I'm pretty sure I'm missing your point here. Were you agreeing or disagreeing with what I said? We seem to be heading in the same direction, but you seem to be taking issue with me referring to a specific lock, at the same time.
Sport vs. Street
- Thread starter FriedRice
- Start date
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
I agree the lock or the end results are different. But they are not really the focus point.
CB Jones
Senior Master
What is the focus point then?
It is too bad that it's a hell of a long flight to sit down and drink beer or five with you and exchange thoughts.
I tell my people all the time, "Be in the right spot, and you're fine, which means ... safe. If you're not there, then you are where the other guy wants you to be, and that's usually unsafe." Same-same.
OP
OP
FriedRice
Master Black Belt
This is obvious though...it's like saying, "knowing how to block a punch is not the same as being able to not get punched in the face". And the guy in question, that you based your winning tactic on......failed at your tactic for suckerpunching (at the ~33 second mark) because his targeted yellow, saw it and was able to do something about it....by moving away and actually throw the 1st punch. And since they were implementing this tactic already, in a recorded video....it's safe to assume that you didn't come up with it before them.
I just mean that it's a better risk than your plan. I didn't say it was guaranteed to win.
But this is armchair quarterbacking in a highly chaotic environment. When you're in there, in real life, I don't think you can make predictions as easily as you're doing here.
Your illustrations are interesting though. When I was in a fight like this, I just remembered swinging like crazy at anyone who I couldn't recognize, but it was more than 5 on 5. Who knows, maybe these Fighters do have elaborate game plans like how you've mapped it out.
OP
OP
FriedRice
Master Black Belt
While what you're saying is interesting, it still doesn't seem to be the main tactic being used by this TFC fighting league. There aren't that many videos to watch, but of the ones I've seen, none seem to endorse what you proposed....except that one that you link, where it VAGUELY resembles your tactic. But after watching it again with many pauses, it seems that the Red that hung back, merely did so on-the-fly and not planned....he was reluctant to engage or worried about his flank or something.....which was why Yellow saw the safe space to help his buddy, double team 1 Red. The main reason that Red won, was due to that Red beating that Yellow, 1-1....taking him out.
But all of the fights seems to start out 1-1 x 5 until 1 guy is out, which turns into a diminishing return effect for the team with 4 vs. 5, and they lose.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. What I saw as a poorly executed sucker punch. Instead of hooking the guy in his face with a left hook, he decided to go all the way to the person's back and threw a sloppy haymaker. The tactic that I suggested requires that they team fight as a unit, and in the video it was clear that they weren't fighting as a unit, hence the missed opportunities to take someone's back and choke them out.
As far as "It's safe to assume that you didn't come up with it before them." That has no bearing. The same tactic of isolating the enemy from a group has been around since ancient times. Romans did it, Greeks did it, Egyptians did it, Chinese did it, Japanese did it. Africans did it. Name any large ancient military and you'll see the same tactic. This is one of the main benefits that ancient soldiers would march and fight in tight formation. The tactic is a historical tactic The romans rose to power because they fought as a unit and not just a bunch of guys trying to go 1 vs 1.
Read some ancient military tactics and you'll see the same tactics that I I'm referring to. 5 vs 5 is simple in comparison. If you and I are on the same team, then I will position myself where I can take your opponents back. After I attack your opponent, you then pick up my opponent. If my opponent is too focus on saving his teammate from being choked out by me, then you'll have an opportunity to take my opponent's back while I'm choking out your opponent.
The same concepts tactics and strategies that were used back then are used today.
Here's an example of isolation. It's a larger scale but the strategy is the same. If you are against a group, isolate one of your opponents and quickly take them down.
Like I stated. The only way my tactics would work is if the team is fighting as a unit. Fighting 1 vs 1 increases the risk of being isolated and defeated. Fighting as a unit utilizes your teammates to take advantage of easy opportunities.
OP
OP
FriedRice
Master Black Belt
There were no suckerpunch to begin with. The entry to the suckerpunch failed, that was the problem. But to be clear, at what time mark are you referring to.
If they fight as a single group, huddled together...then the other team is going to do the same most likely, so you're still getting a 1-1 situation. The other team is not going to be dumb as rocks and send in 1 at a time vs. a block of 5.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Every step that gets you to that lock.
No, but they do affect the approach somewhat. If your point is that an LEO and I would use much of the same mechanics along the way (getting position, etc.), regardless of the endpoint, I can agree that there's a lot of overlap there. If I'm not trying to retain the person (so more projection throws and strikes, rather than locks and takedowns), then we're likely to use different distancing and positions, but the skills for getting to those various positions are still similar in many cases.
Question... think scrap, not dojo demo or whatever "nice world" situation. Projection throwing, or drop at your feet as the "go to tactic?" Well, unless you happen to be fighting with them right next to a ledge/cliff type thing, I guess, which can change your thinking.
Shoot, if it is a real fight situation and there's video around, better change too, eh?
Not true, Just because a group of people decide to stand in one group doesn't mean that their opponents will stand in one group. This is also why ancient military tactics also included formations that help to deal with the enemy attacking the flanks.
we see similar strategy in north American football. For example, If I'm in a 5 vs 5 fight and I see that my opponent wants to attack in a ground then I'm going to have someone attack the flank. While 4 of my guys occupy 5 of their guys then I'll use my 5th man to attack. If you want to know how all of this stuff works then you have to look at some ancient military tactics.
Here an example of what I'm talking about. You'll see both the flank and isolation. 3 take the flank. 2 go out to look vulnerable. As the 3 rush one breaks from the group isolation. But once again. The group has to fight as a unit. It's not enough to be a group. There has to be coordination and communication. Even though one team split into a group of 3 and a group of 2. There was coordination and an understanding of a plan of how to deal with the other 5 and it wasn't going 1 vs 1.
jobo
Grandmaster
I think your correct if you have a general to dictate tatics .But left to their own devices group /gangs with stay together. That's why they had to invent the tatic
Throwing (to the ground at my feet, etc.) is my preference. Most of those throws can be pretty painful to someone who doesn't know the fall, and free me up to move if needed. But it is definitely situational. Projections (which I define as sending them away from me) are more likely to be recovery moves for me, where I missed the throw I wanted. The "drops" (throws that put them down without much energy for impact) would either be escape moves or a transition to a lock/pin, in most cases.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Basically anything prevents them from being grounded standing and able to to throw dangerous shots at you will be to your advantage.
You may only get half a trip that results in a bit of a stumble. But that can give you a couple of unopposed strikes.
Which can turn the tide of a fight in you favor.
Yes, messing wityh someone's lead foot often causes a quick shuffle step which the other guy didn't plan on taking, and lots of times reflexes take over and hands move away from guard at that instant and there's the opening for a quick shot. That shot, once connected, can open up the next, etc.
My time indicator is off I think. Which aspect where you intending to show?
I gotcha, I was just trying to figure out if you meant a specific one.
Similar threads
