The best defense is a good offense is a good defense

[Freedan]

Not really intended much as a serious discussion, but I wasn't sure where else to put it. And meh, maybe it could get some actual thought.

I've heard it said that the best defense is a good offense. And also, that the best offense is a good defense.

So which one do you go with? Suppose you're in a fight; do you focus on defense (thus improving your offense), or on offense (favouring defense)?

Or do you take a third option, where the best offense is the other guy having a shitty defense? That could work.

No, I don't know what I was thinking when I made the thread. I'm operating on a lack of sleep.

And also, Batman on a cake.

[arkisdabomb]

Why choose? It's all about balance. You gotta know the right time to attack and defend, and you'll do fine.

[psychokind]

tactics should be your offense and defense.

in a direct fight however, it's all about the bigger "aggression potential".

[arkisdabomb]

psychokind wrote:

tactics should be your offense and defense. in a direct fight however, it's all about the bigger "aggression potential".

Not always true. Being aggressive doesn't mean you'll win. I've been in alot of fights in my time, and I was never the aggressive one. I also wasn't the one on the ground with a broken nose and missing teeth either. You just gotta be smart about it.

[SoulBlazerFan]

There's this video online of this skinny-ass white guy, all up in this fat guys face. He's pushing him around, yelling and screaming. Finally, white-trash decides to throw a punch. Fat guys raises both hands in a martial artist pose. Next you know,white trash is on the ground.

Doesn't honestly matter between either. It's what you know, and how hard you work at it, that wins a fight. All the strength in the world can't stop one well placed blow to the nose.

[Nurdof]

Speaking of this, I was threatened one time by a friend, and he accused me of hacking his account on this popular game we play. I told him I didn't do anything to hack his account; of course he didn't believe me.

He's a boxer, and I'm a yellow belt in Tae Kwon Do. Now, who would you think is more likely to win in a fight? Probably him. But him and I are friends again, so everything is fine now.

[Dark_Gaia]

being on the attack gives you the advantage in most situations. yes it can go wrong but a GOOD attack is definetly a great defense as well. specifically in RTS games, if you get a strong attack going they struggle to survive and chances arise for you such as map control, building a better economy and knowledge of what the enemy has. also in chess i find attacking is a + for similar reasons. just dont fail ><

[chicken]

i'd concentrate on the defense. i'm practicing aikido and it's way different to the other stuff i did before (tae kwon do and jiu jitsu).

of course, beeing in a real fight its always about who has the better reflexes. it doesnt matter if you can deal out devastating punches if you hit the ground first because the other guy was faster.
also, its mostly not a one-on-one thing. there're also his friends and suddenly, you are facing like 3 to 7 guys. what the hell do you do? standing you ground? run? trying to talk things out?

my old jiu sensei always told us: "dont be stupid enough to set the first blow. you already lost that way." i guess he means that if you keep your temper and try to avoid physical contact as much as possible (you know what i mean), you'll hardly be in the position of a beat-up. well, nowadays there are situations like "hey i dont like your face, lets fix it". there's no talking right there.

next thing: a few weeks ago i was told the legal situation of who-sues-who when one of the guys knows any martial art. my current sensei told me a story about one of his disciples. this guy was at a bar and 3 skinheads were fooling around (badly) with the waitress. he went up to them and told them to stop. what happens? one pulls a switchblade and the other a chain.
so this guy sees himself facing 3 skinheads, 2 of them armed.

a few weeks later, he's at the courtyard, almost getting imprisoned because he sent all of them flying over the bar. he escaped the sentence very closly because he had like 4 other guys testifying that he told the skinheads that he knows how to defend himself and that attacking him would be a very bad idea (and he told them more than once).

WTF? THREE FUCKING SKINHEADS! ARMED! AND I AM ALONE! AND I CANNOT DO SHIT TO THEM BECAUSE I KNOW A MARTIAL ART AND THEY DONT?

... ahem. i got a bit sidetracked... anyway, to sum things up: go for the defense

[Dark_Gaia]

i guess it varies as both methods do work in different situations. i suppose there is no right or wrong answer on such an open generalised theory.

[psychokind]

chicken wrote:

my old jiu sensei always told us: "dont be stupid enough to set the first blow. you already lost that way."

my friends old father, a lawyer, always told us: "don't be stupid enough to set the first blow. you're already in prison that way."

I still think aggression potential and expirience is the most important. I had a friend once, who was very small, and often had fights when he was drunk. he seemed weak, so many provoked him, always ending in him instantly beating them ruthlessly with all force he could bring up. he almost always won, and was considered very dangerous. I once asked him how he does that, and he answered: "I just think about killing my opponent. the whole time, I just think, "Die!"".

[Dark_Gaia]

sounds like a nice guy! haha..