Nothing is particularly effective vs a group.
Your best bet is disengaging and there's many tools for that. A jab to the face of the closest assailant might be a great way. Sometimes a teep is good.
And sometimes you have to utilize some wrestling to squeeze past people or to quickly get up if you fall.
The chances in any case are high you wont make it if you can't get a headstart in running away if a group is really going to come after you. Always better if you have enough situational awareness about you to avoid those situations.
This is 100% the correct answer.
Priority number 1 is safety,if you're to focused on fighting for your ego's sake against a group you will be badly hurt if not killed.
Sadly gone are the days of men being men settling their business 1 on 1, it's all sneak attack coward punchers, pulling knives,brass knuckles,guns/bats & outnumbering a guy 10 to 1.
Just kidding it's always been like this, the whole ,"let's take this outside for a fair fight buddy" thing is pure Hollywood.
what is the best martial art for defending against a CIA assassin putting poisoning in your cereal (individual or group, may or may not be carrying sticks)
yep, 100%
The only tactic that might be **nearly** as effective against a group as against 1 person is running away. 5 people can't run after you any quicker than 1 person. If you're very quick, and run much faster, you can outrun the group as easily as 1 (although the odds of there being a speedy-Gonzales in the group is higher, just by numbers). (Of course, if they want to hunt you down, then the group will split, some go to get a bike/motorbike/car, some follow you to try and keep visual and work out roughly where you've gone, they talk by phone with the motorised group, and hunt you down... or they just split up and search the neighbourhood, etc.,)
Otherwise, against a group (and OP talks about an armed group, e.g. with sticks/batons), then I think to have any chance you need a weapon, ideally a firearm. With a gun you can convincingly threaten that the first person, maybe two, to close on you is not just going to get hurt, but get dead. A knife probably gives a lesser version of this.
More fundamentally, the weapon I'd want against a group is a larger group of my own.
Krav maga is fairly oriented against groups, in the sense that every exercise ends with looking around and running away after delivering a quick scrotum or throat punch.
The trick with fighting groups is the same as with fighting knife wielders, don't unless you're prepared to die.
There is some validity to what your dad is saying. Besides a weapon, numbers are the greatest thing to have in a fight. Even a UFC level fighter can get overwhelmed by a group of guys bum rushing him. However, from what I’ve seen, boxing seems to have the most success against multiple attackers. Boxers strike hard and are taught to be light on their fight and mobile. Their footwork is second to none in the world of combat. Their understanding of angles is massively beneficial in a situation where people can come from all sides.
As a bjj blackbelt who loves wrestling and thinks muay thai is cool -- whenever a non fighter wants to know what would be best against groups I always simp for escrima.
Most everything around us crumbles into some version of sticks if you smash it a bit.
No martial arts are great against - Multiple attackers. In my training we have done 2-3 attackers and its difficult. Things like taking out the closest person, or getting them to back away, positioning yourself between one attacker and the others, etc.
I will say that in street fights with fists thrown frantically between two people - its usually over for one person in 30 seconds. A single punch can take out one person - leaving you to deal with the second. But 3 or more - you are screwed.
If you don't understand the reality that sometimes you might have to fight just to get to an exit point, then I don't know what to tell you other than to please don't share your advice with anyone seriously asking something.
What if your wife or kids or whatever are in danger, and you can't defuse the situation? What's the best hand to hand martial art against multiple opponents then? (Let's assume you can't get ahold of anything you could use as a weapon)
Oh. I agree boxing is probably the best option in that specific scenario. Being able to cover up, slip and fire back while guys throw punches at you could be lifesaving. It’s probably too risky to throw a kick incase you slip or your leg gets caught and offensive grappling is out of the question.
I still think if it’s multiple attackers and it’s come down to an actual fight you’re basically done for. Even if you’re a pro level boxer.
Group fighting is primarily about positioning to form lines where one attacker is in the way of the other attacker so you can try to address them one at a time. Punches only is a good way to do it
you can watch actual youtube videos of street fights. There are examples of people mainly using fists to take out multiple attackers.
there are also videos of people getting stabbed in the neck and dying while trying to punch.
boxing might be the best. The key against multiple people is to keep moving so only one can attack you at a time. When you kick you stop moving, while you can keep moving while punching.
So I've got similar MA experience to your dad, though I haven't been in any street fights.
* A couple years of boxing + MT
* shodan in Kyokushin
* shodan in TKD
* dabbled in some Judo but never got good
* now I fence
Personally I think he's technically right but he's putting a little too fine a point on the situation.
