All sports fights have rules. They have to. They're designed to keep people as evenly fought as possible and to not do any permanent damage to one another. None of these apply in a real fight. You're not fighting in a square/octagon wearing shorts and gloves with one guy of a similar weight category and completely unarmed with a referee to police things and tell you what you can and can't do.
You seem to think that because there are no rules on the streets that suddenly a trained fighter isn't as good a fighter as he would be on the street and that's complete bull☺☺☺☺.
I've been in and seen fights (as a trained fighter and I have friends that are trained fighters) beat the snot out of jackasses who think cause they own the streets they can knock out anyone.
Trained fighters learn to defend people who are attack them and know how to fight. Street fighters are not trained and don't know ☺☺☺☺ about fighting (despite what their egos may tell them).
Remember Roger Huerta? He beat the crap out of a football player that was much bigger than he was.
Hell, come to the warrior's cove (or any gracie endorsed gym) we have the gracie challenge and we'll fight people right off the street to prove our ☺☺☺☺ works. No gloves, no nut cups, no mouth pieces, and the only time the fight stops is when someone gets knocked out or taps.
You're facing an entirely different situation, one where everything is wide open and that big list of things you're not allowed to do in MMA no longer exists. People throw eye gouges in real life. People elbow strike in real life. People attack the groin in real life. People will pick up whatever's available to use as weapons in real life. People headbutt in real life. People will bite in real life, and I don't care how great your triangle choke is, if someone is biting your femoral artery then you will let go.
You make it seems like trained fighters don't know how to protect themselves against eye gouges or other kinds of strikes.
Tell you what, go to a Muay Thai gym or a MMA gym and tell them you want to fight those guys with no rules and see how well you do.
As far as weapons go you think a trained fighter is going to just let some jack ass grab a weapon and strike him with it? You think the trained fighter won't grab a weapon too?
You must be joking.
Have you ever been in a triangle choke? You think you can just bite someone while you're in a triangle choke? Your assertion tells me you have no idea what you're talking about.
Except you didn't. You ridiculed the first two sentences of his post and then just dismissed everything else.
I did address them and then I dismissed them because the logic is bad. Like yours is here.
Which is valid.
In this conversation it isn't.
A knife is a stupid weapon? You regard the likelihood of someone carrying around a knife in real life to be on the level of someone carrying around a grenade launcher?
I don't, it's called SARCASM. I used grenade launcher to make it obvious that I was being sarcastic, which is also why I used pulse rifles and light sabers as examples.
If this is serious, if two people are actually going at each other for real, what makes you think that it's going to stay hand to hand? Do you think in a real life setting where there's any number of things to pick up and throw or use as a weapon, two people who are actually going to keep things on an even playing field? No, you're going to grab whatever you can to use as a weapon. You're going to be using your surroundings. If you're unarmed, you're going to be using teeth and elbows.;
Again, I don't think you've ever been in a real fight outside of HS (if even that). You think people are going to have time to look around for a weapon or that a trained fighter is just going to let him waltz over and grab one?
Usually people fight in the heat of the moment and most of the time street fighters in particular make mistakes like throwing their arms up, pushing and talking ☺☺☺☺.
Have you?
Yep - not so much now cause I'm older (and I don't live in the city), but when I was younger and going to bars and clubs I was in my share of fights.
No. Muay Thai has a few good kicks, even though they throw them wide. It is by no means the best striking art.
OP, do not train in Muay Thai this early on in your development. It will throw your attributes off.
Look man, no offense meant, but I'm convinced, utterly and thoroughly convinced by what you've said on this subject that you have absolutely no working knowledge of martial arts whatsoever.
Muay Thai is EASILY one of the best striking martial arts, if not 100% the best. Wide kicks? Right, because the front kick and pendulum kick are both wide. The spinning back hook kick goes wide enough to block it with a karate kick block (that will end up breaking your wrist if you actually catch it. Which you won't.) /sarcasm
The chances of someone picking up a weapon randomly lying around in the middle of a fight is negligible, and the chances of it being USEFUL are astronomical. In Krav Maga, it takes MONTHS of steady practicing and situational awareness training to decide what the most effective weapon in the room is, and usually it's something portable that you can throw into their face as you press for a lethal neck combination strike.
