Surprise Attacks

[kiai]

Hi guys,

What are some of the most effective "surprise attacks"? Almost universally, it seems to me, martial arts are taught with students defaulting in "duel mode", both opponents facing each other with guards up ready to block attacks and throw their own.

I understand some people will disagree with the nature of this topic, given that both ethically and technically they are taught "self-defence", and this may be construed as "offence", but I'd like to expand my boundaries and understand what techniques are best outside of this context.

For example: You see a person a little distance away, approaching a loved one, with their intent being to harm them. From behind or side how could you deal the most damage?

I'm especially interested in how strikes could be applied here, as opposed to holds - I study Karate, and it seems to me as though most attacks are taught as if you're both facing each other.

 

[ppko]

To be honest the angle of attacks doesnt matter as much as you getting to know the pre-assault cues and the your ability to commit 100%. Practicing pre-assault cues will be of great help and a great addition to your studies.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Well I practice iaido, and if anyone ever told you iai was self defence….they lied to you. It’s about killing the other person before they can do the same to you. There is a kata quite common throughout many iai schools, Nukiuchi, you wait, draw the sword and cut down.

To me a sword would be like a firearm, if you draw it, you’d better be prepared to use it.

 

[Aiki Lee]

There are several kata in Koto ryu that are about walking by someone and murdering them before they have a chance to react.

Martial arts are often "war arts" focusing on killing someone before they can kill you.

 

[K-man]

There are several kata in Koto ryu that are about walking by someone and murdering them before they have a chance to react.

Martial arts are often "war arts" focusing on killing someone before they can kill you.

All kata are designed to do that. Just very few people teach those applications.

 

[Chris Parker]

To clarify Himura's point there (you don't mind, do you Himura?) "kata" in a traditional Japanese system is different to those found in Okinawan/Chinese/Korean systems. In those, the typical format for a "kata" is a string of solo-trained routines, within the Japanese systems (at least the old ones not based in the Okinawan/Chinese forms), a "kata" is commonly a two (or more) person attack and defence set, closer to what other systems refer to as a technique in and of itself.

So a typical one for most systems have an attacking partner (Uke) coming forward with an attacking method (say, a grab and punch), and the defending partner (Tori) reacting (say, cover the grab, evade back and block the punch, then counter strike and kick to finish). Koto Ryu, amongst our traditions, has a large proportion of it's syllabus where the kata are performed with Uke and Tori walking towards each other, and without an attacking action from Uke, Tori strikes or grabs, then follows up. The method is one of attacking rhythms, or what my instructor refered to as "Offensive Defence".

To address the OP, I'd look into things like bodyguarding methods, and I'd forget about such ideas as "how could you do the most damage?", as that very mindset can be rather dangerous from a legal and practical standpoint. I'd look far more at how to intercept a potential person, rather than looking to do damage. Then, when interjecting yourself, damaging is not the best idea for you to have in your mind, either, as it can go very much against "reasonable force" laws in most places.

 

[K-man]

To clarify Himura's point there (you don't mind, do you Himura?) "kata" in a traditional Japanese system is different to those found in Okinawan/Chinese/Korean systems. In those, the typical format for a "kata" is a string of solo-trained routines, within the Japanese systems (at least the old ones not based in the Okinawan/Chinese forms), a "kata" is commonly a two (or more) person attack and defence set, closer to what other systems refer to as a technique in and of itself.

So a typical one for most systems have an attacking partner (Uke) coming forward with an attacking method (say, a grab and punch), and the defending partner (Tori) reacting (say, cover the grab, evade back and block the punch, then counter strike and kick to finish). Koto Ryu, amongst our traditions, has a large proportion of it's syllabus where the kata are performed with Uke and Tori walking towards each other, and without an attacking action from Uke, Tori strikes or grabs, then follows up. The method is one of attacking rhythms, or what my instructor refered to as "Offensive Defence".

To address the OP, I'd look into things like bodyguarding methods, and I'd forget about such ideas as "how could you do the most damage?", as that very mindset can be rather dangerous from a legal and practical standpoint. I'd look far more at how to intercept a potential person, rather than looking to do damage. Then, when interjecting yourself, damaging is not the best idea for you to have in your mind, either, as it can go very much against "reasonable force" laws in most places.

I was more referring to "Martial arts are often "war arts" focusing on killing someone before they can kill you."

