Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Real Fights


Four Versus Four Fight In Siberia - Watch more Funny Videos

Continuing on with our current discussion on where traditional martial arts end and modern fighting skills begin; we look at this four-on-four fight at a mall in Siberia.
I've been in fights like this, two of them were three-on-three and we were surrounded by a crowd both times. One I ended up with a guy in a choke and my back to a wall, the other I was in a mount on the guy with his face down on the sidewalk, hammering the back of his head. His friend grabbed me by the sweatshirt and pulled me off. I'm lucky he didn't kick me while I was on the ground pounding his buddy.
Note what works in the video above. Once it starts, it happens quick. Straight up boxing punches, a few front kicks, and stomping the guys on the ground.

Serious business, it's good no knives came out.

8 comments:

Scott said...

Look, that's not a self-defense situation.
That was a rough game, a monkey dance. If the one guy did get knocked cold for that long he probably has a brain bleed and will die without medical care. However, most knockouts are actually total submissions. The guy lays on the ground and stops moving because he doesn't want to fight. The kicks to his body were in non-lethal areas, as if to say, "hey, you still in the fight?"
In any event, those security guards should be out of a job, perhaps facing charges.
If you are kicking someone out of a store, you do not block the exit. When the guy to his right steps forward he needed to move immediately back and all the way to the right, and then point toward the door. He could have also stepped behind the short guy who eventually hit him and gestured toward the door. When the other guards came up behind him it was obvious they just wanted to fight/dance. If they were professionals they would have flanked up the sides like coyotes--leaving the "threats" easy access to the exit door. An exit they could take with their chests pumped up and a swagger!
Instead of taking positions of tactical advantage, the guards took positions of challenge/domination.
This was social violence. Had the "threats" intended to kill or maim they would have taken advantage of the guards attempt to play a social game.

It's a common mistake of martial arts teachers to conflate social and asocial violence, but it is unethical and inexcusable to not distinguish the two.

Dojo Rat said...

Gee.
I'm glad you're such a keen observer of Human behavior.

Perhaps you also noticed it was in SIBERIA-
Not San Diego.

Small difference perhaps.

Zacky Chan said...

I don't see where "self defense" is mentioned anywhere here? I think it was "four on four fight" actually. And I also don't see a need to preach arbitrary dogma on "self defense" here either. Personally, I enjoy using my own two eyes to objectively analyze media such as this, and greatly appreciate others' related experiences.

Thanks for the post DR.

I'll take care when drunk shopping in Siberia.

Scott said...

Hi Zacky,
You missed the part where this post was a justification for diminishing the value of traditional Chinese internal stances (the badly named, extended guard) and the confused claim of superiority of Western Boxing. And specifically what to teach to old people!!!
You may not see a need to "preach" but I teach traditional arts to women, children, old people, and young men who happen to aspire to high ethical standards. I'm not moralizing, I'm saying well meaning people can get killed because they think they can use game techniques like boxing and MMA against asocial criminals. Making that mistake will get your guts spilled and your head smashed.--don't confuse social and asocial violence!
And I might add, the higher level internal arts do not preference "closing the gap" as so many teachers and bloggers seem to be claiming these days. There are good arguments for "closing the gap" but the Chinese internal arts systems all have superior whole body power that can fight to an extended position without the need to jab.

Dojo Rat said...

Hey man, the Siberian fight video has NOTHING to do with teaching old people Tai Chi.

http://maxalas.blogspot.com said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Todd Erven said...

Asocial violence isn't the only kind that can kill you.

You can label it as a monkey dance but that doesn't mean you won't ever find yourself defending against attacks like that. Avoidance is awesome but you may accidentally "step in it" and not be able to avoid the violence. Any footage of an unscripted fight is useful to watch.

Don't confuse asocial and social violence, I agree. However, don't dismiss social violence either; that can also get you killed.

Scott said...

Your right Todd, social violence can kill you, but 99% of it is non-lethal and most of that is avoidable anyway. There are three reasons people die from social violence,
1. They make the mistake of not knowing the difference between asocial and social.
2. They know the difference but they are "possessed" by their own hormones or emotions...like jealousy or shame...and act without thinking.
3. They are in the middle of some crazy shit...like a real war or a gang war or they are picked out for a random attack by a gang bonding over the thrill of attacking people by surprise.