Giving Ground

"Some Warriors look fierce, but are mild. Some seem timid, but are vicious. Look beyond appearances; position yourself for the advantage. -

Deng Ming-Dao

"The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect... ...is the jewel of the kingdom."
-Sun Tzu

There is no combat without movement, and he who stands still gets hit.

This is a simple fact when it comes to sparring or fighting. But a lot of people have the strange notion that to take a step back is the same thing as retreating- it isn't.

When you step back or to the side, leaving the position you originally were in, this does not mean you necessarily are giving up control of the space you left. If you win the fight because you took a step back, how can it be said you are retreating in the sense of 'losing'?

A particularly rememberable exchange I took part in was against someone who was vastly superior with their hand-techniques, while I held the edge when it came to kicking. I utilized kotai okuri-ashi; taking a step back essentially, and kicking as I did so. As he pursued me across the grounds, throwing strikes whenever I allowed him to come in range, I would kick and kick and kick. Eventually he gave up; he had been hit well over twenty times and hadn't been able to land a single punch.

If I had not given up ground by constantly backing up, and when I ran out of room to do so or under sufficient pressure, I would turn and go back the other way, until he could no longer fight. By having to chase me, he was taking one step forward each time toward losing. And that is ultimately all that matters when it comes to combat of any form- succeeding. And if you don't, to learn from it.

I believe there are cases where leaving a space and surrendering control can be advantageous. In a sense by doing so you are keeping control of the situation by allowing your opponent to take that space. It is not unlike chess or other strategies; losing a pawn or taking a step backward to take two or more steps forward. I call this strategic retreating. Others know it is tactical withdrawal.

Similarly, if the principle of 'losing' ground is that of leaving that which you were in control of, than the superior tactic of stepping diagonally past your opponent as your strike could be said to be a kind of retreat also. I disagree with this.

The only time you are actually 'retreating' is when you not only sacrifice control of the space, but also control of the combat taking place. And when you lose control of the fight chances radically increase of losing the combat situation.

Sometimes your opponent may hold a position where they cannot be damaged from; the most obvious example which comes to mind is when they hold the high ground. Forcing them to leave that superior position to continue to engage you creates vulnerabilities

In Baguazhang we circle walk around the opponent often when it does come to contact; how could this be called retreating if you never even take a space to control.

This idea of 'backing-up' is wrong is a silly notion which can lead to a lot of people taking blows they could have avoided, if they hadn't kept rooted like a tree.

It is not strength to stand there and get hit because of a notion you have to keep the ground to win the battle. Many armies in history have been utterly destroyed because they gave chase to an enemy who whittled them down. This is how the Hsiung-Nu often destroyed the armies of ancient China across numerous dynasty's; because all too often the army fought for the ground, instead of fighting to defeat the enemy.

As Sun-Tzu wrote in the last of his 36 stratagems;

"If it becomes obvious that your current course of action will lead to defeat, then retreat and regroup. When your side is losing, there are only three choices remaining: surrender, compromise, or escape. Surrender is complete defeat, compromise is half defeat, but escape is not defeat. As long as you are not defeated, you still have a chance. This is the most famous of the stratagems, immortalized in the form of a Chinese idiom: "Of the Thirty-Six Stratagems, fleeing is best" (三十六计，走为上计).

I put emphasis on the bolded section; if you retreat, backing up and still are fighting, you are not losing, especially if this is premeditated or deliberate. A strategy of sacrifice to win, given it does not consume you utterly, is always advantageous toward standing in the way and potentially being destroyed.


And besides, if you give your opponent the entire arena, and win regardless; isn't that space then yours anyway as the last still standing?