We don't throw straight rights in street fights.

[drop bear]

Or something.

This kind of pops up a bit and from seemingly sensible people. That even if you are trained to throw a certain way and do it successfully and choose to do it for a whole host of very good reasons.

That you don't because it somehow doesn't fit your preconception of how a street fight should look.

As if throwing a straight right is some sort of sports application.

 

[skribs]

I don't think he's saying you should do the whole fight like that. He's talking about the opening shot. As soon as you ball your fists and raise your guard, the other guy knows a punch is coming and he'll be more prepared for it. He's talking about how to hold yourself so that you can still be ready to cover up, throw a punch, or shoot for the legs, but you won't look like you're going to.

This is different from the sport application, where your opponent knows you want to fight and knows the punch is coming.

When we practice our self defense at my school, we practice from a neutral position instead of a guard. It's not because we think it's better that way. It's because if someone is going to sucker punch us, by definition we wouldn't be ready.

 

[drop bear]

2:45.

"I could do it like I am sparring and throw clean punches but ultimately that's not how street fights work."

 

[Dirty Dog]

When we practice our self defense at my school, we practice from a neutral position instead of a guard. It's not because we think it's better that way. It's because if someone is going to sucker punch us, by definition we wouldn't be ready.

By definition, there is no defense against a sucker punch. If you see it coming and can react, it's not, by definition, a sucker punch.

I do think that staying in a neutral, non-aggressive stance, is a very good idea if you're trying to deescalate a situation. I also think people often call this sort of thing a sucker punch. But it's not.

 

[CB Jones]

2:45.

"I could do it like I am sparring and throw clean punches but ultimately that's not how street fights work."

This made no sense to me.....street fights work how you make them work

 

[skribs]

2:45.

"I could do it like I am sparring and throw clean punches but ultimately that's not how street fights work."

I took that line in the context of the rest of the video.

Also, this is a BJJ school, so the focus is going to be on the grappling.

 

[CB Jones]

Also, not a fan of the the open hands, "hey I don't want to fight", then sneak him.

If you don't want to fight....why are you attacking?

 

[skribs]

Also, not a fan of the the open hands, "hey I don't want to fight", then sneak him.

If you don't want to fight....why are you attacking?

I'm thinking a combination of subterfuge and CYA.

At my school we teach those words, but that's after they've defended themselves (without striking) and have the other person pinned down.

I've also used it to de-escalate plenty of fights, but I actually de-escalated them.

 

[drop bear]

This made no sense to me.....street fights work how you make them work

Yeah that. It is not the first time I have come across this idea.

 

[CB Jones]

Yeah that. It is not the first time I have come across this idea.

I still don't understand why a straight right then shoot for the takedown would not be effective either.

Seems like the straight right would be more effective because there is less likely of getting tied or tangled up if the person steps forward inside the hook.

 

[isshinryuronin]

If someone wants to fight you, they don't care what stance you're in: aggressive, neutral, passive - they're going to throw no matter what.

If they're trained, your stance may influence what attack they open with based on their perception of your stance's weakness. Of course, you could use this to bait him into choosing an attack line of your choice and are prepared for. For example, if your hands are high, you encourage him to attack low and visa versa. Hands wide, you encourage him to strike up the middle.... As long as you're aware of the attributes of your stance and guard, I think most any one can work for you.

Being able to effectively attack or defend from a neutral stance without telegraphing is certainly a good (and advanced) skill to have. This does require coordination of hands, feet and body, as well as mind, to execute all of it simultaneously and the average Joe probably won't pull it off effectively. Handling a quick, true, sucker punch out of the blue? Jason Bourne, John Wick, and maybe one of you can. To be honest, chances are (and I'm pretty quick) I'd probably suffer some damage, but if I'm still on my feet, I would be very, very angry.

I think, in the end, you have to do what you are comfortable, and proficient, with, and control the action (actively or passively) wherever possible.

 

[Danny T]

He has his opinions...I have mine. In the case they don't match. I can do a rear straight, a rear long hook, rear long overhand, a short rear hook, a short rear overhand.

 

[skribs]

If someone wants to fight you, they don't care what stance you're in: aggressive, neutral, passive - they're going to throw no matter what.

Not true at all.

For one, I've had several people try and pick a fight with me, and not a single one has thrown.

Second, there's a big difference in your alert level if the other person looks ready to fight or not.

 

[Dirty Dog]

If someone wants to fight you, they don't care what stance you're in: aggressive, neutral, passive - they're going to throw no matter what.

Nonsense. I couldn't tell you how many conflicts I've deescalated over the years. Hundreds, for certain.

 

[drop bear]

I still don't understand why a straight right then shoot for the takedown would not be effective either.

Seems like the straight right would be more effective because there is less likely of getting tied or tangled up if the person steps forward inside the hook.

Clean punches in general are not thrown because they are martial arty they really do work better.

A straight right is going to be a lot harder to see.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

A straight right is going to be a lot harder to see.

I don't think it's smart to use punch as your 1st attack. Your opponent's leg is always longer than your arm.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

If you don't want to fight....why are you attacking?

Hit first, hit last. you increase your chances of winning if you get the first hit in, and its not unlawful in many places to premptively attack a legitimate threat.


i would also state stance matters if you state you are trying to de escilate it in court, you get everything dissected there if you go there.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

By definition, there is no defense against a sucker punch. If you see it coming and can react, it's not, by definition, a sucker punch.

I do think that staying in a neutral, non-aggressive stance, is a very good idea if you're trying to deescalate a situation. I also think people often call this sort of thing a sucker punch. But it's not.

I've always thought of "sucker punch" as any punch that comes without clear warning. Doesn't necessarily mean you won't see it gathering at the last moment and maybe manage to avoid it. Granted, the classic sucker punch has so few cues, it's likely to go unnoticed until way too late.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Or something.

This kind of pops up a bit and from seemingly sensible people. That even if you are trained to throw a certain way and do it successfully and choose to do it for a whole host of very good reasons.

That you don't because it somehow doesn't fit your preconception of how a street fight should look.

As if throwing a straight right is some sort of sports application.

Yeah, I don't get it, either. I'll try to watch this video tomorrow (slow connection makes it unwatchable). But what's so sports-y about a straight right that it can't be used "in the street"?

 

[skribs]

I don't think it's smart to use punch as your 1st attack. Your opponent's leg is always longer than your arm.

At the distance in the video, you're already in punching range.

You shouldn't be throwing a punch if you're not in punching range.