I get it if you watch MMA once in awhile and read the wikipedia entries and like to think you're well versed in martial arts, but the REAL martial artists here all see right through it.
I practiced TKD for years and I feel that time would've been better spent learning Muay Thai or Judo or even karate. It was a great workout, but I don't feel like it was much more than that.
I practiced TKD for years and I feel that time would've been better spent learning Muay Thai or Judo or even karate. It was a great workout, but I don't feel like it was much more than that.
Judo and Muay Thai yes, karate no. Karate is just as bad for fighting as TKD is, and TKD is much harder to do.
"Well you train sport fighting so its not effective if you want to fight for real"
Which is completely asinine, I'd put my money on a trained fighter vs. a "street" fighter any day of the week.
I didn't see this, so I apologize for not responding sooner. I think I address this in other posts, but let me restate. There is nothing wrong with combat sports - and as I stated they are excellent fighters. However, mentality-wise they are still training you in the context of a tournament. For a lay person, its more valuable to have experience in a martial art whose mentality is centered around someone is trying to kill you, and how to kill them back first (or really, just neutralize the threat) .
Sensei told him that any dojo that didn't do the San-chin Kata, or try to make some people seem better than others or make you do thousands of repetitions of punches before they teach you anything significant is a dodgy dojo. Martial arts are about improving everyone and yourself. Not for creating devision between people. In addition, dojos that teach you Parkour are not teaching you proper ninjutsu.
That's exactly right. I had to leave the school I originally trained in because the son of the owner was getting heavily into MMA and the arrogant attitudes of everyone involved were getting a little unbearable - and were not benefitting anyone's training (plus the whole emphasis of the senior-level classes became focused on MMA-style 'sparring'. I ended up finding a marine who rented out a basement twice a week, and I've never looked back. He has amazing guest instructors come through on a regular basis, and encourages to attend all the seminars that come through (like Kacem Zoughari). My old school wouldn't even tell us when their own instructors were in town (who they would train with), and forbid their employees from getting training from other bujinkan practicioners. So there are good and bad schools everywhere.
Although I don't think the Sanchin kata is necessarily a deal-breaker, I've never found it to be very practical in teaching people how to breathe.
I didn't see this, so I apologize for not responding sooner. I think I address this in other posts, but let me restate. There is nothing wrong with combat sports - and as I stated they are excellent fighters. However, mentality-wise they are still training you in the context of a tournament. For a lay person, its more valuable to have experience in a martial art whose mentality is centered around someone is trying to kill you, and how to kill them back first (or really, just neutralize the threat) .
I'm not familiar with every martial art school, but I have to disagree with you.
As a trained fighter (BJJ, kickboxing, TKD) I can tell you that there's nothing wrong with my mentality nor the mentality of any other trained fighter that I know.
When myself or friends that I know that are trained fighters, have gotten into fights in the past did what we're trained to do. We did not think:
"Well this is a tournament and we have to obey tournament rules"
Even in a tournament context, no trained fighter ever thinks that. They think something a long the lines of I'm going to knock this guy's head off.
In training we do not train in the context of a tournament (unless someone is training to go to one or helping someone who is). Go to a BJJ gym and challenge someone there. I guarantee you even if they do have the mentality you're suggesting (which is imho utter nonsense, no offense) they will still beat a street fighter easily.
