Brazilian Jiu jitsu. Not good against multiple attackers?

What do you think? In my opinion Brazilian Jiu jitsu could not handle multiple attackers, especially multiple armed attackers. If you got someone on the ground, the others could bash the **** out of you, even if you broke a bone, or killed one attacker, the others are bound to be able to hit you or attack yopu with a weapon.

Thats what I think anyway! Later

I think you;re right. Karate is the answer for beating a dozen guys with baseball bats.

And if you're standing? Then, what will these other guys do? Tackle you and crush you?

As always you are a smart **** Gichoke. Couldn't you just say, no martial art will help you against multiple armed attackers. And no, I dont think Karate is the answer. But you can get away much easier if you are standing, kick or punch one or two, and run like hell! If you spear tackle someone to the ground (whats it called in BJJ when you take out their legs?) the others would be all over you. If you kick or punch one, it is quick, it causes pain and may delay the person long enough for you to escape, or take the weapon from him/her.

Tackle you and crush you? Most likely if an amateur tried to tackle you, you could see it from a mile away and simple step aside and watch that person hit the ground, where they are vulnerable to attack.

You also have a much better chance at getting away while your standing, its much easier to avoid an attack if your are standing. You have your feet, if you are one the ground, you can only roll or flip up.

See ya!

BIANA!!!

but grapplers know how to stay standing.

Jiu-jitsu is not all about ground fighting. It is about doing what works best in every individual situation. I feel jiu-jitsu is possibly the best MA in a multiple attacker situation. There are standing chokes and arm-locks, throws, and the ability to control an attacker (even a standing one). Having this skill you could force one attacker to always be between you and the others (theoretically of course). My solution is to run and run fast. No punching, kicking, locking, or throwing, if it is at all avoidable.

My art is full of standing grapples to. But we also are full of weapon work and MA specific training. Why do you feel jujitsu would be better at something it doesn't train for?

Why do you feel JJ doesn't train for multiples ?

Granted it trains almost exclusively for single opponent, but as the guy said, it contains elements (throws, takedowns, standing chokes) that definately address MA.

By your definition, since you say you train........

'weapon work and MA specific training'.

..........you yourself are screwed without a weapon as well as against a single opponent........'cause that ain't your main focus in training.

I'll pose a question.

Please find me as many recorded (By Press or Media) instances from say........oh..........1900 to the present, where individuals have succsessfully saved themselves from a MA situation.............useing ANY means without the aid of a firearm.

I say press or media because I'm guessing one could dig up numerous recorded accounts of single opponent altercations where one guy survived the fight useing an arts techniques.

My point ?

Economy of Preparation.

Training to hurt one opponent quickly (for use as an example, hostage, or shield) is probably a lot more effective in defusing or even detering a MA situation than spending most of your time scenario training techniques you'll never test for real until you have to.

Personally I like training weapons.

Knives and ****.

I carry a weapon always in my neighborhood.

I'll be glad to use it if my attackers or my own intuition gives me time to pull it out.

Hope thier not just asking directions.

As for volatile enviroments such as concerts, bars etc...........

You can't get in with a weapon............they check you here.

Hope you knife guys are comfy in prison garb 'cause if you gut someone and they came empty handed.

The MA have also now become witnesses to a homicide.

That is to say if you actually have the jam to feel warm intestines spill onto your hand.

Because the poster said/implied it did not. And because the statement of most BJJers on this topic has been 'impossible, so don't bother'.

I do not know to what extent it trains standing grapples. I imagine it varies by school. I think standing grapples are a basic element to a good MA strategy. Therefore JJ should have a good foundation for MA combat.

No. But it would mean that someone who specialized in non-weapon work would have the advantage of that specialization. Look at NHB fights as a good example. The people that won, were the people whose art and training was best specialized to that environment.

I cannot punch better than a boxer, I cannot wrestle better than a wrestler. I hope that what I have picked to train in will serve me better than what my opponent has chosen. That I train with a knife does not make me unable to fight without one. But the poster's statement was not that JJ *could* fight multiple attackers, or even that it could do it well. Rather he stated, even though JJ did not train for MA, that it was the *best* art for MA.

I could not easily dig up press articles on 1-on-1 fights under those rules without putting more effor into it that I care to do. Most fights that make the press either involve firearms or large groups.

The percentage of the population that trains, is good, got into a fight, it happened to be with multiple attackers, no one had a gun, it got into the paper, and I saw it.... Well the odds are slim.

Did I ever *see* it happen? Once. Has it happend to people I know and believe? Twice. Have I seen it in a press release? Maybe, mostly I read Bluesnews and not the morning paper. I don't recall seeing the results of *any* fight weather MA or not.

I am sure.

That is a different argument and one I did not make. Of course studying business in college is more likely to be of use than studying ancient Arabic. But if your career happens to involve deciphering Arabic, which is more useful then?

Or to cut the analogy. Even if I give you that you are right and 1-on-1 is more likely and, therefore, more profitable. That is irrelevent to the question of weather JJ is the best MA art, despite not training MA.

It's fun.

I stopped. I do not want the temptation of using it.

<snip>

I'm a JKD guy so I prefer 'Improbable'..............as in don't put all your eggs in one basket.

The people who compete in the NHB forum are light years ahead both in giving as well as recieving punishment than any of us dojo heads.

You guys gotta get it out of your head that your simply 'In a different category' and 'Addressing a different enviroment' with your training methods.

Your pretending, they are fighting.

You have more rules to escape injury than them.

wrestler.

If you trained them you'd have a crack at it.

That is unless he's got a knife.

Depends if you take shots and give them when you train.

No, he said..........

'I feel jiu-jitsu is possibly the best MA in a multiple attacker situation'.

'Possibly' Jerry 'Possibly'.

You missed my point entirely.

I said.........

'Training to hurt one opponent quickly (for use as an example, hostage, or shield) is probably a lot more effective in defusing or even detering a MA situation'.

Meaning, 'rather than' focusing on highly improbable scenarios where victory is assumed.

Perhaps it's time to enroll in a business course.

Your cliche doesn't relate. The improbability of MA varies based on... well, everything. Size advantage, skill difference, numbers, weapons, weather they all arrive at the same time, etc.

They are higher caliber atheltes than I. That is certain. But also irrelevent to a statement on art. Knife to knife I would have the advantage against a comparable-level opponent who trained in a non-knife art.

I am focusing on different aspects of a fight. It helps me in some contexts and hurts in others. Multiple armed attacker is a realistic concern in the crucible in which Silat formed.

They are competing.

Not more. But you are saying that making presumptions about how I train. Many appear to be wrong.

One or the other. And if they trained like me, they could be as good with MA.

I don't understand. That would be the situation when my training choice would be most useful.

Shots?

situation'.

I disagee with his 'feeling' and I feel that it is 'probibly not' the best MA in a multiple attacker situation.

still wrong.

I do train to use one opponent as a hostage or shield.

What makes you feel I do what you are describing?

Not my field.

I do. BJJ's heavy randori emphasis makes for fast strong tough guys, that is more important against multiple opponents than having an arsenal of wristlocks.