If you defend positionally. Cutting angles, good footwork, head movement. You can attack with both hands. Which is what that cover is kind of designed to do.
So you cover, create a positional advantage and then blast with both hands to get a tactical advantage.
So to be clear, I also assume a "dynamic environment" any time we're discussing actual combat strategy. I assume both people are always moving, always performing their fundamentals to the best of their ability. So when you say "attack with both hands" I'm thinking, "We're all, always attacking with both hands" unless you mean to literally throw both hands in an attack at the same time, in which case the only effective sort of that I've encountered comes from grabs, eye-pokes, and ear-claps. I don't think that's what you mean though, so then my retort is:
When you examine the fight in real time, the amount of time between any defense and attack (assuming you're doing each rapidly) is very small. Regardless of whether you engage both hands briefly in a defense, or you cover one side while throwing a strike on the other side, you should be always engaged in active defense; but unless you only count a simultaneous action with both hands at the same time as "attack with both hands", then we're always attacking with both hands. So I guess I don't understand what you mean.
Where as say blocking and striking simultaneously while it works against one punch. Gets beaten by covering moving and striking if there are a lot of punches.
Here, it would seem you're answering my above question, but my position is that this does not answer that question. The breakdown goes like this:
We've presented two scenarios. One in which you attack/cover (let's call it A/C) and one where you defend/move/counter (let's call it D/M).
A/C - The attacker throws, as described in the scenario the original poster set up. The defender goes with option #2, as I described it (with slipping the jab-- and I'll assume for this that both fighters are right-handed for simplicity of examining this-- to the attacker's left, covering his face with his right hand, and launching the right-handed hook. Let's say it whiffs, and the attacker continues his combo with the right cross. The defender now slips the cross to the attacker's right side, covering the right side of his own head with his right hand that just whiffed the right hook he threw, and now launching a hook on the left side for the follow-up.
Of course, this situation is a little unrealistic because while you could possibly do that, it's going to be a pretty low percentage of people who could actually pull it off, requiring perfect timing, great speed, and in most cases significantly weakening at least the initial right hook thrown by the defender, if not both hooks. More realistically, this would be easily corrected by slipping the jab/cross in succession, and only throwing the left hook at the end.
D/M - The attacker throws the jab/cross, you cover up, circle to his left side (again, we're assuming right-handed fighters) and assuming you pulled it off perfectly, with impeccable timing so that he's still recovering the right arm from the cross, you now have time to throw one good punch before he resets his footwork, unless that punch *creates* the opportunity to throw another-- in which case, the A/C response does precisely the same thing, but isn't relying on its own success. The A/C response assumes a return to neutral advantage/disadvantage, and that the fight continues. It seems the D/M response is relying on the original attacker being unable to recover, which will not be the case in most scenarios. The resolution to this D/M is that after the defender moves and strikes once, the original attacker steps his back leg across his centre line to reset toward the defender, and you're at what I call "neutral" again, either way.
I have to admit however, in the course of writing this, I can more clearly see the advantage of the D/M response. It does leave you in a superior position if it all goes exactly as intended. The A/C response still seems a safer choice if it fails however, because even if it misses you're already back to neutral. If the D/M response fails, you didn't get the difficult timing exactly right, the attacker resets position before you gain superior position, and now you're back to neutral without having even thrown an attack. In other words, the attacker got free shots at you (which creates risk), and all you did was change position. If you're just stalling for time, or you have some other reason not to be aggressive, D/M would work better.
Also. Strategically. If say someone hook into my cover. They open that side to a counter with the cover hand because it has a direct inside line now to their head.
Unless they threw that hook with head movement and foot work.
Again, in discussing strategy I'm always assuming both combatants are defending themselves the best they can, therefore he *is* moving his head and feet. Every attack creates an opportunity for the counter attack, thus the "always be contouring" and "countering" part of the ABC's.
Where as say blocking and striking simultaneously while it works against one punch. Gets beaten by covering moving and striking if there are a lot of punches.
Punches in bunches is always assumed. Every single moment of attack and strike creates opportunity for counter/attack. As I'm sure you know, unlike in dojo scenarios, real fights almost never have a single strike for responding to in the most ideal way. The strikes come rapidly, usually sloppily, and even if not they still create an opportunity for counter at each one. The jab/cross combo is possibly the safest dual-strike option because it's really difficult to counter a jab with a hook if there's a cross following it up to cut to the inside; but generally, we are essentially *always* attacking and defending at "the same time". Sure, it's not precisely the same time, but as far as a human is capable of perceiving and moving, it basically is "the same time".
) say you are 2/3rds correct as you have covered 2 of the 3 elements of speed. You've got how fast your hook is actually moving, and the timing of action (jab) starting before your reaction.
In other words, if your guard is in an extended or other favorable position, you may only need to move your hand two inches to intercept the attack, while the attack may have to travel two feet to hit your face.