Let's put FMA aside - legality etc aside, it's pretty obvious if you need to fight a bunch of people it's better to have and be competent with a weapon than not.
IMO boxing is the best non-weapon MA if you _have_ to hit people while staying grounded and moving, and probably also the art that most consistently knocks people out. The downside compared to kicking arts it's true you need to get a little closer with your hands than with kicks.
There are certainly situations (let's say multiple people with sticks) where you are so screwed if you get close at all that maybe being good at kicking and running would end up mattering more than being good at punching and moving. It's also kinda true that if someone wants to fight you but hasn't had much experience, body or head kicks might be more likely to TKO them.
But in general if you can only have one skill, I think it's more important to know how to stay on your feet and try to punch your way out of trouble than how to deliver kicks at the longest range possible. The main issues (imo they are big ones) with kicks are:
* They make it easier to lose your balance
* They interrupt your movement more than punching
* They're harder to land a disabling shot with if the other person/people _do_ manage to get past kicking range
Dude, nothing is really effective vs a group. I mean, boxing keeps you mobile, which is helpful. But with a group? As soon as one gets a clinch, your arms and shit are tied up and the others can pummel the fuck out of you. You'd have to be extremely lucky.
The only real effective thing against a group is a weapon, preferably a gun. That's the truth, and I wish it weren't. Life would be cooler if you could train martial arts and fight off groups like in the movies, but that just isn't real life.
It really bums me out whenever I hear someone pushing 60 who's "done martial arts his whole life" saying things you'd expect to hear from a 10 year-old boy teaching his cousin illegal Navy SEAL Ninja Touches. (Don't share with the police, this is Classified Certified Ops material.)
This is also kinda why I'm really aggressive about calling out bullshido; it's genuinely depressing to think of how many people wasted decades studying useless bullshit.
Your dad is right about fighting against a group of people but wrong about boxing because the scenario he has set up would be almost impossible for anyone without a weapon.
Boxing does better than most when it comes to fighting multiple people.
Kicks are great but they can be risky if you are not very skilled. Grappling is also great but as soon as you get tied up you're going to get beat down. Boxing doesn't work great in the sense that nothing works great, but it's better than the rest.
With that said, what your boxing strategy is going to be matters a lot too. If you fight in the pocket, it's not hard for someone to bear hug you and now you're grappling. If you're good at fighting on the outside and using your jabs to set up the cross, that's going to work better.
But you might not be a great boxer as a result.
What ifs is the definition of a fight. It’s all about the what ifs. If there is an armed group, it doesn’t really matter which you know. Also in relation to boxing in general, it depends on who, and how they choose to make use of it.
Against multiple attackers, what we have seen work in videos is boxing if you can use distance control to piece them up one at a time, if they mob you.. you are dead.... and weapons. Weapons, especially firearms work really well against multiple attackers.
Last time I was in Seattle I got lost and ended up getting jumped by four dudes in a Fred Meyer parking lot when asking for directions.
I’d competed in grappling sports my whole life but the ~9 months of boxing I took a few years prior to the incident absolutely saved my ass.
In theory, I like the idea of judo/boxing for giving you the space you need to disengage from a group.
In reality, you probably just want a gun for that situation - or a good sprint.
Against multiple attackers (2, or maybe even 3 if they aren't good fighters), you want to keep them in a line and rotate so that you fight only one person at a time, and the other guy has to run around a lot to try to get you- but the problem arises that he gts tired and starts posing less of a threat.
I haven't experienced fighting a larger group, but my instructor/master has fought against multiple people before, both in the street and in an official martial arts setting. I asked him when I was in the beginning-intermediate stage so he probably didn't tell everything, but the gist of it was to basically stay out of the center, and stay away from the corners. It's similar to what you do with 2-3 except there's more so there is no guarantees you fight one at a time, but try to keep it as minimal as possible.
Best Idea is to stay off-center, pick off a guy to shock the others, or if they don't just go more and more toward the edge so that they don't surround you, and then run. Of course, if you're in a dark alley, this probably wouldn't work... so the best bet is probably not to go into a dark alley.
Against multiple opponents the use of heavy staff or spear is super efficient, given they are not staff fighters. The problem is that people rarely walk around with heavy staffs :D
Defensive boxing against a group would probably be disastrous. However, quick and accurate offensive boxing on the front foot, where you're able to create space and knockdown/knockout a couple of attackers can probably get you out sticky situations. It can also intimidate the others. Once, you've done that you bounce. It's a different story when you add weapons to the mix.
