Sparring Ring Idea

[Hanuman]

It came to my attention a little while ago that almost all martial art scenarios concentrate heavily on the 1 vs 1 scenario both in philosophy, physically and legally.
But, what if you are jumped by 2-8 guys, and what if they are armed?
If you lose, it could be very bad, if you win but hurt them, they could testify against you and you could get sued, stupid but true!

Circle sparring is a way to combine the effects of non-injury martial arts, multi-opponent combat and parkour.

1) Set up a large circle as the sparring field.
2) Spar within the circle, once you have the advantage run across the edge of the circle
3) After crossing the circle edge your opponent has 5 seconds to cross the edge as well, or you gain a point.
4) If he does cross before 5 seconds, neither of you gains a point and the round ends.
5) A running tab is kept of everyone's points, and recorded. The highest ranked is considered King.
6) If your opponent is injured in a session (past self-inflicted injuries such as twisted ankles, ect) you lose all points and start at 0.
7) Be respectful of your opponent's well-being.

To Be Determined:
-Additional Rules
-Multi-Opponent Systems
-Armed Opponent Simulation
-Circle Sizes

What does NPF think of this, and how can this be expanded?

[krogothwolf]

The whole crossing the line of the cirlce seems kinda weird? What's the point? and aside from knocking the guy down, 5 seconds seems kinda long. Why can't a knock down be the point as opposed to the line crossing?

[Premmy]

sounds like a Capoeira Rhoda to me, but less fun and more needlessly complicated
non-injury martial arts, multi-opponent combat and parkour
what does parkour have to do with this?

[synkr0nized]

You do like mad flips as you cross the edge for bonus style flair and then kick-flip off walls and junk. Radical.

[Premmy]

Sounds like just flipping or tricking, does anybody GO anywhere?
*parkour nerd*

[Azisien]

I'm gonna open up with my M60 spray n' pray. How many points do I get?

[Hanuman]

The whole crossing the line of the cirlce seems kinda weird? What's the point? and aside from knocking the guy down, 5 seconds seems kinda long. Why can't a knock down be the point as opposed to the line crossing?
The crossing the line is to give a time advantage, so you can run away.
Finishing a 3-8 person fight ESPECIALLY with weapons means you either get severely hurt or severely hurt people, winning can get you sued, losing can get you hurt, so you run away.
Parkour is the art of running away, tricking is the specific fiend of parkour for non-practical movements. You can notice a parkour master by his ability to go from point A to point B more quickly than normal movements and with the least loss of energy to do the movements.

The circle concept is to train you to understand when you get a person and to train split second timing to be able to bolt away as soon as that happens.

[Premmy]

Parkour is the art of running away, tricking is the specific fiend of parkour for non-practical movements. You can notice a parkour master by his ability to go from point A to point B more quickly than normal movements and with the least loss of energy to do the movements.

Yeah, I know that, the concept of staying within one area seems antiethetical to everything I've ever learned about parkour.

Parkour=effcient movement from point a to b
Freerunning= The beautiful movement from point a to b
tricking= Moving beautifully, not necessarily going anywhere

The circle concept is to train you to understand when you get a person and to train split second timing to be able to bolt away as soon as that happens.
Yeah, sounds like a Capoeira rhoda.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

If I got ambushed by 6-8 guys with weapons I'd just turn into Bruce Lee. Problem solved.

[Hanuman]

Yeah, I know that, the concept of staying within one area seems antiethetical to everything I've ever learned about parkour.

That's because it's a mixed styling, it trains suppression, run reaction, transition from combat to parkour (possibly after being floored a few times and taking a few hits) and the synergy between a suppressive situation straight into a fleeing situation, such as if 3 guys (one of them armed with a pistol, the others with knives) hold you at gunpoint and escort you along, you could disable one into the others and make a dash for the corner of a building and hit cover before the pistol holder could aim at you.

It's not training for any specific thing, it just breeds good habits.

[Rejected Again]

Just a few minor things:


But, what if you are jumped by 2-8 guys, and what if they are armed?
If you lose, it could be very bad, if you win but hurt them, they could testify against you and you could get sued, stupid but true!

Circle sparring is a way to combine the effects of non-injury martial arts, multi-opponent combat and parkour.

