"Why don't you Fxxkin attack all at once?"

'Why can't they all attack at once?'

Because they have rules. Since their fight has this "one-touch" rule, all fighters will be more hesitant to attack because if they get touched by the opponent's weapon, they're considered 'out.' But if you watch the news or any street rumble videos, you will know this isn't the case. Of course, IRL no one's gonna mess with you if you carry an actual weapon you show in the open, but you must also know that people won't go down as easy as they show in their videos.

wow !

If they are all wearing armor you can't reliably quickly kill them 1 by 1 and they will swarm you

Attacking at the same time would be a fine option if friendly fire was a active XD

Understand and utilize your surroundings when fighting multiple threats.

"With one sword, it is impossible to attack and defend at the same time" there are European styles that do exactly that, soooo... yeah, that actually is a thing, you just need the right weapon, in this case, more often than not, a very long two handed sword as seen with Montantes for example.

The answer is because they're scared, period.
The defender can only injure one at a time, they're all afraid of being that one.
Even over a guaranteed quick win.

You can defend and attack with a single blade through riposte, which is quick succession of defense and turning the defensive movement into an attack - unbalancing the enemy after they come in to strike then taking advantage of that to deliver an offensive strike, but probably not effective against multiple opponents. I'm going to guess you were referring strictly to fighting vs multiple opponents.
The spear is not a defenseless weapon - the defense of the spear is that you are farther away. Any defense can be broken, it just happens that the spear's defense is broken if the enemy gets past the tip of the spear without suffering injury. Polearms and specifically Raven's beak solve some of the issue since you can use certain designs of polearm to also strike when retrieving the weapon or by swinging it sideways. I'm not sure if this can be properly done in sparring without causing injury however.
Still, in a realistic situation, if you have three people attacking you with the intent to kill you, it is highly unlikely that you will survive, even if you are very skilled, without using your environment to your benefit - making the three people fight you one at a time by positioning taking the terrain into account, using nearby environment to incapacitate your enemies by pushing them off or tripping them over a rock, etc. I don't think it's quite worthwhile to handicap yourself by not forcing everyone to fight you one on one. It's a real and good tactic. Anyone who complains can go watch Steven Seagal pretend to be a martial master. Keep up the good work.

Try it with 4 people? 4 walls? Surround and wall him in at once? There will be then at least 1 person behind his back, let the guy behind his back be the "signaler" for the rest to attack.

People don't know how realistic it is when in situations like this, wether in movies or real life, it's actually a really good strategy to attack one at a time when you're 2v1ing a skilled opponent. Two attacking at once is risky as not only can the enemy use your own ally against you, it also erase the possibility of a follow up attack if the first one fails. The whole point of attacking one of a time is to tire your enemy, confuse them, and looking for the enemy's weakness then follow up accordingly, which all in all is a great strategy.

Every attack on two swords is the same downward swing. That seems kinda silly.

People forgot friendly fire is on irl

Nah. Every attack from the opponents is the same hella telagraphed 12-6 strike wildly lunging into the counter. No one even attempts to take advantage while he's blocking/countering. All the group attackers are nearly statues by comparison. The general concept of continuous movement and all this works against comparitively weaker opponents but any group with anywhere near the same level of ability is beating a singular combatant every time.

That's why attacking simultaneously with ranged weapons is much easier. Bullets won't get into each other's way.

People commenting about attacking all at once have no experience or knowledge of fighting in general

I think what people mean by “attack all at once” is a coordinated attack.

You can slowly corner your opponent with a few call outs. People abusing line of sights & making use of blind spot.

The dual blades would not effectively work for defense and an attack from it would not have nearly enough power to take them out that easily if they decided to capitalize on when you had attacked.

It just seems like people who aren’t used to coordinating.

You dont die immediate after a slash or a stab, use that to hold the guy so that your allies can finish him off. 😊

Some option i think is

1. You don't want to be the one die

2. You don't to hit your ally. Which makes fighting cumbersome

3. Space might be a limitation

Etc

They all did the same telegraphed attack too. Explain that.

I mean u can clearly see in multipple occasions that when the guy in the middle is attacking and being countered, the guy who is defending is completely exposed on his right and the guy who stands there withing stabbing distance, does nothing and just waits for the counter on his friend to end, where he coud easly "men" or "tsuki" especially when the defender is over extending with his right side swing, he is completely exposed.

In weapons fighting under right conditions you can basically push numbers advantage until exhaustion becomes a factor.