Adding to what FoxBlade said, from my experience, places that teach with tournaments in mind tend to still address the possibilities of "dirty" fighting. As a more specific example, when participating in varsity judo my Sensei would mention specific concerns, such as being wary of people that may opt to repeatedly kick at an opponent's ankles to weaken them in place of trying to do a real leg sweep as well as how to handle those situations. There are many other things that aren't allowed that can still be done discreetly if the person wants to play dirty. As such it's a good idea to be aware of how to handle those situations, and I'm sure many instructors know that. "Street" or "Sport", the goal is still to win.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"What is mana but possibility, an idea not yet given form?" - Jhoira
Adding to what FoxBlade said, from my experience, places that teach with tournaments in mind tend to still address the possibilities of "dirty" fighting. As a more specific example, when participating in varsity judo my Sensei would mention specific concerns, such as being wary of people that may opt to repeatedly kick at an opponent's ankles to weaken them in place of trying to do a real leg sweep as well as how to handle those situations. There are many other things that aren't allowed that can still be done discreetly if the person wants to play dirty. As such it's a good idea to be aware of how to handle those situations, and I'm sure many instructors know that. "Street" or "Sport", the goal is still to win.
True that brother. However, some martial arts do not support tournaments and often ban them, purely cause they cannot be sure that people will come out of them alive if someone lacks control. In addition, many of the moves require the user to break bones, tear joints, kill people or throw them, amoung other horrid things. There would simply be too many banned moves and tournaments would be a waste of time, or if people were advanced enough, it would be boring as nothing would happen and if it did it'd happen very quickly, making it uneventful.
In Ninjutsu, even the most basic and fundamental moves can kill your opponent with the first strike. It would be far too difficult and boring to make tournaments for.
And I think you miss the point of weapons training. As I said above, it's not about the 'move' or in this case the weapon, but how someone moves their body when attacking. The movements involved in kenjutsu or bojutsu can be applied to any weapon (most likely a stick, a pipe, your belt, etc). The weapon is irrelevant, its about how you move your body. Not being trained in how to apply those movements to improvised weapons is a problem. Personally, I always imagine I'm fighting with a pen or my keys, since that is what I'll most likely have on me and at the ready. If someone jumps me and I have a pen... god help them, they're getting a Jay13x home tracheotomy. I told my fiance to always carry her keys like claws between her fingers when she is walking to her car alone. She never really took me seriously until one of her med school lectures was talking about how easily soft tissue could be damaged... by pens and keys.
This is emphatically true. In fact, my teacher even mentioned keys if all else fails.
Since you speak highly of kendo, and purkle as well, I'll look into it. Thank you. Although I've always found the footwork of Western fencing superior to kendo's.
Although if you want to learn how to knife fight, you won't find any better than the Filipino Martial Arts... the people who invented the balisong are awesome.
Oh, you think that's cool, google "indestructible combat umbrella".
Kali is also fun because of its destructions. You'll check a person's punch, for instance, and then strike the bicep or the nerve. Then there's the grappling arts, which incorporate, for instance, the concept of uninterrupted biting. You should try it sometime.
In any case, unless I had nowhere to run... there is no way I'm getting into a knife fight. If your opponent is in any way skilled, you are going to get cut, no exceptions. I'd rather use the secret ninja 'run the hell away' technique.
And this all the more so.
purklefluff is right on the money, particularly in this:
important: i've studied martial arts for 12 years. and there's some truth that needs to be stated.
- you can never know that you'll win a fight. there is so much uncertainty and potential for other people to get involved in a brawl.
- cockiness is a bad trait to have and can get you in trouble.
- regarding knives: never, EVER fight someone who has a knife. despite what people tell you or what you learn, there is too much room for error and knives are too deadly to reliably or consistently fight against. ALWAYS run or attempt to escape from a knife fight.
and lastly:
- learning one single martial art really well is INFINITELY BETTER than learning many different styles incompletely. trust me on this.
You seem to think that because there are no rules on the streets that suddenly a trained fighter isn't as good a fighter as he would be on the street and that's complete bull☺☺☺☺.
What situations do you train for?
How you train is everything. What you train for, what you train until it becomes reflexive, is everything.
Notice I never said "useless" in my post. I'm saying it's a change in situation that you wouldn't be readily prepared for. And judging by your reaction to the idea of someone using a knife, I feel I'm completely justified.
Street fighters are not trained
Whoa there. It seems we have a difference of definition regarding street fighting, and I want to clarify my position.