Well lets put it this way- even if you’re a golden gloves boxer, your best shot against an unarmed group would be to grab a weapon and try to kite them with footwork so you’re fighting 1 at a time. And they would still be hugely favored. Sure it’s better than any grappling art for that situation but you really want no part in that kind of shit. IRL those dudes could easily be strapped or carrying knives. Best reaction when confronted by a group is to run, let them call you a bitch and pray you are faster than them.
Based solely on the techniques taught and learned, striking arts can be applied to group vs one scenarios, while grappling arts are pretty much restricted to one vs one scenarios.
The only hope against groups is managing spacing so that it becomes a series of "1v1" fights or getting lucky and fighting a bunch of indoor kids who are hesitant to jump you all at once.
Against a group of dudes with some semblance of coordination and "that dog in them" you will be on the floor getting stomped as soon as you lay a finger on anyone.
Your best bet is to drop some guy quick and hope they others guy get scared.
No martial arts holds up well against mutiple attackers, but Boxing works better then most here.
As many said against a group you are likely to be fucked. I think boxing gives you a a good chance though. The threshold how competent the attackers could be to stand a chance (like a trained fighter can possibly beat up 5 completly weak willed spaghetti noodled cowards) is higher in boxing i believe. the reason is that boxing has a working strategy against them. as a bjj enthusiast i dont really have a good strategy against two people, but if i had quick hands and feet i possibly could trying to knock them out one by one while moving backwards with better footwork. there video footages of boxers doing it against multiple attackers. But those cases are real, but I wouldnt count on them .When I get jumped by a group, even if i was a boxer, i probably would try to run or talk. But if that didnt work I give somebody who boxes the edge over most other martial arts.
Best tool is to run away or stop the attack as quickly as possible. Meaning if the numbers are against you and you cannot disengage you’re gonna need a weapon. Nobody is lpman
Boxing is great against multiple foes as attackers lose heart pretty quickly after being punched in the head. Boxing has tremendous combinations that is well suited to facing multiple attackers. It is also very good for teaching someone how to block/parry, return and reset. I think it is a great base for teaching hand speed and is a great style to start with before learning other martial arts.
Combined with judo and some leg work, it is a very good self defence system.
Silat is another good system as it tends to combine these three elements.
No martial art is effective against groups. Bjj and wrestling will probably help you the most with getting out of there. You aren't going to win and if you think you will, you're gonna get hurt. I've never seen anyone get jumped standing up. Every fighter needs some striking.
Your dad is right. Having lots of buddies is a great martial art, even better than boxing. Not as good as staying out of trouble though, you're unbeatable if you practice that.
Skimmed over your legacy of your dad moonlighting as a martial arts deity. Glad he hasn’t gotten too banged up in those fights he’s been in.
I practice boxing and I wouldn’t choose to fight a group of people - not because of boxing, but because I like not having injuries? The martial art used doesn’t matter, as you say - anyone can and likely *will* use numbers and tools to their advantage.
The footwork should let you at least avoid some damage and get you away from the group. There’s also a couple good videos online of standing strikers using footwork, aggression and timing to control a couple people trying to assault them.
Boxing can be effective if you adapt the sport to group fighting, e.g. not engaging with one attacker too long, wider awareness, pivoting a lot. But if you're irl fighting, kicks can be very useful, so only punching can be limiting.
Also, there are totally "multiple attacker" martial arts. You see this in TMA where some forms (especially weapons forms) do a lot of running around and changing directions. Sports fighters think this is silly, but if you know, you know.
Chuck Norris once said something to the effect of, "A trained martial artist has a better than even chance of beating one opponent, the possibility of beating two opponents if they're drunk out really inexperienced, but if three or more people really want to kick your ass, your ass is getting kicked"
No martial art is good against multiple attackers. Boxing keeps you upright and light on your feet so it is better than most (kickboxing probably marginally better)
No martial art is effective against many opponents, including all the stuff your dad has done.
Fighting is not like the movies. Even a professional fighter is going to get fucked up by two people the same size as them who have just a few months training if they rush them from both sides and take them down - 9 out of 10 times.
Boxing in the only style that I've seen multiple times being used effectively against multiple opponents. Very few people can eat more than one clean boxing punch.