However, in regard to our kata. Yes, they are a string of techniques but not random. Each technique may have 15 or more applications so it is not possible to have a two man drill that covers all applications moving through the entire kata. We do have simple two man drills that will go through the entire kata but in this instance Tori has only the first move set, whether it be strike or grab. From that first move, every move Tori makes is based on predictive response. Either he defends or he gets hit. If he defends then the defence is predictable and the bunkai continues. If not he gets hit, end of exercise.

We do take techniques out of kata and train them as you described and in the Japanese form of Goju we had pre-arranged sparring or yakusoku kumite. I have taken that out of our training because I found most of it choreographed and not realistic. Once Tori has made the first move, that should be it. To say for example, "Tori strikes to the head right fist. Uke, tsabaki to the left, parry with right, strikes left Shuto across the throat. Tori spins to his left and strikes with right fist to head ....". HELLO! What makes this unrealistic is that Uke now has to deal with a choreographed response that does not take into account that Tori has a crushed trachea, can't breath and in reality we are moving behind ready to break his neck. That type of scenario was typical of the stuff I objected to in the Japanese Goju.

In Goju the Japanese kata are very much the same as the Okinawan but it would appear the Japanese like the kata to look good where the Okinawans are more concerned with how well it works. This probably has a lot to do with competition.

So the scenario that you described is exactly what we do, only we possibly do it more as a random free form (kyogi) rather than a formalised combination (bunkai).

The other thing in the OP was basically a pre-emptive attack. We do practise those as well although not from a casual walking past scenario. Our pre-emptive strikes will depend on distance, whether you can hit and withdraw, whether there is more than one attacker etc.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hey, K-man,

I was more referring to "Martial arts are often "war arts" focusing on killing someone before they can kill you."'

Ah, okay. I took it from your previous post:

All kata are designed to do that. Just very few people teach those applications.

Understandable, I think?

But to your point, there are some that may not quite fit that description, but that's a little beside the argument here.

However, in regard to our kata. Yes, they are a string of techniques but not random. Each technique may have 15 or more applications so it is not possible to have a two man drill that covers all applications moving through the entire kata. We do have simple two man drills that will go through the entire kata but in this instance Tori has only the first move set, whether it be strike or grab. From that first move, every move Tori makes is based on predictive response. Either he defends or he gets hit. If he defends then the defence is predictable and the bunkai continues. If not he gets hit, end of exercise.

First, I don't think I said anything about the kata being "random", that wouldn't make any sense whatsoever, would it! My background, so you know, includes Tani-ha Shito Ryu Shukokai Karate-do, and Rhee Tae Kwon Do, so I'm familiar with the way kata are presented there.

Actually, it can be done, and schools such as Katori Shinto Ryu manage it (by using the format as a way of "hiding" the actual methods of the art in a number of ways), but I do agree that it's not an easy thing to do with unarmed systems. I have done it with our systems before, making a "story" of a call-and-answer style approach, with one kata to begin with, the end (finish) being thwarted by the original attacker with another kata, which gets defeated with another one, and so on (typically three, four, or five combined that way).

Oh, and the way the Katori Ryu does it is this:

[yt]cQB5Lc1C_a8[/yt]

Each sequence is made up of a lot of different "techniques", tied together and disguised, to a degree.

We do take techniques out of kata and train them as you described and in the Japanese form of Goju we had pre-arranged sparring or yakusoku kumite. I have taken that out of our training because I found most of it choreographed and not realistic. Once Tori has made the first move, that should be it. To say for example, "Tori strikes to the head right fist. Uke, tsabaki to the left, parry with right, strikes left Shuto across the throat. Tori spins to his left and strikes with right fist to head ....". HELLO! What makes this unrealistic is that Uke now has to deal with a choreographed response that does not take into account that Tori has a crushed trachea, can't breath and in reality we are moving behind ready to break his neck. That type of scenario was typical of the stuff I objected to in the Japanese Goju.

Ah, see I wouldn't say that it's unrealistic, I'd just look for what it's designed to teach (which may not be combative realism, honestly).

But to show you what we mean when we say "kata", here are a few from Koto Ryu. First is Keto:

[yt]PXqKGu_GvqA[/yt]

Then, one of the "attacking" ones that Himura was mentioning, this is Hehi:

[yt]UatWoTrJoMw[/yt]

In Goju the Japanese kata are very much the same as the Okinawan but it would appear the Japanese like the kata to look good where the Okinawans are more concerned with how well it works. This probably has a lot to do with competition.

Yeah, different emphasis there. Interesting, though!

So the scenario that you described is exactly what we do, only we possibly do it more as a random free form (kyogi) rather than a formalised combination (bunkai).