Biggest stunts we have pulled off with My "shieldbrother" in recreational fights include 2v8 lock v charge formation victory both "surviving" and we once ran trough 2 small opposing teams taking out all of them one by one while he protected me and I slashed around with dualwield (minimum of 10 members for each team with 500+ participants each battle divided to 4 armies that event)
Lastly with two Persian Immortal geared guys from different team protected me into a charge trough that resulted in total collapse of opposing formation, low "kill" count for us but other participants trashed the broken formation and we got trough safely.

Yeah, you really don't need 2 swords if they come at you like this, bliindly rushing into your range with their weapon way over their head. You literally hold out your sword and let them impale themselves with the disregard for defence they're showing.

I always wondered fighting with bladed weapon is swinging a spear left and right like a madman is the strongest move

what utter NONSENSE!

Attacking at the same time would still work if you surround the other side, and give no room to move.

Lmao this almost looks as goofy as the fake medieval tournaments hahahahah

Surely you cant defend with 1 hand a guy coming at you with 2 hand strike? The weight would go through

Short answer: beacause they are not used to it.
The defender constantly repositions himself during the fight, but the attackers fail to move quickly to his unprotected back. There is not mythical advantage for the defender, he is just more skilled than his attackers.
We did similar exercises in our longsword class, with and without weapons. Without weapons, we played a "Raptor" game, reminiscent of the scene in Jurassic park, where the raports flank the hunter. The participants quickly got the notion of lateral movement and flanking.
With weapons, the task for the defender is to line up the attackers, so that he will fight only one opponent at the same time.
The task for the defenders vary: One needs to engage the defender, but not with the aim to inflict damage, but to bind him. The job of the others is to flank the defender and get to his unprotected sides and back.

Also, what slightly irritates me in lots of Kendo videos is the suicidal movement of the attackers. They attack from above with the sole intention of hitting and practically jump into weapon range of their opponent. Surprise, surprise, they get hit by a counterstrike. This is a lack of proper distance management and a result of the conditiononing they received in the sports arena in my opinion.
The goal is not to play tag and hit the other person faster. The goal is to stay alive and optionally hit the other person. Fighting with weapons is not Super Mario, where you pick up a mushroom to get more lives.

I feel like this just shows why for the vast majority of non-gunpowder warfare, the spear/pole-arm reigns supreme. You can very easily coordinate a many vs 1 situation with the spear’s reach and stabbing which doesn’t get in the way of your fellow soldiers.

Yeah, they should totally attack together as a groupe!
Meanwhile, me, in games like Chivalry: "Why do I keep hitting my allies? Whyyy?"

I was once in Fencing, our coach had us do 2v1's I was one of the 2. It was suprisingly difficult to attack at the same time, whenever we tried to our timing was off and there was enough of an opening for him to parry both of us, mostly because we never communicated with each other, but hey why whould we with our opponent literal inches away from us? Sometimes our timings were so off he had time to get a hit or 2 in. I actually did worse in the 2v1 than I did in a 1v1.

The fundamental problem is that it's just kendo people being kendo people in the same way that a lot of martial arts are useless for MMA. Theoretically, it's meant to be "the way of the sword". In the past, that would have meant not only a different range of training experiences, but also a completely different mindset. The reality of most modern martial arts is that they are sports or glorified dances operating within an artificial set of constraints and people get really good at operating within those -- and only those -- constraints. In a way, they can't be blamed for thinking and acting that way, though probably at higher levels, they would transcend such thinking and embrace the "-do" part of the martial art. Of course, they did act like lemmings multiple times, so that's on them.

Bruh just get a pewpew and pew

Comment section is full of self appointed "Weapon/Combat experts." The fact is that the group should be stronger on both offense AND defense if they work together. 1 guy with 2 swords or a spear would not be able to combat a group of people sticking together. But them running in 1 at a time, the most stupid "Group tactic" ever, is the reason why people comment "WTF is this fake BS"

spear hitbox is good but the recovery frames make it a little unsafe.

Cool now that you trained throw all that training out window because your opponents won't listen to Jack

What if everyone went stabby stab at the same time surrounding the guy ?

reminds me of vagabond, and the fight against the 70 yoshioka.

the skill musashi pulled off in those chapters was making a 70 on 1 fight into a 1 on 1 fight 70 times.

Spear is shit weapon, opponent grabs it and you lose instantly.

this is why the spear is the ultimate weapon.

if you have allies swinging around swords, or axes, or any weapon that needs swung, that ally creates an area around him that you can't enter without risking being hit by him, and equally such you have an area around you that you can't allow your ally to enter lest he be hit.

but not a spear, you don't swing spears you poke em. you can pack a bunch of people in a line with spears, or in a circle, no way you are fighting them one on one, give each one a shield, put some folks inside the circle to shield the top and wham, you got yourself a phalanx. invulnerable to arrows, direct attack with pretty much any melee weapon, weak to cavalry and explosives.