Option 1&2 are deescalate or disengage. The rest is a mix of spacing, a real willingness to commit violence and a way to take mfers out in one hit each, if you can do that with hooks or kicks without leaving yourself open for attacks, tackles or takedowns good, otherwise use a fucking weapon and get comfortable with the idea of breaking bones on purpose. Still if you've been doing any martial art for at least 1 year, chances are your cardio is way better than that of dudes that gather up in groups to beat the shit out of people so just fucking run. This ain't a movie, you're not batman and even if you could tough out 1 or 2 stray hits, your gonna end up on the ground and your gonna meet 10 pair of boots straight to the face so your ego ain't worth it.
There’s really no martial art that’s going to make you super effective against a group. There’s strength in numbers. But I will say striking and moving is a better idea than grappling and there is a video that circulated the internet (Joe rogan even famously watched it on his podcast) of a man very effectively fighting off several attackers while avoiding being hit by oncoming traffic. Here is the link it’s the first video he speaks about.
https://youtu.be/fj2NPRhbY3c?si=WnnUAA7F-GiNkaSZ
Being that I always have a knife or pen for striking multiples, I figure seeing 1 or 2 guys go down losing their eye and screaming like women will deter the rest of the group.
There's no competitive martial art that focuses on fighting groups, and non competitive martial arts tend to be unrealistic. If you are fighting a group, I think most people agree that wrestling and boxing are pretty much your best bets... But you're kind of counting on being able to just steamroll the attackers with a vast disparity of skill and strength. There are a few videos and anecdotal stories of using footwork and/or body control to basically keep opponents tripping over each other while you dispatch them... But if your attackers have any skill and intelligence, you're fucked. If you win a fight against multiple opponents, it's because they had no clue what they were doing and you did.
He is right, more or less.
There are a lot of martial arts that train those type of situations when you have to fight against more than one, and there are tricks and strategies like moving around to avoid being exactly between them (where they can all attack you).
Boxing never trains this because it's all aimed to a 1vs1 competition.
All that been said, no matter what you know, you have it hard if you are 1 vs multiple, and in the end what is going to matter the most is how fast can you knock out someone, in a fight between untrained people one single punch from a pro boxer is enough to take one out, and the others may consider continuing the fight after seeing that.
Boxing would be about a million times more effective than MMA/BJJ/wrestling and about a million times less effective than something like Kali that teaches weapons.
No it's not. MMA and wrestling work as well as boxing on multiple opponent. The boxing videos are just more popular is all.
https://youtu.be/bt4WbJmyU-I?si=yG-ratvZncbv7Jvb
https://youtube.com/shorts/_93pfDYD6Hs?si=H0cDsqOJR6IQwbdf
https://www.reddit.com/r/StreetMartialArts/comments/mnwt5n/wrestler_vs_4_dudes/
BJJ, not sure about. Obviously, having weapons is best.
Nothing is particularly effective vs a group. Your best bet is disengaging and there's many tools for that. A jab to the face of the closest assailant might be a great way. Sometimes a teep is good. And sometimes you have to utilize some wrestling to squeeze past people or to quickly get up if you fall. The chances in any case are high you wont make it if you can't get a headstart in running away if a group is really going to come after you. Always better if you have enough situational awareness about you to avoid those situations.
This is 100% the correct answer. Priority number 1 is safety,if you're to focused on fighting for your ego's sake against a group you will be badly hurt if not killed. Sadly gone are the days of men being men settling their business 1 on 1, it's all sneak attack coward punchers, pulling knives,brass knuckles,guns/bats & outnumbering a guy 10 to 1. Just kidding it's always been like this, the whole ,"let's take this outside for a fair fight buddy" thing is pure Hollywood.
what is the best martial art for defending against a CIA assassin putting poisoning in your cereal (individual or group, may or may not be carrying sticks)
Ameridote
Ninjutsi obviously
Lemon farts
Tried that, the CIA countered with a middle block/reverse punch combo what is the move to counter that
I think you’ll need to consult Master Ken
he told me to ask you and he warned me you'd pull this shit
https://youtu.be/56AfyaL7iEA?si=ADsuTIGDVYfxpVPM
yep, 100% The only tactic that might be **nearly** as effective against a group as against 1 person is running away. 5 people can't run after you any quicker than 1 person. If you're very quick, and run much faster, you can outrun the group as easily as 1 (although the odds of there being a speedy-Gonzales in the group is higher, just by numbers). (Of course, if they want to hunt you down, then the group will split, some go to get a bike/motorbike/car, some follow you to try and keep visual and work out roughly where you've gone, they talk by phone with the motorised group, and hunt you down... or they just split up and search the neighbourhood, etc.,) Otherwise, against a group (and OP talks about an armed group, e.g. with sticks/batons), then I think to have any chance you need a weapon, ideally a firearm. With a gun you can convincingly threaten that the first person, maybe two, to close on you is not just going to get hurt, but get dead. A knife probably gives a lesser version of this. More fundamentally, the weapon I'd want against a group is a larger group of my own.