Lethal force laws are good to know.



1) Set up a large circle as the sparring field.
2) Spar within the circle, once you have the advantage run across the edge of the circle
3) After crossing the circle edge your opponent has 5 seconds to cross the edge as well, or you gain a point.
4) If he does cross before 5 seconds, neither of you gains a point and the round ends.
5) A running tab is kept of everyone's points, and recorded. The highest ranked is considered King.
6) If your opponent is injured in a session (past self-inflicted injuries such as twisted ankles, ect) you lose all points and start at 0.
7) Be respectful of your opponent's well-being.

Its going to be hard to do this with out injuring your opponent. I think a static loss of 3 points would be more fitting. Also, your opponent should have to cross the line in the same general area that you left. This makes it more realistic since if they are supposed to be chasing you to finish the robbery, they would not cross the line on the other side.



To Be Determined:
-Additional Rules
-Multi-Opponent Systems
-Armed Opponent Simulation
-Circle Sizes

What does NPF think of this, and how can this be expanded?

AOS-I would just use those nerf swords and airsoft guns with paint rounds for the fake weapons. They don't hurt, but let you know if you have been "wounded."

Circle Size- 1v1 15-20(4.5-6m) feet. 1v??? min 20 feet(6 m).

[Premmy]

Ah, so it ends the very minue parkour begins.

[Corel]

If I got ambushed by 6-8 guys with weapons I'd just turn into Bruce Lee. Problem solved.

That's your solution to everything.

Should add lava, and broken glass.

All for the greastest art of them all, Run-fu.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

This is why I learned Ju-Jitsu. They teach you how to deal with multiple attackers.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

That's your solution to everything.

Should add lava, and broken glass.

All for the greastest art of them all, Run-fu.

My solution to most things is to make incisive commentary while the inherent instability in the system leads to widescale collapse/revolt on which I shall propel my dreams.

[Corel]

My solution to most things is to make incisive commentary while the inherent instability in the system leads to widescale collapse/revolt on which I shall propel my dreams.

So basically you are to the Internet what Bruce Lee was to the fighting community.

But really, I'm completely serious when I talk about being proficient in Run-Fu.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

-Multi-Opponent Systems
-Armed Opponent SimulationIn this tangent, am I the only thinking you need to follow an "inner city fighter style" allowance to really test some people? Inner city fighter referring to no-holding-back, everything's a target, everything's a weapon fighting. But you can't safely test this kind of thing.
Interesting idea Lev, long way to go though.

[Hatake Kakashi]

This is why I learned Ju-Jitsu. They teach you how to deal with multiple attackers.

Is that the traditional Jiu-Jitsu, or the one you see in MMA all the time where you lay on your back while someone mounts you, punches you, and calls you a dirty whore? I could see multiple... attackers... wanting to take their turns. Yes.

Only kidding, man. Even so, multiple attackers are best evaded rather than confronted. If you take them on for any extent, best case scenario is you beat them all while taking a few minor shots because they're all somehow unskilled. Not an impossible notion... not everyone is trained to fight... but worst case scenario, someone in the group has experience besides a couple of minor brawls and takes you out.

[krogothwolf]

See, I'm one of those people who thinks if you're going to have a competition/sparring like this, you should allow to possibility of being hurt, it makes everything so much more fun!

The whole time/crossing line thing is complicated for something you want to "deal with multiple attackers" Yeha those attackers are totally going to let you be safe by crossing a line.

I say line em up, charge and last one standing wins.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

it makes everything so much more fun!Not a case of fun, more practicality. Now, critically wounding (say you opened a key artery/vein or broke a limb) would have to be discarded in any practise on the basis you prevent the other guy from practising but minor injury would be inevitable and teach the stamina/endurance required in such a scenario.

[krogothwolf]

Man, I don't know about you but when I was age 10-22 me and my friends use to have backyard brawls all the time, and that didn't involve pussy crap like holding back on your punches and crap. We obviously didn't try to kill each other or seriously hurt each other(Though I did break my friends arm when he didn't give in, but that wasn't my fault!).We had a rule if you tapped out you were done(or got knocked out) Sure we got injured, but it was still fun! Also we tried not to kick each other in the junk, but didn't mean we never did!