To me a street fight is any fight that takes place out of a controlled ring with a referee and rules. In other words, the fights that take place in real life, street or otherwise. It has nothing to do with the level of training of the fighter, and to automatically dismiss these fighters as not trained is not something you can say as a blanket statement. Most people are, indeed, not people who know how to fight. But there are many martial arts geared toward combat in a scenario without rules. These people are absolutely trained. Paul Vunak focused his study on street fighting. He is absolutely a "trained fighter" by every stretch of the imagination.
I'm not talking about people who can't fight vs. people who study how to. I'm talking about people who train for a sports competition vs. people who train for combat in a scenario where no restrictions or rules apply. There is a major difference. This is not to discount the martial arts. It is instead commenting on the difference of how the fighters are training.
You make it seems like trained fighters don't know how to protect themselves against eye gouges or other kinds of strikes.
Do you?
Do you train eye gouging, headbutting, biting, etc.? Do you know, for instance, where the most effective places are to bite someone? Once again, it is about what you train for.
Tell you what, go to a Muay Thai gym or a MMA gym and tell them you want to fight those guys with no rules and see how well you do.
The fact that you're being this glib about a fight without rules is illustrating to me a serious problem.
Have you ever been in a triangle choke? You think you can just bite someone while you're in a triangle choke? Your assertion tells me you have no idea what you're talking about.
Where is your leg in relation to someone while performing a triangle choke? Right.
Next time you practice BJJ with someone, note when you have the opportunity to bite your opponent's inner thigh. Or his cheeks. Or his nipples. These are key points on the body because a bite to them is difficult to deal with and a place you cannot be bitten back. And please note that I'm not saying that BJJ is bad or not useful, quite the contrary, but I'm asking you if you would know how to execute such an attack, or if you would find yourself completely caught off-guard by one.
I don't, it's called SARCASM.
No, making a foolish claim in an insulting tone and saying that it's sarcasm makes it no less foolish.
"The subject at hand doesn't include people using grenade launchers, nukes, light sabers, pistols, katanas, knives, lasers, or any other stupid weapon you might try to include in this conversation.
I am only addressing hand to hand combat here and nothing else."
Because I'm sure everyone you might encounter in real life is going to honor your code of fairness and remove anything they're carrying on them in order to fight you bare-handed.
Look man, no offense meant, but I'm convinced, utterly and thoroughly convinced by what you've said on this subject that you have absolutely no working knowledge of martial arts whatsoever.
Muay Thai is EASILY one of the best striking martial arts, if not 100% the best.
Jeet Kune Do, whose philosophy is based around taking what is useful and discarding what is not, incorporates from Muay Thai a few kicks, primarily the rear leg hook kick to the thigh. What is noteworthy is that these kicks are thrown differently than Muay Thai throws them because they are thrown in Muay Thai in wider arcs, making them inefficient. The attributes of Muay Thai fighters are considered generally poor, which is why the OP should not be training in Muay Thai. Certainly not now. It will throw his attribute development in the wrong direction.
I assume you are now going to claim that this is because no one in Jeet Kune Do is a "REAL martial artist". In anticipation of this post, please post your credentials and some fighting clips so that I may build you your own school and start an internet campaign announcing that this martial art is a waste of time. Shouldn't be too hard for a fighter of your caliber to overwhelm us with your "REAL martial artist" abilities. I'm sure your authority and combat experience outweigh that of Dan Inosanto, because who told that guy he knew anything about fighting, or Paul Vunak, because who did he train? The Navy SEALS? Oh yeah, like a bunch of sailors would know anything about real life combat, right?
The spinning back hook kick
And do you often find yourself often turning your back on your opponents?
The chances of someone picking up a weapon randomly lying around in the middle of a fight is negligible, and the chances of it being USEFUL are astronomical.
Jay13x said it better than I did.
and usually it's something portable that you can throw into their face as you press for a lethal neck combination strike.
So, you even go so far as to acknowledge that something thrown in someone's face would be useful in a fight. But no, there's no possibility you'll find anything like that around...
I'm not familiar with every martial art school, but I have to disagree with you.
As a trained fighter (BJJ, kickboxing, TKD) I can tell you that there's nothing wrong with my mentality nor the mentality of any other trained fighter that I know.