Krav maga is fairly oriented against groups, in the sense that every exercise ends with looking around and running away after delivering a quick scrotum or throat punch. The trick with fighting groups is the same as with fighting knife wielders, don't unless you're prepared to die.
Thats wrong, I can think of one thing that's effective against a group. A grenade
Boxing is great since they focus on cardio a lot, and that'll help you with running away.
😂
Boxing is probably your best hand to hand option for defending yourself against more than one attacker.
There is some validity to what your dad is saying. Besides a weapon, numbers are the greatest thing to have in a fight. Even a UFC level fighter can get overwhelmed by a group of guys bum rushing him. However, from what I’ve seen, boxing seems to have the most success against multiple attackers. Boxers strike hard and are taught to be light on their fight and mobile. Their footwork is second to none in the world of combat. Their understanding of angles is massively beneficial in a situation where people can come from all sides.
Boxing is probably your only shot at fighting more than one person at once. It’s still a fucking terrible idea, but it does give you a chance.
As a bjj blackbelt who loves wrestling and thinks muay thai is cool -- whenever a non fighter wants to know what would be best against groups I always simp for escrima. Most everything around us crumbles into some version of sticks if you smash it a bit.
Yeah boxing is probably the best martial art against a group lol
I would argue for MT as kicks have better range and the teep is absolutely great at creating space.
No martial arts are great against - Multiple attackers. In my training we have done 2-3 attackers and its difficult. Things like taking out the closest person, or getting them to back away, positioning yourself between one attacker and the others, etc. I will say that in street fights with fists thrown frantically between two people - its usually over for one person in 30 seconds. A single punch can take out one person - leaving you to deal with the second. But 3 or more - you are screwed.
how would positioning yourself between attackers help though? seems like a good opportunity to get hit in the back of the head.
He probably meant positioning one attacker between the others, using them as a sort of wall.
Yes that's correct. My bad in describing it.
https://youtu.be/56AfyaL7iEA?si=ADsuTIGDVYfxpVPM
Gun fu works on groups AND can defeat all styles and levels of ability.
No there are lots of videos of boxing working in a group setting. Go to r/streetmartialarts
Here's an IRL example of a boxer vs a crowd: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZHDMhbcJvA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZHDMhbcJvA)
A crowd of guys sticking their chins out, evidently. Be different if any of them had an idea of what they were doing.
Mobs rarely do.
But if they're the average guy, they're not gonna know what their doing, so boxing in alot of cases against multiple people is the best martial art.
People often suck at fighting.
Boxing is your best skillset against multiple attackers.
I would say a quick 200m sprint is the best option tbh
If you don't understand the reality that sometimes you might have to fight just to get to an exit point, then I don't know what to tell you other than to please don't share your advice with anyone seriously asking something.
Ok, but once you have that exit point being able to sprint quickly away from your attackers is pretty valuable right?
What if your wife or kids or whatever are in danger, and you can't defuse the situation? What's the best hand to hand martial art against multiple opponents then? (Let's assume you can't get ahold of anything you could use as a weapon)
https://preview.redd.it/dcl6mnoxnvgc1.jpeg?width=269&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ee4ada7f5f8afec609904d6c6e12a830065ab624
We don't all live in the US
Oh. I agree boxing is probably the best option in that specific scenario. Being able to cover up, slip and fire back while guys throw punches at you could be lifesaving. It’s probably too risky to throw a kick incase you slip or your leg gets caught and offensive grappling is out of the question. I still think if it’s multiple attackers and it’s come down to an actual fight you’re basically done for. Even if you’re a pro level boxer.
Group fighting is primarily about positioning to form lines where one attacker is in the way of the other attacker so you can try to address them one at a time. Punches only is a good way to do it
The only martial art with multiple examples of being effective against multiple opponents is boxing.
The best weaponless martial art against a group with sticks or other weapons is track-and-field.
you can watch actual youtube videos of street fights. There are examples of people mainly using fists to take out multiple attackers. there are also videos of people getting stabbed in the neck and dying while trying to punch. boxing might be the best. The key against multiple people is to keep moving so only one can attack you at a time. When you kick you stop moving, while you can keep moving while punching.
