

Jail (at least up here in Canada).

**dakotajudo** · Posted On: 5/14/2005 3:37pm

Originally Posted by bodar

My problem with the poster's premise is that there's still about a 60% chance that you'll get into a one-on-one fight.

It's actually much higher than that. Of all crimes of violence, 79.5% involved a single attacker.

Of all attempts, about one third were completed (4.9 million vs 1.6 million).

About half of all attempts (2.4 mil of 4.9) involved strangers. Less than a third were completed (0.7 million). Of these, 57.8 percent involved one offender.

The other half of attempts, involving non-strangers; 89.3% of completed attempts involved a single offender, but again, about a third of attempts were completed.

In otherwords, if you are attacked, there is a 2/3 chance that you won't fight at all, regardless of the number of attackers.

Multiple attackers also seems to be skewed towards robbery - about half of robberies are multiple. Cases of assault and rape tend (4/5) tend to involve single offenders.

More importantly, the majority of crimes of violence (3.3 mil of 4.9) are simple assaults - hardly a fight, really. More rare are the beat-downs (i.e. aggravated assault); 0.8 of 4.9. Three-quarters (76.3%) of aggravated assault involved one offender.

NB. As I understand it, simple assault usually means without weapons, and resulting in no serious injuries.

I would assume that the table given represents reported crimes. Do we know if the unreported crimes tend more towards single or multiple attacks; simple or aggravated assaults? The vast majority of what I've seen in bars and such tend to be simple assault, one offender.