Cool. This is just taken from your phrasing about kata, again I'm from a karate and TKD background, so I wasn't under the impression that kata was the singular teaching and training method used.

The other thing in the OP was basically a pre-emptive attack. We do practise those as well although not from a casual walking past scenario. Our pre-emptive strikes will depend on distance, whether you can hit and withdraw, whether there is more than one attacker etc.

Yep, same with us. We have kata that just hit and leap out, ones that follow up with a kick, or another strike, and ones that transition into throws. I'm still advising that the approach of the OP isn't the greatest plan in the world, and should probably be re-thought.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Whether opponents are squared off and prepared for combat with each other or not, a punch is a punch, a kick is a kick. Training to defend against them can only serve you well, as it teaches muscle memory that is faster than thinking about and then applying a defense. Reflexes, once ingrained, can be faster than thought, it's been shown. For example, when you touch a hot stove, you pull your hand back faster than the time it takes for the nerve to send a signal to the brain, process the sensation of heat and pain, and the brain to send a signal to the muscles to pull the hand away. So practicing your skills until they are ingrained is good when you don't have time to think about what to do when you turn and suddenly there is a fist flying at your face.

However, in my experience, attacks seldom come without some kind of run-up. Usually a verbal confrontation that escalates. And non-trained people will generally telegraph their intentions. Even better, Americans tend to all do the same thing; step back, cock the strong hand (usually the right) and try to throw the big haymaker punch at the head. It's a classic. It's also easily defended against once you have become trained yourself. I'm not saying I'm great at it, but that day is coming.

Other skills that are important for a MAist to have, but which might not be taught in a given style of martial arts, include situational awareness. That is, being aware of and proactive to situations which might escalate or which represent inordinate danger. Simple example; most punchups happen in bars. Solution; stay out of bars. If you find you just can't leave the bars alone, at least pay attention to your surroundings, don't get sloppy drunk, and keep your eyes open.

 

[Chris Parker]

(Ahem!) Er, while I agree with what you've posted, Bill, the OP isn't asking how to defend against a surprise attack, he's wanting to know what the best surprise attacks for him to use (against someone from behind them or to their side) for maximum damage.... so you know....

 

[Bill Mattocks]

(Ahem!) Er, while I agree with what you've posted, Bill, the OP isn't asking how to defend against a surprise attack, he's wanting to know what the best surprise attacks for him to use (against someone from behind them or to their side) for maximum damage.... so you know....

Oh, I totally missed that! Thanks!

Eh, my dad taught me that one. Walk up behind the guy and hit him in the back of the head with a baseball bat. Game over. The best fight is the one that leaves the opponent dead if your intent is not to get hit or retaliated against later. I'm not sure why one needs MA for that.

 

[Chris Parker]

Ha, yeah, that'd work. Again, I'd have some reservations from a legal standpoint, and if this is intercepting someone approaching a loved one, you may not be carrying the baseball bat.... still, nothing's foolproof, is it?

You have reminded me of an old story of Charles Daniel (Ninjutsu). Essentially, he was asked a question that basically equated to "how would you prefer to fight so-and-so?". Charles looked at the questioner and answered "With them asleep or in a coma. Not very sporting, but it gives me the best chance!"

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I'm especially interested in how strikes could be applied here, as opposed to holds - I study Karate, and it seems to me as though most attacks are taught as if you're both facing each other.

Sorry, misread your post initially. In our style, we teach breaking the fight line to strike. So even if opponents are facing each other, we step offline or circle to attempt to attack from the side or rear. An 'otoshi geri' is delivered from a 45 degree angle in our style, not facing the opponent. Kicks to the knee and back of the legs are quite effective at forcing the opponent to the ground; no matter how strong a person is, their knee joint cannot take tremendous power applied to the side of the joint; and they can't walk or run with their knee destroyed. I'm sure there are lots of applications; we do many of them, as self-defense includes attacking, not just blocking and deflecting attacks. We seek advantages by attacking where the opponent is unable to defend; this would fit your scenario, I think.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Ha, yeah, that'd work. Again, I'd have some reservations from a legal standpoint, and if this is intercepting someone approaching a loved one, you may not be carrying the baseball bat.... still, nothing's foolproof, is it?

You have reminded me of an old story of Charles Daniel (Ninjutsu). Essentially, he was asked a question that basically equated to "how would you prefer to fight so-and-so?". Charles looked at the questioner and answered "With them asleep or in a coma. Not very sporting, but it gives me the best chance!"