[ThatPoorMessenger]

Well, yes, but I would class all of that, except breaking the arm, minor injury.

[Hanuman]

Is that the traditional Jiu-Jitsu, or the one you see in MMA all the time where you lay on your back while someone mounts you, punches you, and calls you a dirty whore? I could see multiple... attackers... wanting to take their turns. Yes.

Only kidding, man. Even so, multiple attackers are best evaded rather than confronted. If you take them on for any extent, best case scenario is you beat them all while taking a few minor shots because they're all somehow unskilled. Not an impossible notion... not everyone is trained to fight... but worst case scenario, someone in the group has experience besides a couple of minor brawls and takes you out.
Jiu Jitsu has a lot of good techniques to deal with multiple attackers, it's just none of them are MMA since MMA is strictly 1v1 cage match gladiator style. It's mostly takedowns that you see in MMA except they deal with the next attacker instead of pursuing the grounded one. Personally I think kung fu mixed with systema kicks are a better defense vs multiple opponent takedowns, but that's just me, and jiu jitsu takedowns are made efficient by breaking fingers and wrists while you do it.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

Personally I think kung fu mixed with systema kicks are a better defense vs multiple opponent takedowns, but that's just me
Not really thought of that. Would advocate there are different realms within martial arts that would be better if twisted into the style.

[Hanuman]

Not really thought of that. Would advocate there are different realms within martial arts that would be better if twisted into the style.

Tai chi is a major one, stupidly powerful balance ability comes out of that.

[Jagos]

It came to my attention a little while ago that almost all martial art scenarios concentrate heavily on the 1 vs 1 scenario both in philosophy, physically and legally.
But, what if you are jumped by 2-8 guys, and what if they are armed?

Best thing is to have your back against a wall.

Goes to the Sun-Tzu saying about giving your opponent a place to retreat. If you back even a rat into a corner, it will fight more fiercely than if it has a hole to escape through.

You will have all of your opponents on one side of you, you can watch their movements, and when you have to ram their head into a wall repeatedly, it gets them to back off.

Oh, and if you can, sniff out the leader. Push through all of the little guys, take him down and take him out. Once the leader is gone in a fight, the rest of the pack disperses since you've just shown you're the top dog. *thumbs up*

[ThatPoorMessenger]

Oh, and if you can, sniff out the leader. Push through all of the little guys, take him down and take him out. Once the leader is gone in a fight, the rest of the pack disperses since you've just shown you're the top dog. *thumbs up* Not all people are like dogs. Although a lot of them seem to possess the intellect of them. :sweatdrop
Tai chi is a major one, stupidly powerful balance ability comes out of that.Stability tends to be a good thing. Although using an aggressor's body weight in such a scenario would hold you a lot better than anything else. You need to conserve stamina, not hurt people, and still get on top. Then again, personal balance is a neccessity upon such a field of play.

[7days]

I agree with Jagos. Find the biggest, meanest one and hurt them. I mean really hurt them. Ender style. That way you not only win the battle, you win the war. The only way to defeat a group is to break that group mentality. Make them remember that they are individuals and individuals can be hurt.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

I agree with Jagos. Find the biggest, meanest one and hurt them. I mean really hurt them.I thought the whole philosophy was not to use heavy injury?

[7days]

If they are armed, and outnumber you, I don't know if non-heavy injury is an actual possibility unless you have a lot (and I mean a lot) of training. I would assume in a situation like that you would be fighting for your survival. Non-injurious methods are not really an option. I would argue that if your opponents are not interested in playing fair there is no reason to limit yourself in such a way. Now if you are into martial arts training to the point that it becomes more about philosophy than self defense, I would assume you could take them down non-violently. But for most people, even with a little training, facing several armed assailants is not a philisophical exercise but a fight for your life scenario.

Edit: Besides, an overwhelming show of force on one person may help you to avoid having to fight( and possibly injure) all of them.

2nd Edit: I just reread the start of the thread and see that I missed the point. However, I stand by my statement. If several armed opponents jump you, and you fight back and they sue, I'd hope a good lawyer would be able to get you off faster than you could say "self-defense".