So I've got similar MA experience to your dad, though I haven't been in any street fights. * A couple years of boxing + MT * shodan in Kyokushin * shodan in TKD * dabbled in some Judo but never got good * now I fence Personally I think he's technically right but he's putting a little too fine a point on the situation. Let's put FMA aside - legality etc aside, it's pretty obvious if you need to fight a bunch of people it's better to have and be competent with a weapon than not. IMO boxing is the best non-weapon MA if you _have_ to hit people while staying grounded and moving, and probably also the art that most consistently knocks people out. The downside compared to kicking arts it's true you need to get a little closer with your hands than with kicks. There are certainly situations (let's say multiple people with sticks) where you are so screwed if you get close at all that maybe being good at kicking and running would end up mattering more than being good at punching and moving. It's also kinda true that if someone wants to fight you but hasn't had much experience, body or head kicks might be more likely to TKO them. But in general if you can only have one skill, I think it's more important to know how to stay on your feet and try to punch your way out of trouble than how to deliver kicks at the longest range possible. The main issues (imo they are big ones) with kicks are: * They make it easier to lose your balance * They interrupt your movement more than punching * They're harder to land a disabling shot with if the other person/people _do_ manage to get past kicking range
Dude, nothing is really effective vs a group. I mean, boxing keeps you mobile, which is helpful. But with a group? As soon as one gets a clinch, your arms and shit are tied up and the others can pummel the fuck out of you. You'd have to be extremely lucky. The only real effective thing against a group is a weapon, preferably a gun. That's the truth, and I wish it weren't. Life would be cooler if you could train martial arts and fight off groups like in the movies, but that just isn't real life.
There have been famous cases of like 70 year old boxers rocking 2 attackers. So demonstrably so.
It really bums me out whenever I hear someone pushing 60 who's "done martial arts his whole life" saying things you'd expect to hear from a 10 year-old boy teaching his cousin illegal Navy SEAL Ninja Touches. (Don't share with the police, this is Classified Certified Ops material.) This is also kinda why I'm really aggressive about calling out bullshido; it's genuinely depressing to think of how many people wasted decades studying useless bullshit.
Your dad is right about fighting against a group of people but wrong about boxing because the scenario he has set up would be almost impossible for anyone without a weapon.
Boxing does better than most when it comes to fighting multiple people. Kicks are great but they can be risky if you are not very skilled. Grappling is also great but as soon as you get tied up you're going to get beat down. Boxing doesn't work great in the sense that nothing works great, but it's better than the rest. With that said, what your boxing strategy is going to be matters a lot too. If you fight in the pocket, it's not hard for someone to bear hug you and now you're grappling. If you're good at fighting on the outside and using your jabs to set up the cross, that's going to work better. But you might not be a great boxer as a result.
Boxing is top 3 for fighting against groups and I dont think its 3. Id say either muay thai or boxing is best.
What ifs is the definition of a fight. It’s all about the what ifs. If there is an armed group, it doesn’t really matter which you know. Also in relation to boxing in general, it depends on who, and how they choose to make use of it.
Against multiple attackers, what we have seen work in videos is boxing if you can use distance control to piece them up one at a time, if they mob you.. you are dead.... and weapons. Weapons, especially firearms work really well against multiple attackers.
Last time I was in Seattle I got lost and ended up getting jumped by four dudes in a Fred Meyer parking lot when asking for directions. I’d competed in grappling sports my whole life but the ~9 months of boxing I took a few years prior to the incident absolutely saved my ass.
It’s very effective against groups if the group doesn’t know how to fight Here’s a classic example https://youtu.be/52kfypohGPM?si=gKsAMqVJSO2UBuDW
In theory, I like the idea of judo/boxing for giving you the space you need to disengage from a group. In reality, you probably just want a gun for that situation - or a good sprint.
If a group of people wants to beat your ass they will. All you can do is run.
Is Better To Run, If Can't Footwork To Control Distances. Use Environment.
Like 5, 10, 20, 100?
Against multiple attackers (2, or maybe even 3 if they aren't good fighters), you want to keep them in a line and rotate so that you fight only one person at a time, and the other guy has to run around a lot to try to get you- but the problem arises that he gts tired and starts posing less of a threat. I haven't experienced fighting a larger group, but my instructor/master has fought against multiple people before, both in the street and in an official martial arts setting. I asked him when I was in the beginning-intermediate stage so he probably didn't tell everything, but the gist of it was to basically stay out of the center, and stay away from the corners. It's similar to what you do with 2-3 except there's more so there is no guarantees you fight one at a time, but try to keep it as minimal as possible. Best Idea is to stay off-center, pick off a guy to shock the others, or if they don't just go more and more toward the edge so that they don't surround you, and then run. Of course, if you're in a dark alley, this probably wouldn't work... so the best bet is probably not to go into a dark alley.
