damage, tiredness, and the erosion of the will to fight—are all interrelated. A fighter who gives up easily may be worthy of contempt perhaps, but one who is worn down in a tough contest deserves respect whether his inability to fight on stems from exhaustion, damage, or mental defeat.
Inability to Continue
Inability can occur for two reasons; either the opponent is physically unable to continue fighting, or he is prevented from doing so by some means. The latter could be because you have escaped. If you can run away, get to the other side of a door and lock it, or put some other barrier in the way then the fight cannot continue. This is not really applicable to a sporting bout, unless you want to jump out of the ring and leg it into the changing rooms. It is, however, a valid gambit in a self-defense situation.
It is even possible to consider escape as a “win.” If you were sufficiently overmatched that you would suffer serious injury then an escape, however undignified, is a better outcome. However, the “just run away” school of self-defense thinking is rather limited. There is no point in fleeing from someone who is likely to pursue and catch you; you’ll just have to fight when you’re tired. Escape is a tool for ending a fight like any other but it must be used intelligently.
If it is not possible to escape and the opponent cannot be induced to give up (i.e. self-stop), then the only option is to render him physically incapable of fighting. There are two ways to do this; either by inflicting sufficient harm on his body that he cannot use it to fight with, or by switching off the control mechanism by inducing unconsciousness. That can be achieved by blows to the head, by causing the head to strike something, or by the use of a choke or strangle. The latter is safe enough if you know what you are doing, but can cause death if kept on too long.
The simplest way of inducing an inability to continue, in principle at least, is a knockout blow to the head. However, in practice, this can be hard to deliver; mainly because the opponent will protect his head. Temporary inability can be induced by winding the opponent with a body blow, which might also lead to a self-stop. Alternatively, it is possible to damage body parts so that they cannot be used.
Most of the techniques normally termed joint locks and submissions were originally designed to destroy or disable a joint. In a sporting context they are usually applied firmly and steadily, causing pain and the threat of injury if the opponent does not submit. Continued pressure will cause damage to the joint, or alternatively the lock can be slammed on hard and fast with no attempt at control. This gives the opponent no chance to tap out and would only be done in self-defense, where the intent is to disable an assailant rather than to win a sporting contest.
Intervention
Intervention in a sporting context can take the form one fighter’s corner “throwing in the towel,” sometimes literally. This is one responsibility of the corner man—to surrender on behalf of a fighter who is too stubborn to give up but who is suffering unacceptable harm. Alternatively, the referee may stop a fight for various reasons. In a sporting bout, intervention is normally a matter of fighter safety and there are rules in place to govern this. As with tapping out or submitting in any similar manner, submitting in a sport bout is final; the fight is over and there is a clear winner.
In a self-defense context, intervention can take many forms, not all of them useful. A fight between two individuals can be greatly complicated by bystanders or friends trying to separate the fighters or assist them. It is not uncommon for someone to get hurt because a well-meaning bystander or girlfriend was swinging on their arm trying to drag them away.
Intervention can also take the form of security or police personnel arriving to deal with the incident, or passers-by deciding to join in. It is not uncommon for totally uninvolved people to run up and kick someone who is fighting or even lying helpless on the ground. This possibility for random intervention makes street fights, especially those that go to the ground, something of a gamble.
In a sporting context, intervention normally takes the form of a coach or referee halting proceedings. When the guy in charge says it’s over, it’s over. Things are less clear-cut on the street.
However, it is possible to use the intervention of others as a tool to end a situation. One of the few times when it is worth applying a restraint in a self-defense situation is when assistance is readily available. If an assailant can be restrained and handed over to police or security personnel, or if your friends are available to quickly dissuade him from continuing the altercation, then restraint may be a reasonable option. Otherwise, it is probably not a good idea unless the opponent is not much of a threat. The last thing you need is to be entangled with one opponent, trying to apply a restraint, only to be hit by one of his friends.
Winning
It is easy to think of “winning” a fight in terms of a clear-cut victory, but this is usually the case only in sporting bouts. In a self-defense context, “winning” is a more nebulous thing. It is more about you than the opponent, inasmuch as your goal is more likely to be to prevent yourself (or someone you want to protect) from coming to harm. It is not all that important how you achieve this, and indeed, a situation that involved you knocking the other guy clean out but taking a few shots into the bargain might be considered less of a victory than one where you were able to talk him down and never exchanged blows.
Winning, as already noted, is a matter of ending the situation on the most favorable terms you can obtain. There are many routes to that goal. In a sporting bout you can win by knockout or submission, or by wearing the opponent down until he cannot go on any longer. You may even be able to induce him to do something that will get him disqualified, though this is a fairly hollow sort of victory. In any case, a winner will be announced so the situation is fairly clear-cut. In a self-defense situation, things are more nebulous. Winning can be achieved by many of the same methods, but there are victories to be won in other ways too. An opponent who is dragged off by nightclub security, or who allows his friends to persuade him that you are not worth it, will not trouble you any more so this can be considered a victory.
The “fence” is used by security professionals worldwide. It is essentially a modified fighting stance designed to be non-threatening but to keep potential aggressors at bay while remaining ready to react if necessary.
Often the psychological barrier of the fence posture is enough to deter an aggressor. If not, he can be pushed vigorously away with a firm command to keep his distance.
Often, a potential aggressor can be deterred in this manner. If he comes back again after being pushed away, he is clearly determined to fight and must be dealt with accordingly.
In short, it is necessary to understand what you are trying to achieve in order to have the best chance of victory. In a sports bout your aim will usually be to be declared the winner by the judges. In a self-defense context your goal is more likely to be to avoid coming to serious harm. If that is achieved by hurting the assailant, so be it, but knocking him out or whatever you must do to him is not the goal, it is merely an outcome. The goal is to get home safely, and so long as you achieve this then you have won.
What Makes an Effective Fighter?
Several factors, usually in combination, can make a fighter effective. There is no single formula for success; two equally good fighters may have entirely different advantages. However, the single overriding factor is mental rather than physical.