This is another situation where 1 opponent sets a framework and is just performing a play within that. The 3 fighters took themselves out of it the little I watched this. People aren’t going to huddle up and approach you in a row, they’re going to fan out and surround you eliminating so much of the running. There’s been about 3 times in my life when I’ve been surrounded by opponents and the first thing they did was encircle me then close together. You will get a few shots off maybe but it will quickly come to an end. If it’s a martial art using the touch and you’re out rules then maybe that’s a different story but again that’s a format designed to work within this very specific setting. Not that anyone is running around today with years of sword fighting experience and a team around them analyzing it from every angle but still… you have seen it with the overwhelming majority of martial arts in the last several years. It’s cool and there’s a lot of experts till the day when they step to the shoot wrestling/kick boxer hybrids that live in a ring, only to realize somethings very broken. I have recently began studying this just to see what is out there because like most men I think when I was a child nothing on earth seemed cooler than warriors, swordsmen at the top of the list. That said, just watching the speed of movement, angles, some of the things I hear people say and the standardized dogma it really seems like this is more of the same. Hopefully not though, it’d be great if there were some in tact weapons traditions that haven’t lost their martial prowess I can learn from. Regardless, I love fighting and I’m glad others do too! We need it now more than ever.

Just attack through your ally.
Better tontrade 1 for 1 then lose 3 to 1.

The answer is pretty simple, if you (the group) haven't trained to fight like a group or do not remember to (when adrenalines high you often get tunnelvisioned) you most liekely are going to be picked apart by a more experienced fighter. Picture the scene, a knight vs a group of three to four peasant militia. The knight has spent pretty much his entire life training to fight in battle, the militia hasn't. The militia if they worked well togheter and know the ins and outs of supporting eachother without overextending the formation (getting split apart by little more than a yard) the knight will do his all to get you, the group, into a single line or in laymans terms orbit around the formation in an attempt to get out of range of the milita's weapons as well as putting the milita men themselves in eachothers way.
This way the knight effectively only fights one to at most two opponents each time he goes in for an attack. These moments last split seconds but in a fight seconds might as well be minutes. But if our group knows how to engage and rotate and do... well everything to limit the knights attempts the group will win.

Also its been tested by HEMA and SCA heavy fighters that the ideal number of attackers attacking the same target is 3. Any more than three attackers and you just get in each other's way, that it proves more a detriment to attack four at the same time. And to accomplish this you need to surround the opponent and the opponent, if they know what they are doing, will never allow this to happen or they pretty much lose.

This video does a poor showing, and goes more for crowd pleasing style than utilizing and tactics... like if your friend is getting gutted, CHARGE! the opponents weapons are busy disembowelling someone and thus they will be not there to block your spear/sword/axe/etc.

Personally I love the fighting theory of lines and rings. The line represent where you are facing, you want your opponent on your line while you do not want to be standing on your opponents line. The circle represents your range, which I personally divide into three ranges. Far range represent the furthest reach of your weapon, these attacks often are just thrusts and cuts done by the tip, these are easy to dodge/miss with. Then you got the middle ring that represent ideal distance, here you deliver the strongest cuts, thrusts and slashes, here you land with strength and power and here is where you want your opponent to be since they can't simply dodge/lean away. And lastly the short range, here is where you generally do not want your opponent, for here you do not have the space to use your weapon effectively (except for sword and board). In SCA we call this distance 'hugging' since here you can only deliver back handed wraps and stabs with short weapons, and to the observer it looks like you are wrapping the opponent in a hug, very useful when facing great weapons (pole weapons and two handed swords etc.)

By understanding the concept of lines and rings, you can start doing a lot of fancy stuff, how to lure open guards, how to estimate when you are safe and when you are not. When you are making it difficult for your opponent to hit you etc. And a friend standing on your line effectively removes you from being a danger. Noise, narrow field of view (depends on helmet) and spatial awareness (where are your friends, where are they going and what are they doing next, rinse repeat for however many opponents you face) and you will quickly notice how easy it is to get in the way of each other, add in adrenaline and just plain exhaustion, heat, breath and you make it all the more difficult.

A lone fighter going up against a group will try their best to add to said difficulty as best they can.

I've done a lot of group sparring in hema and I can confirm everything they said in the video to be true.

until you put on armor and fight for real this all becomes useless, nobody is going to chase you like this its dumb

Fighting as individuals in a loosely and recently formed group, instead of as a formation trained as such.

It also helps that they only do the same attack from on high and have the reflexes of a sloth. FFS, this is some stinky Bullshido here. How many 'Hero' shots in movies did you watch before Steven Seagulling this?