Something comical:
I find, in considering this, that I lack confidence in the idea of relying on only a few targets, for unarmed defense. I think this feeling is probably in error.
For, if I cannot succeed with two or three targets, why would I have more confidence if I had dozens? Wouldn't having lots of targets make my chances worse not better? There is more to screw up.
Paradoxically, I am okay with the idea of a short list of targets when weapons are contemplated; either Lamb's nightstick approach or Janich's knife approach seems reasonable. What changes when the weaponry is, instead, foot and fist? Why am I more comfortable, in that case, with lots of targets? I think my feelings on the subject are unreasonable.
A part of it may be early-life exposure to the charts in martial handbooks that show all the many places to hit, without any indication provided that I should be thinking seriously about just a few of them. On other pages, there were the very many ways of attacking the points. I early on got the impression that this stuff has a lot of complexity to it.