When myself or friends that I know that are trained fighters, have gotten into fights in the past did what we're trained to do. We did not think:
"Well this is a tournament and we have to obey tournament rules"
Even in a tournament context, no trained fighter ever thinks that. They think something a long the lines of I'm going to knock this guy's head off.
In training we do not train in the context of a tournament (unless someone is training to go to one or helping someone who is). Go to a BJJ gym and challenge someone there. I guarantee you even if they do have the mentality you're suggesting (which is imho utter nonsense, no offense) they will still beat a street fighter easily.
I have no doubt that many of those people could easily destroy me, as I stated previously. That wasn't my point. My point is that those are Martial Arts that are best applied while in peak physical condition, and have a very head-on mentality to combat. The idea of going to a gym and challenging someone is indicative of that head-on mindset.
I wouldn't challenge anyone directly, I'd let them think I was submissive and then sucker punch them. I'd act like I'd never had a day of training in my life, or like I was slightly drunk to put them a little off guard. I would run away. I would never knowingly put myself in a situation I would have to fight my way out of.
For the layperson, the kinds of Martial Arts I described are much more useful for self-defense. I'm not saying other Martial Artists aren't good fighters, I'm saying that if the average person found themselves in a situation where fighting was the only way out, the training from the type of Martial Art I'm talking about would serve them better. Read on as I talk about this more.
Since you speak highly of kendo, and purkle as well, I'll look into it. Thank you. Although I've always found the footwork of Western fencing superior to kendo's.
The thing to be aware of with Kendo versus Western fencing techniques is that Kendo is designed to end a fight in one hit.
I would be aware that Kendo on its own isn't going to be as effective as constantly changing style. Simply switching from one to the other quickly can be very disorienting.
Kali is also fun because of its destructions. You'll check a person's punch, for instance, and then strike the bicep or the nerve. Then there's the grappling arts, which incorporate, for instance, the concept of uninterrupted biting. You should try it sometime.
I already do that, although not specifically Kali. Numbing the arm so that its useless for a few seconds or more is always a good idea. Although I'm sure a great many people are better at it than I am.
So, you even go so far as to acknowledge that something thrown in someone's face would be useful in a fight. But no, there's no possibility you'll find anything like that around...
The mentality you were responding to is one of the key philosophy differences I was speaking about. Improvised weapons are everywhere and very effective. I'm not just talking about picking up a random stick (although on my way into the office I noticed several that might do). Right now I can tell you I have over half a dozen weapons on my person. I have a pen (stabbing, distraction), my belt (striking, binding, distraction), my tie (binding, distraction), my keys (cutting, stabbing, distraction), a small amount of change (distraction), my watch (striking, distraction), my wallet (distraction, very effective as that is most likely what they'd want anyway), as well as work and personal cell phones (striking, distraction). If you noticed, I listed distraction for everything item I have, because they can all be used multiple ways, and the flinch reflex can usually buy you a precious second or two to either get away or finish the fight. In an environment like a bar, you have many, many more weapons within easy reach. Mugs, bottles, bowls of nuts, little plastic signs, chairs, other people. Improvised weaponry is everywhere and can be VERY effective. Using the space you are given is also useful. In a bar the environment can be a huge advantage in a fight, or avoiding a head-on fight.
I wouldn't challenge anyone directly, I'd let them think I was submissive and then sucker punch them. I'd act like I'd never had a day of training in my life, or like I was slightly drunk to put them a little off guard. I would run away. I would never knowingly put myself in a situation I would have to fight my way out of.
And this is why a claim like this:
Quote from FoxBlade »
As a trained fighter (BJJ, kickboxing, TKD) I can tell you that there's nothing wrong with my mentality nor the mentality of any other trained fighter that I know.
Is false. Because if you're advocating running around challenging people to fights, then you've forgotten discipline and keeping your own ego in check.
The thing to be aware of with Kendo versus Western fencing techniques is that Kendo is designed to end a fight in one hit.
