how much do you work Multiple Opponents?

[middleway]

hi all,

We have had talk of weapons training, knife training and the like lately. But i cant remember a recent thread on the importance of training against multiple opponents.

To be fair i think this is one of the most overlooked or unrealist parts of most peoples training. staggering attacks n stuff like that.... But is more common than single one on one Duels IME and more common than blade attacks etc.

I know the systema guys work this stuff alot. But i am mainly interested in the CIMA / JIMA crowds stuff.

interested in your thoughts

Cheers
Chris

[yusuf]

i wish i could do more dude, but alas don't; even have one training partner at the moment

[middleway]

yeh thats the problem aint it ... finding people willing to throw down with this sort of stuff!

Bet you know some decent drills though . Any insights you would like to share?

all the bestt
chris

[yusuf]

Hey dude,

dont; really knwo anything that isn't publically taught at any Krav Maga or Silat class. I would say one thing that i haven;t seen elesewhere, after doing all the zombie, milling, collision drills I would highly reccomend everyone outting on helmets / cup and really going for it (evryone attacks one person, 10 seconds per defender)..

Adds a very interesting feedback loop to the drills.

yusuf

[Juan]

Unfortunately I don't do any training in this. Although, I totally recognize the importance in this type of training.

[Chris Fleming]

Musashi said something about how it is difficult to round up people to practice multiple opponents especially at large scales.

Clearly he's never been to Pennsic.

[Chris McKinley]

There is something to be learned from any of this kind of training, however, yusuf makes a good point about the inherently increased risks of it, especially as the intensity goes up. More moving parts = more chances to slip on a banana peel, to mix my metaphors. While headgear isn't always necessary, a cup probably is.

If at all possible, I'd highly recommend training this sort of material with someone who's supervised it a lot. I'm not a big fan of just throwing people to the wolves with this sort of stuff; too many personal trauma issues can come screaming out uncontrolled and people are often very reluctant to mention anything about it beforehand. This kind of training ideally should progress incrementally in intensity. Eventually, there should be beat-downs with shouting, cursing in your face, kicking on the ground, even medium-to-full contact strikes, hits with padded sticks and even ye olde trusty red marker. Why? Because that's what happens in the reality of these situations. If you're only prepared for a quiet, safe tussle where everybody remains standing most of the time, you're living in fantasy land.

However, for that level of intensity, there has to be a supervisor to act as a failsafe. Bones and psyches don't care whether they're getting broken in a real assault or just realistic training...the damage can be done either way. Also, this kind of training represents a higher level of physical and emotional trust between training partners than most training does by a good margin. There's something inherently more traumatic about being ganged up on by a group of fellow human beings than a solo confrontation, and respect must be shown for that risk. Remember, these are your friends and partners, and we don't want to break our toys.

As we've discussed in other recent threads, multiples and weapons are not exclusive. In fact, the probability of one or more weapons being present goes up dramatically with an increase in the number of assailants thanks to the mob mentality. It's not either/or....you absolutely must assume the presence of weapons in multiples training.

[Chris McKinley]

Chris Fleming,

Are you a fellow SCAdian by chance? I'm currently working out a training schedule to begin training my rapier guys for Gulf War in Mississippi next March. Nothing like the fun of fighting in a large group like that.

[yusuf]

Chris... agreed on the superviosr.. One noticable thing i've seen in all these sorts of full contact things is the 'supervisor' should have enough skills to kick the shit out of any person/people who take it upon themselves to try and hurt others.

Sad but true...

[Waterway]

Multiple opponent is a regular part of most Aikido training, and also part of Daito Ryu from what I have seen. I was taught to refer to it as taninzugake.

Below is a demonstration from Moriteru Ueshiba, grandson of the founder of Aikido:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzp8EKI4jN0

The idea in practice in Aikido is awareness of movement and space and to keep "centred" in all of it. It isn't suppose to represent a realistic attack situation (if such a thing could even ever be truly created). It is the same as Tanto Randori... it is designed as a method to learn Aikido principles, not to learn how to defend againist a knife attack!!

On two occasions my Aikido teacher decided to let us go "freestlye" in taninzugake. Basically there were no strikes allowed, but stand up grappling (throws, takedowns, sweeps etc...) was allowed. No one in the class, even the Dan grades, were able to keep away from a group of four opponents (standard grouping for the excercise) for very long.

It was real eye opener. A guy who was a 2nd Dan and trained MMA for 4 years found it just as tough as some of the greener students. The teacher of the class said he did it to show us how incredibly difficult it was just to survive against multiple opponents, let alone try and "beat" them.

I found it had a lot of value. It helped you avoid movement from several different sources, helped you develop better awareness of space and helped you to stay calm and balanced in the midst of the chaos.

It goes without saying that trying to use Aikido to "beat" multiple opponents never worked. The people who focused on avoidance usually lasted longest, whereas those who tried to engage their opponents got overwhelmed pretty quickly.

Trying to fight multiple opponents didn't get you anywhere in my experience. If you are to train it, I would try and concentrate on avoiding their attacks.

Another strategy I never tried out, but was suggested on another forum, was to use the clinch to tie a single opponent up, and use them the shield yourself from attacks. Nice idea, don't know how it would play out in training though, and I don't know enough about CIMA to know if there even is a clinch-type movement in it.

[Chris McKinley]

Nope, no IMO. Avoid if possible. If not, assassinate and run. Multiple opponent situations are lethal force justified situations. Get away, and kill your way out if you absolutely are forced to engage. It's not the same as a typical 1-on-1 fight. It's an extremely dangerous situation that usually involves weapons, and can very easily result in death or permanent injury.

[everything]

don't do it either, d'oh. if i actually had time, i'd rather play team sports. better conditioning, more fun, also probably better peripheral awareness, awareness of space, rhythm, you get "push hands", fajin, etc. hockey is probably ideal. then you get multiple opponents and dirty boxing on top of the above.

[Waterway]

Just relating my experience in class. When people engaged with opponents, they got bogged down and over-run. When people tried to use the space to avoid attacks or push/pull people out of the way, they faired better.

To me it isn't a question of what you are prepared to do, it is what the situation allows you to do. Again, in my (limited) experience staying away from oppponents, constant movement and avoidance and using space was the most effective thing. Trying to use force against one or more people to "take them out" was almost always a disaster. But heck, its not my money, adopt the strategy you feel is best, then test the strategy out against multiple opponents. I did as part of group on a weekly basis for a few years, and I came to my own conclusions (which I posted above).

[Chris McKinley]

Waterway,

Notice I'm not recommending stopping to engage anyone. Engaging even one opponent in a "fight" vastly increases the odds you will be surrounded, denied escape, and overpowered. Escape, evasion, redirection...all of these are preferable to stopping to engage. However, your odds are bad if you are forced to engage. Use of lethal force cannot be ruled out as a viable, and in some case the only viable, tactic for survival in such a situation.

[bartekb]

Musashi clearly also has not been to a polish after match party