[ThatPoorMessenger]

I'd hope a good lawyer would be able to get you off faster than you could say "self-defense". Even a bad lawyer could but, one shouldn't injure just because it seems a helpful option. Avoiding it when possible is best. Just because they fight dirty doesn't grant a right for the victim to do so. Although...competent defence often is fighting a little dirty.

[7days]

I disagree. Once someone has decided to use a certain level of force, they are accepting that that level of force may be visited upon them.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

7days, I would disagree, unless I needed to make use of that kind of force (which I would, unless I could run), I wouldn't make use of it. No one, no matter how good or bad, deserves to suffer. Suffering as a neccessity, carry on, however.
Still, this is turning into a philosophy, not a brilliant school of combat as Lev plans. :D

[bluestarultor]

I disagree. Once someone has decided to use a certain level of force, they are accepting that that level of force may be visited upon them.

This. If a guy is going to beat the snot out of you, you need to end it as quickly as possible, and nut shots are good for dropping guys if you know you can land one.

Running away is fine so long as the guy isn't faster than you. The limping associated with a sore pride will also help with that.

There is a certain point where you delve into excessive force, but if you're trying to get away, you're probably not going to hit it.



Edit: That's not to say I agree with sticking around and causing grave injury. You need to cause enough to protect yourself. Going beyond that is not conducive to winning a court case or even really being innocent.

Also, I disagree with "taking out the leader." First off, if you're facing bad odds, chances are you're screwed and nothing you do is going to change that unless you REALLY fuck someone up. Then they might cut their losses. But trying to find the "leader" often breaks down because there isn't really one or there's a more complex hierarchy than that. And if there is, or even if there isn't, if a bunch of guys are after you, they're probably determined enough to not scatter when just one goes down. There's safety in numbers and if you have five guys, taking out one is not going to help much or deter anyone.

[7days]

This. If a guy is going to beat the snot out of you, you need to end it as quickly as possible, and nut shots are good for dropping guys if you know you can land one.

I think no matter where we stand on the issue, a good nut shot to the enemy is something we can all get behind.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

I think no matter where we stand on the issue, a good nut shot to the enemy is something we can all get behind.I'd rather not, when you draw that elbow back, it would hit mine. In all seriousness, yes, if the situation called for it's need. I'm not going to hit someone in the nuts if I can easily escape just for the sake of hitting the nuts. Now, were I forced to, goodbye nuts! :rolleyes:

[Jagos]

I thought the whole philosophy was not to use heavy injury?

I was speaking on the being outnumbered part, not the sparring.

Sparring is great to practice application of a technique. But all that goes out the window in a brawl or something like that. Best thing to do is get out of the situation.

If you can't or you're in a corner, then you use what's there and fight it out. Depending on the type of fight you're in, you can do things that put the battle into your favor. Keep your back to a wall so you don't have to worry about surprises, make sure they can't bumrush, and stay on your feet if at all possible.

Other than that, there's not much you can do against multiple opponents. Once one guy moves in, they all do. You just want to protect against that.

[ThatPoorMessenger]

Sparring is great to practice application of a technique. But all that goes out the window in a brawl or something like that. Best thing to do is get out of the situation.Depends on the opponents but this is usually true.

[Hanuman]

Ok I've expanded the idea for a few things.

CTF Mode - 2 flags (football sized round objects) are placed in the center of a half circle about 50m apart (varying), crossing the rope of the halfcircle is illegal, it's full contact and if someone taps out they are treated as disabled for 10 seconds, minimum is 2v2 and the game ends when you have both flags at your halfcircle. Throwing is illegal.

Escape Mode - A gap is made in the sparring ring, it's 2-4 vs 1. The object is to exit the circle, crossing the rope disables you until the round ends. The round ends when either the escaper is disabled via rope, taps out or escapes.

King of the Hill - 1 Person stays inside the circle, another one enters and the first to be floored leaves, then another one enters and this continues for a duration.

Reverse King of the Hill (Thunderdome) - 1 Person stays inside the circle, the winner leaves.

[Jagos]

No hip tosses in CTF?

[Hanuman]

No hip tosses in CTF?
If you injure someone you lose all points you've ever accumulated in the games, the person with the most points can submit votes and the rest of the group can vote on a result-- such as booting someone who has little respect for the safety of others from the group.

So to answer your question, if you can do it 100 times in a row without injuring them then I don't see why not.