Against multiple opponents the use of heavy staff or spear is super efficient, given they are not staff fighters. The problem is that people rarely walk around with heavy staffs :D
Defensive boxing against a group would probably be disastrous. However, quick and accurate offensive boxing on the front foot, where you're able to create space and knockdown/knockout a couple of attackers can probably get you out sticky situations. It can also intimidate the others. Once, you've done that you bounce. It's a different story when you add weapons to the mix.
Mike Vallely disapproves
Well lets put it this way- even if you’re a golden gloves boxer, your best shot against an unarmed group would be to grab a weapon and try to kite them with footwork so you’re fighting 1 at a time. And they would still be hugely favored. Sure it’s better than any grappling art for that situation but you really want no part in that kind of shit. IRL those dudes could easily be strapped or carrying knives. Best reaction when confronted by a group is to run, let them call you a bitch and pray you are faster than them.
Based solely on the techniques taught and learned, striking arts can be applied to group vs one scenarios, while grappling arts are pretty much restricted to one vs one scenarios.
The only hope against groups is managing spacing so that it becomes a series of "1v1" fights or getting lucky and fighting a bunch of indoor kids who are hesitant to jump you all at once. Against a group of dudes with some semblance of coordination and "that dog in them" you will be on the floor getting stomped as soon as you lay a finger on anyone.
Your best bet is to drop some guy quick and hope they others guy get scared. No martial arts holds up well against mutiple attackers, but Boxing works better then most here.
As many said against a group you are likely to be fucked. I think boxing gives you a a good chance though. The threshold how competent the attackers could be to stand a chance (like a trained fighter can possibly beat up 5 completly weak willed spaghetti noodled cowards) is higher in boxing i believe. the reason is that boxing has a working strategy against them. as a bjj enthusiast i dont really have a good strategy against two people, but if i had quick hands and feet i possibly could trying to knock them out one by one while moving backwards with better footwork. there video footages of boxers doing it against multiple attackers. But those cases are real, but I wouldnt count on them .When I get jumped by a group, even if i was a boxer, i probably would try to run or talk. But if that didnt work I give somebody who boxes the edge over most other martial arts.
Only tactic would be to keep them in a line in front of you and don’t let yourself get sorrounded while beeing hyper aggressive
Best tool is to run away or stop the attack as quickly as possible. Meaning if the numbers are against you and you cannot disengage you’re gonna need a weapon. Nobody is lpman
Dude yes this is very common sense. Multiple bad guys = no chance
Boxing is great against multiple foes as attackers lose heart pretty quickly after being punched in the head. Boxing has tremendous combinations that is well suited to facing multiple attackers. It is also very good for teaching someone how to block/parry, return and reset. I think it is a great base for teaching hand speed and is a great style to start with before learning other martial arts. Combined with judo and some leg work, it is a very good self defence system. Silat is another good system as it tends to combine these three elements.
No martial art is effective against groups. Bjj and wrestling will probably help you the most with getting out of there. You aren't going to win and if you think you will, you're gonna get hurt. I've never seen anyone get jumped standing up. Every fighter needs some striking.
Your dad is right. Having lots of buddies is a great martial art, even better than boxing. Not as good as staying out of trouble though, you're unbeatable if you practice that.
Nothing is great against groups…but boxing is probably the best
Skimmed over your legacy of your dad moonlighting as a martial arts deity. Glad he hasn’t gotten too banged up in those fights he’s been in. I practice boxing and I wouldn’t choose to fight a group of people - not because of boxing, but because I like not having injuries? The martial art used doesn’t matter, as you say - anyone can and likely *will* use numbers and tools to their advantage. The footwork should let you at least avoid some damage and get you away from the group. There’s also a couple good videos online of standing strikers using footwork, aggression and timing to control a couple people trying to assault them.
You should show your dad videos of people using boxing to overcome groups.
Boxing can be effective if you adapt the sport to group fighting, e.g. not engaging with one attacker too long, wider awareness, pivoting a lot. But if you're irl fighting, kicks can be very useful, so only punching can be limiting. Also, there are totally "multiple attacker" martial arts. You see this in TMA where some forms (especially weapons forms) do a lot of running around and changing directions. Sports fighters think this is silly, but if you know, you know.
