You're face to face with a potential opponent who is 25 lbs. of muscle heavier than you.
You know it's going down. You know it's going to happen. You turn around or walk away, then HE'S going to initiate.
You have a chance to be the "firstest." Do you bil jee (or any lead tool of your choice), or do you throw a rear cross (or any rear tool of your choice)?
I am going to borrow, quote and steal from Roy Harris.
Here is Roy's take on using a finger jab.
"A finger jab is not a fight stopper. People have a tendency to think that it is or present it as such.
The purpose of an eye jab is to briefly blind the person as when the finger hits the eye or even grazes it, eyes start blinking and watering. This gives you a couple of seconds to either run away or safely close distance to deliver a fightstopper such as knees, elbows or headbutts."
Or, you could use the cross as a fightstopper.
That's what I always liked about Roy. He's one of the most logical and analytical instructors out there.
"Lead with speed; devour with power" - Coach Blauer
"Closest weapon to closest target" - the same dude
My first shot is most likely the ead to the eye. It'll set up the power shot.
right cross. why not take the power shot if like you said you can strike first? (and I like Wing Chun)
I would throw the biu jee first, then follow it with the right cross.
Throw a twenty dollar bill on the ground and run?
"You're face to face with a potential opponent who is 25 lbs. of muscle heavier than you."
I'd be just as concerned with whether he is decidedly taller or shorter than I am, maybe more.
"You know it's going down. You know it's going to happen. You turn around or walk away, then HE'S going to initiate."
You do not include Running away as an option. Why?
"You have a chance to be the "firstest." Do you bil jee (or any lead tool of your choice), or do you throw a rear cross (or any rear tool of your choice)?"
Suppose I poke him in the eye first and it does actually work. Suppose then that there are witnesses. Suppose then I tell the police/judge I knew it was "going down," I knew it was "going to happen." Suppose then they say, "Unless you own a time machine, you 'knew' nothing for certain. You struck a man before he ever touched you and you blinded him in one eye. Please come with us to jail. Please pay him and your defense attorney more money than you could possibly have. Please have your name plastered all over the news as a martial arts psycho. Please lose your job." Etc. BTW, I am not saying the cross is any better. Imagine it lands, he falls back, hits his head on cement, dies. Etc.
Are these (deliberately) extreme examples? (Also please see the thread "Question for Demi" that is running right now.)Of course, but so was the "no way out" scenario that started this thread.
John
I don't think a biu jee permanently blinds someone making your example absolutely ridiculous John Frankl! But good entertainment value for the fake courtroom scenario.
Perhaps detach a retina?
I was actually thinking the same thing as John Frankl. If you appear to be the initiator, you might as well sell your house and give the guy or his family all your money. You are screwed.
Personally, I would try to control the distance and then draw his attack when he was just out of his optimal range so I could deal with it (if possible - better than going to jail or getting sued).
sg
"You do not include Running away as an option. Why?"
Because the discussion is about which tool (not tactic) to utilize in a face to face confrontation where running away is not an option (i.e. in a NYC subway). The discussion is meant to ellicit opinions on whether one prefers lead tools or rear tools in a CQC situation.
I don't include "running away" as an option for the same reasons why I don't include using a cellphone, using my girlfriend as a shield, giving him all my cash, or using jokes to distract him.
PLEASE STICK TO THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD. If you'd like to discuss running away as an option, please start your own thread, and discuss this option there.
As for supposing a witness is there...who said there were witnesses?
As for supposing cops come...who said anything about cops coming?
You're on a completely different topic John. The subject of the thread is to discuss the relative merits of a lead tool over a rear tool, and an example was given to give those options the proper context.
You're free to discuss your other options and suppositions...but please move it to a different thread. Your comments are interesting at best, but they're not relative to the subject (which I recommend you take another glace at). Thank you.
"Or, you could use the cross as a fightstopper."
I like this quote. Here are my thoughts on it.
1) I'd LOVE to believe that the cross (or MY cross) is a fightstopper. It's been proven to be a fight stopper, if placed properly. However, it isn't a guaranteed fight stopper. Trust me zw, I have the same feelings as you that the cross is a fightstopper...but something tells me that there's also the chance (in this particular scenario) that your opponent may take it, or you hit him in the wrong spot.
2) The reason why I'm looking at the bil jee is because it is theoretically faster than the cross (because of it's positioning). What worries me about it is that not only is it FAR from a fightstopper, the accuracy issue is there as well. If I miss with an eye jab, he's going to be standing there, unfazed, with a scratch on his nose.
The bil jee is meant to buy time to unload the big weapons (rear elbow, headbutt, knees). Bil jee is plan A, HKE is plan B.
I'm wondering if plan A could be the CROSS (the rear), then revise plan B w/ a lead hook (thrown on the half beat) or a forearm smash to the neck to facilitate the plum, then go to HKE. Much more boxing oriented.
Essentially, the accepted formula is to start with a lead, then unload with the rear. What I'm wondering (out loud to you guys), is whether the formula can be reversed.
:::applies "knuckleball-beat-em-all" to thread:::
:::runs away:::
I like apples.
"I like apples."
Then start an apple thread.
Sticking solely to the questions at hand so as not to anger 4 Ranges...:)
What we are talking about here is 'preemptive striking' or attacking first when an attack is imminent. The tool that you should use should be based on range, the desired effect and your ability to throw it well.
I teach the jab, the slap, the finger jab (bil jee), the front kick, round kick, groin slap and others as a preemptive strike, again, based on various factors.
The finger jab is usually used to help bridge the gap when the distance between two opponents is a little too great to effectively lead with the cross. It may land or just make him flinch or blink, but either way, it masks the launch of the cross or any other follow up.
The cross, or any power punch from the rear hand, is what EVERY person expects that's ever been in an actual fight. So, landing it well presents a problem. I've seen guys and even have a clip of a guy throwing the short right and dropping the opponent out cold. I believe even Dempsey wrote about the dangerousness of the 18" cross. So, if you are in the proper range, sure, it's an excellent tool to lead with and then follow with your choice of power shots. Outside of the proper range, most people would not be effective in leading with the same tool that your opponent is waiting for and will probably throw himself.
BTW, my initial 'smiley' was not a passive aggressive one...
Reprimand taken. Apologies.
I don't find the topic compelling enough to start my own thread, but I will refrain from needlessly complicating your thread.
John
I would take a rear handed shot any day. I prefer the palm heel to a cross, but they are both similar in mechanics.
Lead with speed and devour with power is an OK theory if you're facing one guy, but if there is 2 or more, you better hit VERY hard with EVERY shot and keep moving.
To quote my good friend Lito Angeles, why not, "Lead with DECEIVE and devour with power?" Meaning, set your power shot up with proper body language and verbal deception.
By the way, IMO one of the best one-shot fight stoppers is the power-slap to the side of the head. VERY powerful with minimal accuracy necessary to have a fantastic result.
John:
That's cool. I see you've started your own thread. I posted statistics there that you might find interesting to the discussion.
Scott:
"The finger jab is usually used to help bridge the gap when the distance between two opponents is a little too great to effectively lead with the cross."
This makes the purpose of the bil jee much clearer.