It's funny, but our (American) society taught many of us to 'fight fair' even when we're fighting a criminal attack. We don't strike from behind or without warning, we don't hit women, we don't kick in the bollocks, and so on. Well, MAists do, but in general. The bad guys don't fight fair, but the good guys often think they must.

My dad raised me differently. If you are about to be attacked, attack first, attack hard, and don't stop until there is no chance of being attacked. Don't talk, hit. Don't warn, hit. And so on.

 

[Aiki Lee]

Hit him with your car!

 

[Nomad]

Sniper rifle. 400 yards out.

 

[jks9199]

Sniper rifle. 400 yards out.

Well, I'll see your sniper rifle at 400 yards, and raise you one cruise missile over the horizon! LOL

On a more serious note, if you want to learn how to ambush, watch predators. Human or animal... successful predators make ambush a key element of their strategies. Develop one or two key techniques (like a tiger's pounce), and practice using them in different situations, from different angles, until you can confidently rely on them.

Doing this study is a good practice -- because the reality of real violent attacks is that the predator will use surprise, and only by looking through their eyes can you really understand how to prepare to defend.

 

[K-man]

Actually, it can be done, and schools such as Katori Shinto Ryu manage it (by using the format as a way of "hiding" the actual methods of the art in a number of ways), but I do agree that it's not an easy thing to do with unarmed systems. I have done it with our systems before, making a "story" of a call-and-answer style approach, with one kata to begin with, the end (finish) being thwarted by the original attacker with another kata, which gets defeated with another one, and so on (typically three, four, or five combined that way).

I think I understand where you are coming from. What you have are short forms to combat a particular attack. If that attack is stopped Uke then becomes Tori and begins another attack and so on.

In the bunkai devised by Masaji Taira Sensei at the Jundokan, you can move between kata as appropriate. In doing so you are linking parts from different kata which in effect is similar to what you have described. Main difference is with ours, Tori remains Tori.

Ah, see I wouldn't say that it's unrealistic, I'd just look for what it's designed to teach (which may not be combative realism, honestly).

It is only realistic in that I constructed a combination that would counter the attack described. When it got to the end I could have used a kick or takedown but in the scenario Tori is destroyed by the blow to the throat. If in the scenario tori had responded in the predictive response he would have lifted the left hand to protect. Uke would then take that hand pulling down to expose the head for the next strike, possibly heel palm to jaw. Once again end of scenario. All I was saying by getting Tori to turn and attack again was that the original scenario finished the moment Tori could not stop the strike. After that you start a new scenario. What I did was probably proposed a scenario that made sense with Tori turning away. What I intended was one scenario that moved into another without a logical transition. That was the type of training that we were expected to memorise in my previous life.

But to show you what we mean when we say "kata", here are a few from Koto Ryu. First is Keto:

[yt]PXqKGu_GvqA[/yt]

This is what we would call yakusoku kumite or prearranged sparring. If it had concluded with a lock or takedown we would call it kyogi kumite.

Then, one of the "attacking" ones that Himura was mentioning, this is Hehi:

[yt]UatWoTrJoMw[/yt]

I haven't seen that type of attack in Goju but we do a similar attack in Aikido. (We do the technique in Goju, but not as a pre-emptive strike)

I'm still advising that the approach of the OP isn't the greatest plan in the world, and should probably be re-thought.

Can't disagree with that advice!

 

[ppko]

It's funny, but our (American) society taught many of us to 'fight fair' even when we're fighting a criminal attack. We don't strike from behind or without warning, we don't hit women, we don't kick in the bollocks, and so on. Well, MAists do, but in general. The bad guys don't fight fair, but the good guys often think they must.

My dad raised me differently. If you are about to be attacked, attack first, attack hard, and don't stop until there is no chance of being attacked. Don't talk, hit. Don't warn, hit. And so on.

My thoughts exactly this is also the way I was brought up. I was always told its not self defense its being able to know that you opponent is going to attack and hitting him first, the law doesnt state that you cant attack first what (most states) it states is that your level of force can go no further then making sure the threat is no longer there. There is ussually a lot more however I dont have the time about to head out and catch some bad guys here in afghanistan lol

 

[ralphmcpherson]

If I have to strike first, then its a kick to the knee. As Bill said earlier, it doesnt matter how big they are or how tough they are, if you can kick someone in the knee (properly) without telegraphing it you can simply walk away because there is no chance they will be chasing you or anybody else for quite some time, at least not until after the recuperation from their full knee reconstruction.