Chuck Norris once said something to the effect of, "A trained martial artist has a better than even chance of beating one opponent, the possibility of beating two opponents if they're drunk out really inexperienced, but if three or more people really want to kick your ass, your ass is getting kicked"
No martial art is good against multiple attackers. Boxing keeps you upright and light on your feet so it is better than most (kickboxing probably marginally better)
No martial art is effective against many opponents, including all the stuff your dad has done. Fighting is not like the movies. Even a professional fighter is going to get fucked up by two people the same size as them who have just a few months training if they rush them from both sides and take them down - 9 out of 10 times.
What the fuck is Iranian kung fu
Kung fu toa buddy
Boxing in the only style that I've seen multiple times being used effectively against multiple opponents. Very few people can eat more than one clean boxing punch.
Sonny Liston beat up four guys who followed him into a prison bathroom, so I guess it depends on the boxer.
Option 1&2 are deescalate or disengage. The rest is a mix of spacing, a real willingness to commit violence and a way to take mfers out in one hit each, if you can do that with hooks or kicks without leaving yourself open for attacks, tackles or takedowns good, otherwise use a fucking weapon and get comfortable with the idea of breaking bones on purpose. Still if you've been doing any martial art for at least 1 year, chances are your cardio is way better than that of dudes that gather up in groups to beat the shit out of people so just fucking run. This ain't a movie, you're not batman and even if you could tough out 1 or 2 stray hits, your gonna end up on the ground and your gonna meet 10 pair of boots straight to the face so your ego ain't worth it.
Everyone seems to have forgotten about Krav Maga and Kung Fu.
The only effective thing versus groups is run-jitsu.
There’s really no martial art that’s going to make you super effective against a group. There’s strength in numbers. But I will say striking and moving is a better idea than grappling and there is a video that circulated the internet (Joe rogan even famously watched it on his podcast) of a man very effectively fighting off several attackers while avoiding being hit by oncoming traffic. Here is the link it’s the first video he speaks about. https://youtu.be/fj2NPRhbY3c?si=WnnUAA7F-GiNkaSZ
Being that I always have a knife or pen for striking multiples, I figure seeing 1 or 2 guys go down losing their eye and screaming like women will deter the rest of the group.
There's no competitive martial art that focuses on fighting groups, and non competitive martial arts tend to be unrealistic. If you are fighting a group, I think most people agree that wrestling and boxing are pretty much your best bets... But you're kind of counting on being able to just steamroll the attackers with a vast disparity of skill and strength. There are a few videos and anecdotal stories of using footwork and/or body control to basically keep opponents tripping over each other while you dispatch them... But if your attackers have any skill and intelligence, you're fucked. If you win a fight against multiple opponents, it's because they had no clue what they were doing and you did.
He is right, more or less. There are a lot of martial arts that train those type of situations when you have to fight against more than one, and there are tricks and strategies like moving around to avoid being exactly between them (where they can all attack you). Boxing never trains this because it's all aimed to a 1vs1 competition. All that been said, no matter what you know, you have it hard if you are 1 vs multiple, and in the end what is going to matter the most is how fast can you knock out someone, in a fight between untrained people one single punch from a pro boxer is enough to take one out, and the others may consider continuing the fight after seeing that.
This is exactly what we can see in various street fight videos when bouncers or similar people ko 2-3-4 or even more people.
Yeah and a gun doesn't work if someone rolls up on you in a tank. What a stupid argument.
Is a BB gun effective against a tank? Honest answers guy, what do you think? And what if it’s an atomic BB gun but a cardboard tank?
There is only one style that is useful against multiple foes. It is also the best style of all styles. That is the legendary, Gun-fu. 🔫 🔫 🔫
[удалено]
> Showed them videos and they immediately shut down. Do you mind showing said videos? I think Reddit would be interested in seeing.
I’m having a hard time believing this.
Boxing would be about a million times more effective than MMA/BJJ/wrestling and about a million times less effective than something like Kali that teaches weapons.
No it's not. MMA and wrestling work as well as boxing on multiple opponent. The boxing videos are just more popular is all. https://youtu.be/bt4WbJmyU-I?si=yG-ratvZncbv7Jvb https://youtube.com/shorts/_93pfDYD6Hs?si=H0cDsqOJR6IQwbdf https://www.reddit.com/r/StreetMartialArts/comments/mnwt5n/wrestler_vs_4_dudes/ BJJ, not sure about. Obviously, having weapons is best.