Fighting Strategy

[pilgrimsunwukun]

Setting up some parameters1) the fighters are of equal ability(I know nothing is equal, speed, strength, skill,attitude, timimg all vary) but the two fighters are considered good by their Sifu and the scenario is not a 230 pounder with 22 years of experience verse a 10 year old who just earned a white belt. (2) there are no rules except to win (3) along with (2) weapons like knives beer bottles bats guns are present or could be cause you never know (4) this is war in the street and not fighting in a ring.

1) Position is more important then speed but you need timing to get into position
2) to be able to direct your opponent is more important then being stronger then your opponent
3) Fighting from the outside is not as good as fighting inside
4) Soft is better then hard.
5) It's better to rely on a big bomb as opposed to have smaller/weaker hits set up the big bomb, ( really ? smile smile )
6) It's best to open the opponent's centerline

Hopefully Sifu with EXPERIENCE teaching like Northern Shaolin, Iron Tiger, Piercing Hammer, Mooyongmantis(sp?) the Empoer's long fist Sifu from Chicago , can add some input.

Pilgrim Sun Wu Kung / Steve

[lkfmdc]

1. The distance between you and your opponent dictates whether an effective offense is possible. If you are not close enough to attack you have two options;

A) Stay out of range, assume a comfortable position from which you can launch all attacks (your fighting stance), and wait for your attacker to attack. This is called "SETTING".

B) Circle your attacker while out of range and wait for an opening.

2. The distance between you and your opponent dictates which tools you will use;

A) At long range the legs are best used to inflict damage, maintain distance, unbalance and break your opponent’s rhythm.

B) At middle range the hands are best used to inflict damage, deflect attacks and control.

C) At short range the elbows, knees and head can inflict damage while throws can be used to incapacitate them. Certain standing submissions can also be used to incapacitate an opponent. Takedowns can place an opponent in a position where you can stomp on them.

3. Footwork is the “secret” to effective offense and defense. It is simultaneously the most basic and most advanced skill.

4. The second most important line of defense is the high guard. It will deflect and absorb blows the fighter may not have even been aware of.

5. A fighter must learn how to effectively close the distance, to move forward without exposing themselves to a counter attack.

6. Circular techniques are the most powerful and most natural, particularly circular kicks such as the round kick. However, they expose the fighter using them to certain dangers and should be tempered by the use of straight techniques as well.

7. Straight kicks such as the foot jab and side kick are difficult and seem unnatural but skill in them can be acquired with appropriate practice. Once skill is acquired, their effectiveness can be quite impressive.

8. It is essential to remain even in emotion in order to effectively evaluate the situation you are in. You must be cautious and patient. Determine your opponent’s strengths and weaknesses. Determine whether your opponent is an aggressive or defensive (counter attack) fighter.

9. Attack the weak points of an opponent while avoiding their strengths.

10. Capitalize on mistakes and extremes. Push your attack against an overly defensive fighter. Wait patiently and counter attack an overly offensive fighter.

11. Effectiveness in fighting depends not only upon your ability to use your own techniques but also upon your ability to defend against and counter your opponent’s techniques. This means a diligent and complete practice of all the techniques.

12. A less forceful but quick and accurate strike that actually lands is superior to a very powerful blow that is slow and will miss the target.

13. Conditioning is an essential part of any fight. If skill and techniques learned are equal then the stronger, more flexible, better conditioned athlete will be victorious.

14. All fighters must learn how to “finish” a fight. They must learn how to finish their opponent once they have been stunned or taken down.

[SevenStar]

the principles used are prety much universal, be they sport or a "war in the street", as ross pretty much pointed out. however, I will disagree with the initial post in that soft is not always better than hard. sometimes being stronger is more important to being able to direct,ESPECIALLY if skill levels are equal.

[lkfmdc]

The purpose for free sparring/competition/sport is not to win or to lose. They are simply safe methods of engaging in situations which, while certainly not identical to an assault, approach these conditions as much as reasonably possible. The process is what is important.

There exist many sporting formats with differing degrees of safety and realism.

The student should be aware that the more closely a sporting format approaches realism (allowing leg kicks, knee strikes to the body, throws, takedowns, etc.,) the more training and conditioning that is required.

Other formats severely limit the legal tactics and techniques to ensure the safety of the participants (for example, American kickboxing is limited to only punches and kicks above the waist) but are further removed from realism.

The student should be aware that some of the tactics and techniques which are part of the fighting strategy may not be legal in some competition events. However, the student should still be aware of how these tactics and techniques should be used in a real assault situation.

