Silat: Sparring and Exoticizing

**selfcritical** · Posted On: 6/20/2007 5:26pm

At the risk of sounding retarded(-er) I will offer my criterion of "suitability for multiple attackers"

1) when performing whatever manuver, can you quickly disengage and run away if more people show up?
2) can you see around you?
3) When someone inevitably grabs you and tries to hold you down/knock you down so his friend can hit you, can you get control of the clinch/whatever long enough to get a dominant position and disengage?
4) can you keep people from surronding you, and force your way through the gaps?

Anybody who says they can "fight" multiple opponents is pretty silly, unless we're talking about deploying weapons and using them. People who say they've got some good ideas for being able to "escape" multiple opponents is much less silly.

**Askari** · Posted On: 6/20/2007 5:36pm

Selfcritical,

You just described Judo. Nothing else can satisfy the criteria. Yours in Green, my responses in red bold:

1) when performing whatever manuver, can you quickly disengage and run away if more people show up?
==Judo - Grip breaking and throws
2) can you see around you?
==Well, I have eyes, so all arts fit this one - So Judo again
3) When someone inevitably grabs you and tries to hold you down/knock you down so his friend can hit you, can you get control of the clinch/whatever long enough to get a dominant position and disengage?
==Judo and/or wrestling
4) can you keep people from surronding you, and force your way through the gaps?
==Football (running back) and/or Rugby

So, my conclusion, is that if you train a combination of Rugby and Judo you have your best chances against multiple opponents based upon your initial 4 criteria.

I much prefer my solution of avoiding that lifestyle from the beginning. Eventually the choice to regularily fight multiple opponents is going to catch up with you.

**Jim_Jude** · Posted On: 6/20/2007 9:28pm

Originally Posted by Cullion

Standup arts are more useful against multiples.

True Dat!!! :new_usa:

**Jim_Jude** · Posted On: 6/20/2007 10:03pm

Originally Posted by Askari

Selfcritical,

You just described Judo. Nothing else can satisfy the criteria. Yours in Green, my responses in red bold:

1) when performing whatever manuver, can you quickly disengage and run away if more people show up?
==Judo - Grip breaking and throws
2) can you see around you?
==Well, I have eyes, so all arts fit this one - So Judo again
3) When someone inevitably grabs you and tries to hold you down/knock you down so his friend can hit you, can you get control of the clinch/whatever long enough to get a dominant position and disengage?
==Judo and/or wrestling
4) can you keep people from surronding you, and force your way through the gaps?
==Football (running back) and/or Rugby

So, my conclusion, is that if you train a combination of Rugby and Judo you have your best chances against multiple opponents based upon your initial 4 criteria.

The Silat style that I do now has all of this, mostly from its grappling aspects and maneuvering.

I much prefer my solution of avoiding that lifestyle from the beginning. Eventually the choice to regularily fight multiple opponents is going to catch up with you.

I totally agree with you & Marc MacYoung about this ;)
However, the last time I checked this wasn't a "couch potato / milquetoast / sedentary lifestyle" forum. I don't need to train for a safe lifestyle, I train for when trouble comes looking for me, for whatever reason. Who in their right mind seeks out trouble, really? I train for when I can't avoid the worst-case scenario, like multiple opponents. How hard is it to deal with one or two untrained guys? Not hard. More than that, or weapons, God forbid, is some worst-case scenario stuff, & while it is highly unlikely that it will happen, what does it hurt to train for it? Nothing. It's about as likely as getting attacked by a highly trained BJJer or Wrestler, but I've train in grappling too. In the same token, tho, I don't train for sport.
However, I plan on doing some crosstraining soon, I'm close to Thomas Denny & Craig Buchanan, they're just a few minutes away so I've got some decent & easily accessible resources.
SoCal is great in that respect.

**Cullion** · Posted On: 6/27/2007 8:19am

Originally Posted by Hedgehogey

You got tossed around the mosh pit the last time you tried to bring out this ridiculous TMA cliche. Kindly get out of my thread with the rest of the genetic undesirables in your crew.

It pisses you off because it's true. Simple logic and the video evidence available should tell you this.

**Boyd** · Posted On: 6/27/2007 12:15pm

It's also about as useful a statement for advancing productive discussion as "Tai Chi sucks", which is equally true.

**nomamao** · Posted On: 6/27/2007 1:14pm

I still don't think that multiple person scenarios are something you CAN truly train for.

I don't even get the point.

But, that's just me.

**Lampa** · Posted On: 6/27/2007 1:32pm

I got into one multiple attacker self defense scenario in my life, which is one more than a smart person gets into. As someone who is primarily stand-up and recently got into bjj, I used the one bit of grappling skill that was inuitive enough and trained enough to come. I pulled guard. Used the dude as a shield from the stomping for a little bit, both physically and psychologically as they didn't quite no how to approach it without hitting their guy. That staved them off long enough for the fight to get broken up by some of my friends. I was a lot less worse for ware than what would have happened if I tried to stand with one of them when they all started knocking me around.

Certainly, this technique wouldn't have worked if I were completely isolated. But, as it's the only multiple attacker scenario I've ever gotten into and I survived it by going to the ground, when people accept it as fact that you should never go to the ground with multiple attackers I'm sort of left to wonder. I normally don't mention it because it was one strange circumstance and I don't have anywhere near the kind of fighting experience to be handing out any axioms or generalities. But, could someone explain how they feel about the scenario I just described while we're on the "Never go to the ground with multiples" tangent, again.

**Askari** · Posted On: 6/27/2007 4:22pm

Lampa,

Strangely enough, I have a friend who had the same multiple attacker scenerio as you. Where he pulled guard and used one guy as a shield.

He survived with minimal superficial scratches and a few bumps. It was as he was leaving a place of work and I think he smacked one of them into a car.

But this guy was a fairly accomplished grappler at the time, though a smaller fellow.

Even given those two scenerios, I dont think of pulling guard as a good combat option.

**Jim_Jude** · Posted On: 6/27/2007 10:03pm

Originally Posted by Askari

Lampa,

Strangely enough, I have a friend who had the same multiple attacker scenerio as you. Where he pulled guard and used one guy as a shield.

He survived with minimal superficial scratches and a few bumps. It was as he was leaving a place of work and I think he smacked one of them into a car.

But this guy was a fairly accomplished grappler at the time, though a smaller fellow.

Even given those two scenerios, I dont think of pulling guard as a good combat option.

That's great! I never thought of that! I'm not going to do it if I can help it, but that's great that it came in handy.