the application of BJJ in a 1 vs 5 surely isnt the best idea to get on the ground and start triangling 5 people. but it cant hurt. if ur struck to the ground, which you probably will in 1 v 5, then you are knowledgeable at how to defend yourself, and grapple your way on to your feet possibly.

My god look what I started.

a real discussion.

thank you helping by contributing conductively to this forum.

cookie?

This post was edited by PRBJJ on Jun 14 2011 01:35pm

In my experience versus 3+ attackers the best idea is to corral them into eachother


if you keep circling around them so that the closest attackers have to go through eachother to get to you, you will only be facing 1~2 people head on, then you hopefully dont get taken to the ground.


I explained it somewhere else, once you are on the ground it is considered attempted murder for someone to strike you while you are pressed agaisnt the ground, it even gives the police the right to use lethal force if they are being attacked while on the ground.




GJ

This post was edited by MrJoshua on Jun 14 2011 01:21pm

im not quite sure i understand... most attackers that are in groups of 3+ arent all grouped together. they are probably circling you, or atleast surrounding you. not running at you in a line

not sure why the on the ground thing is considered murder is relevant to this discussion

In my experience, 3+ assailants means I'd get WORKED.

In the group I work with, I'm the little guy. And I'm around 5'9", 170, fairly athletic build. (I've got lats and traps, but no six-pack.)

If I took the three next smallest guys in my group, and they were intent on stomping a hole in my @ss, I'd need to get gone, or I'd be done.


Politely disagreed.

Against an untrained chump (average drunken frat-boy, for example,) there's a WIDE variety of technique, practical or impractical, that'll work to subdue them.

It's not the untrained chump I'm worried about.

It's the dude that's got a grudge against society that's got the weight pile in the garage and a police record that I'm worried about.

I would say that BJJ is preferable to a number of martial arts as a foundation, simply by virtue of the fact that there's a component of randori (or live sparring.)

I would strongly recommend any style that has a "free play" full-contact component, be it BJJ, boxing, Muay Thai, Judo, etc., because you can test IN REAL TIME whether or not:

1. what you know works, and

2. if you can apply what you know.

I'm always skeptical of any art or any instructor that doesn't have any kind of full-speed sparring in their curriculum.

Further, the people who excel in those styles that have full-contact competition as part of their curriculum tend to be in good physical shape. I can't think of any high-ranking BJJ players or Muay Thai fighters that are doughy and out of shape. And surely, being in better physical shape would help with an "in the wild" encounter, neh?

if you are fast enough on your feet when they try and circle you you can step outside of their circle and they will get in eachothers ways

lol u can think your smart all u want and use all the knowledge u want but if u aint got the hands u aint got the hands lmk

give a fuck what "style it is" if ur throwing hands and your landing lefts and rights and niggas are dropping your doing what your doing right obv. right?

i know a guy who has never had an "instructor" or "art" director that would stomp a hole in your and everyone on this whole discussions ass just do to the fact that he is a swarming animal

ok maybe that was a little cocky but i doubt u would have a chance against this guy

This post was edited by 00001111 on Jun 14 2011 02:39pm

Why are we entertaining discussions on street fighting in a sports forum.

it's fun to pretend