[MonkeyKingUSA]

Steve,
Interesting post!
I am a pragmatist. On the street I go for overkill. I would not defend myself with my hands if a gun or knife are present. At 0-21 feet I would use a knife (Tuellner law). At 21 feet or greater I would use a firearm (my Beretta 92FS or my Bushmaster AR-15).
If I had to use my hands, of all the styles I have practiced, I would use a combination of Monkey and Jujutsu. I would start at long range and try to destroy the opponent's legs and balance with kicks while gouging at his eyes. In close I would strike at or grab his windpipe and groin. If it went to the ground, which I would avoid, I would bite, use chokelocks and attempt to repeatedly bang his head against the ground.
However, most real fights that I have seen or been in start at contact distance. There is no circling, stances, etc.. One guy sucker punches or charges the other and the defender, if he wasn't smart enough to throw the first punch, must react instantly out of the blue.
I have a martial arts friend who teaches a couple of kung fu styles. He is great at forms and sparring. Yet he got jumped at a gas pump by a couple of guys who kicked his a$$ for change. Moral of the story, no matter how tough you are, if you can't sense an attack and respond instantly to a threat, you better have good health or life insurance.

A deputy sheriff, who has been a friend of mine since the second grade, described a day he spent in court like this:
Prosecutor: Deputy ______ can you identify the man who attacked you?
Deputy: Yes, he is sitting over there (he points at the defendant).
Prosecutor: The defendant looks like he took a serious beating. With what did you hit him.
Deputy: First, I hit him with a building. Then I hit him with the luggage rack of a car. It was still attached to the car.
I like the way my deputy friend thinks.

MonkeyKingUSA aka Mooyingmantis aka Richard A. Tolson

[SevenStar]

this is why these types of discussions are stupid. you can't have them because nothing is absolute - they turn into what if threads. usually, there is no time for circling, but last week at work I witnessed a fight in which they circled eachother. at work I have gone to the ground several times. never was there any broken glass, and only once did someone else try to jump in. I choked someone out on the ground last saturday, right after the fight with the circling.
anything can work, although some things have better chances of success. personally,I would never eye gouge unless we were grappling, as I have better chances of success with it if I have control and a dominant position.

[MonkeyKingUSA]

Seven Star wrote:
personally,I would never eye gouge unless we were grappling

That is an important point in fighting. What works for one person will not work for everyone. I have used attacks to the eyes very effectively. Our style emphasizes this and I have worked to master it. Not everyone should try this. I said that it was what I would do.

One thing that is often overlooked in martial arts training is non-violent resolutions of tense situations. In Fort Wayne, Indiana I worked with MR/LD individuals. Some were violent towards the workers and the other clients. One of my responsibilities was teaching the "physical management" of violent individuals. This meant bringing others under control mentally or physically without causing them harm. This really honed my martial arts and crisis resolution skills. I think many martial artists are too quick to "test their skills" rather than find a non-violent resolution to a possible violent encounter. In my opinion that is sad. It promotes needless violence, opens the individual up for a civil suit and gives martial arts bad press once it hits the news.

Pilgrimsunwukun,
Sorry if this has led us away from what you wanted to discuss. But perhaps martial skills and conflict resolution training is a good example of using both soft and hard.

[mantis108]

I am no expert but can't help it ...

the golden rule in fighting is always K.I.S.S.

Mantis108

[SevenStar]

Seven Star wrote:
personally,I would never eye gouge unless we were grappling

That is an important point in fighting. What works for one person will not work for everyone. I have used attacks to the eyes very effectively. Our style emphasizes this and I have worked to master it. Not everyone should try this. I said that it was what I would do.

One thing that is often overlooked in martial arts training is non-violent resolutions of tense situations. In Fort Wayne, Indiana I worked with MR/LD individuals. Some were violent towards the workers and the other clients. One of my responsibilities was teaching the "physical management" of violent individuals. This meant bringing others under control mentally or physically without causing them harm. This really honed my martial arts and crisis resolution skills. I think many martial artists are too quick to "test their skills" rather than find a non-violent resolution to a possible violent encounter. In my opinion that is sad. It promotes needless violence, opens the individual up for a civil suit and gives martial arts bad press once it hits the news.

I completely agree. a quick, non violent solution is always the ideal. not everyone thinks that way,though. we once had a guy ask if he could bring his nunchaku to use on people!

[pilgrimsunwukun]

IKFMDC
1)I'm taught to never back up. One reason is that if you back up the opponent is controlling the timing and you're behind getting tee-ed off on. 2) Most important is the high guard- I attempt to cover high and low-if all the eggs are in the same high basket, then my balls get scrambled. 8) Even keeled attitude is fine but I feel an I don't care, i go in and control the space attitude is better. 12) True, hit for a reason makes sense
Seven star
Soft enables on to sense the opponet, it's faster to be softer, if you're loose you can turn the power on when you want. Better to be stronger, can't remember the exact sentence but it seems as i train I find joint locks , sweeps , trips slip in and down the person goes, even if they are way stronger then me. Especially as I change stances, levels of stances.
MonkeykingUSA
Agree guns work best. Since I don't have any , that's part of the hand to hand component of the question. Back to the idea of getting in close- what would you rather do? Disarm a gun in your chest or a knife? Both are probably fatal but if you disarm the gun at least you're not cut like you will be with a knife. I like the idea of attacking with kicks to get in and then go for the eyes. That follows the concept of getting in. Seems like Bung Bo has the simultaneous kick and eye strike/ right hand chops the left hand(I'm not a 7* person so I don't mean to offend if I'm wrong) but that does'nt seem to be a long distance technique- kicking and striking a person simultaneously seems like you are pretty close.
Fights do seem to begin with contact and sucker punches, hence the need to be enviromentally aware. I've heard the story of the guy who was beat up at the gas station from him, think that event made him train differently. Non-violence is best, clearly.

I'm just posting to hear what folks have learned. My art emphasizes position more then speed and power. Like the horse stance is strong shoulder to shoulder but not from chest to back, so place the opponent in that precarious position.
Timing isn't so good, like in blocking. Ever block a slow guy and hit him in the face? Ever try to time your block to a fatser guy and have him hit you in the face.? Position is better then timing. Hitting or kicking someone is a good way to control the timing and gain control of the person.
Regarding power, Choy La Fut people seem to have those iron forearms that just carve through a person, hence it seems power from a conditioned tool is important. Piercing Hammer has some insights, I'm sure.
It seems most feel strength is a key component but I wonder if that's really true. Nope I don't believe it is. For example Bruce Lee had difficulty playing Chi Sai with Yip Man, even though Bruce was crazy strong and Yip Man was older and weaker.
I think being able to use your strength effectively, with jing is more important then benching 425 or squattin 650. I also think stance work is better then weights.
The bad fights I've seen and the two I've been in lasted less then a minute, so I'm not so sure MMA ring conditioning is so important. ( And of couse being in fantastic shape is a really good thing.)
Mantis 108:KISS is great.

Steve/ Pilgrim / Sunwukuung

[msg]

a lot of training i have done it would be two or three on one ..and not realy holding back the people you are training with if they go down there right back on you ..it would be non stop .we even trained in water three on one to see if you can make it to the shore we did every thing we could ..but you will never know what will happen on the street .you just have to let go blast has hard as you can and dont stop till hes on the ground with some thing broken .and then get out of there

[SevenStar]

speed isn't necessarily better,imo. timing and distancing are key. when two people are equal in skill, it's individual attributes that will make or break you. that is why I say strength is so important. any grappler here would probably agree with me on that. when two people have equal ability, the advantage goes to the one with better attributes.

as for softness,it's great, but you won't always have the luxury of time. my heirarchy in terms of defense is evasion, parrying, blocking. you don't always have time for the ideal, but other options can accomplish the same result.

relaxation enables one to sense attacks, but I don't consider that softness.

[SevenStar]

as far as heavy weights vs. stance training, they are two different things. stance training is for muscular endurance and weight training is for muscular strength.

[Black Jack II]

Soft enables on to sense the opponet, it's faster to be softer, if you're loose you can turn the power on when you want.

Soft sounds like a great attribute but due to how a body often handles the psychological effect of stress reaction it is really can be a waste of time. Being soft in a fight is a part of that long chain of fighting mythos. When faced with a stressor the brain's hypothalamus is quickly activated and sets in train a series of hormonal reactions which lead to the release of adrenaline and noradrenaline into the bloodstream.

These biological changes send us into a lot of unfamiliar sensations. Tunnel vision, changes in hearing, loss of fine motor skills, shaking, confusion, anxiety, danger of going to delayed reaction if not used to fighting under adrenal based conditions.

I like flow drills, I think everything has its place, but its better to train under harder conditions like sparring and jerky situational training than working on soft principles, as when it happens you most likely wont be flowing like water but jacked up under a bucket of stress.

[MonkeyKingUSA]

speed isn't necessarily better,imo. timing and distancing are key. when two people are equal in skill, it's individual attributes that will make or break you. that is why I say strength is so important. any grappler here would probably agree with me on that. when two people have equal ability, the advantage goes to the one with better attributes.

as for softness,it's great, but you won't always have the luxury of time. my heirarchy in terms of defense is evasion, parrying, blocking. you don't always have time for the ideal, but other options can accomplish the same result.

relaxation enables one to sense attacks, but I don't consider that softness.

I think you make some good points.
But I do not personally place much emphasis on evasion, blocking and parrying. I am a big guy. Only 5'9", but 230 lbs. most of which is hardened muscle currently. So I am big enough to take some shots (iron body training) and blast through many of my opponent's attacks. Getting hit only makes me madder. So getting hit does not make me back up in a fight. I would rather take a shot to the body if it gets me in close enough to break a patella, slam a shin, or rip at a pectoral.
BTW, what I described above is not how I teach CMA, just how I have found it works for me.

I agree that timing and distancing are a very important key, especially in our Monkey style. Then speed and power come into play. Unfortunately, in many self-defense situations there may be no time for distancing and timing is more about how I respond to my opponent's pre-emptive attack.

A lot of ideas about strategy are really about the type of situations one might find themselves in during the course of an ordinary day. The strategies of a person who works in a medical center and only travels in very familiar settings, like myself, is going to be quite different from someone who works in law enforcement, as a bouncer, or travels to many different, unfamiliar places.

Steve,
As for whether I would rather have a gun or a knife pointed at my gut, that is a tough question. It may or may not only take one bullet to kill me at point blank range. While many people can live through numerous knife slashes (though not punctures). I think I would still rather be at 100 yards with my AR-15. Like I said earlier, I am a pragmatist.
Good discussion guys!