I would be aware that Kendo on its own isn't going to be as effective as constantly changing style. Simply switching from one to the other quickly can be very disorienting.
Alright.
Fair enough. My question is what if you're holding something that isn't as graceful, or sharp, or long as a katana? I defer to you on this, because I don't know anything about Kendo, but it seems like the further you deviate from something like a Japanese sword, the less useful it becomes.
It's also that I feel like when you say that kendo's mentality is ending a swordfight in one blow... I don't know, it just seems like a boxer who throws no jabs. This would probably make abundant sense on a battlefield with multiple swordsmen in armor, but if we're talking unarmored dueling, Western fencing is very mobile, and it's also about wearing your opponent down, and this sounds more apt to me. If a fencer finds an opening like say your arm is open, or your leg, he'll cut it. And the thing is, if you have a bladed weapon, a single cut can bring a person into shock, and if your body goes into shock, you're in bad shape. It's why knife fights are so lethal, a madman flailing wildly with a bladed weapon with no idea what he's doing can slash you. But I defer to you on this, you're more versed in swordfighting than I.
Also, there seem to be no end to schools of Japanese swordfighting. Would you have a resource to... I hesitate to say "which is best?", but at least to tell the differences between them?
The mentality you were responding to is one of the key philosophy differences I was speaking about. Improvised weapons are everywhere and very effective. I'm not just talking about picking up a random stick (although on my way into the office I noticed several that might do). Right now I can tell you I have over half a dozen weapons on my person. I have a pen (stabbing, distraction), my belt (striking, binding, distraction), my tie (binding, distraction), my keys (cutting, stabbing, distraction), a small amount of change (distraction), my watch (striking, distraction), my wallet (distraction, very effective as that is most likely what they'd want anyway), as well as work and personal cell phones (striking, distraction). If you noticed, I listed distraction for everything item I have, because they can all be used multiple ways, and the flinch reflex can usually buy you a precious second or two to either get away or finish the fight. In an environment like a bar, you have many, many more weapons within easy reach. Mugs, bottles, bowls of nuts, little plastic signs, chairs, other people. Improvised weaponry is everywhere and can be VERY effective. Using the space you are given is also useful. In a bar the environment can be a huge advantage in a fight, or avoiding a head-on fight.
Exactly! Rivaltuna's acting like just because this isn't Diablo II and you won't find the Bone Snap Unique Maul lying around that weapons won't be found anywhere. That's what improvised weapon means.
The bottom line is if you're fighting someone, you take any and every measure you can to tilt the odds in your favor. No one would ever fight hand-to-hand if there's anything around that they can use to throw or swing or strike with. It's like the myth about cowboys dueling at high noon, if that ever happened it was a rare occurrence indeed because no one in their right mind would fight someone fair when they could wait in an alley or somewhere and shoot them in the back. People don't fight fair, you shouldn't expect them to in a real-life context, and you shouldn't have qualms about not doing so yourself when your life is on the line.
Alright Highroller, you have now proven to me beyond any doubt that you are absolutely clueless when dealing with martial arts.
I have been practicing JKD for 6 years now, btw. Total Approach JKD.
But the fact that you say Muay Thai kicks are inefficient just says to me that you're trying to look smart talking to someone who's entire life revolves around martial arts.
Dan Inosanto is good, but Tommy Carruthers is in my opinion the living legacy to bruce lee.
Also, in the street, good luck finding a weapon. In a bar, or a house, it's much easier, but i was referring to a fight outdoors rather than inside.
PS. I'm curious as to exactly how many ways jackie chan can kill me with a toaster.
Fair enough. My question is what if you're holding something that isn't as graceful, or sharp, or long as a katana? I defer to you on this, because I don't know anything about Kendo, but it seems like the further you deviate from something like a Japanese sword, the less useful it becomes.
Yes and no. It would work with anything you have to hold with two hands. Like I said before, the movements are what is important, once you learn those you can translate it to any weapon. Although a baseball bat or a pipe or stick is most effective. However...
Far more useful than Kendo in the real world is training with a Hanbo (half Bo staff) or weighted chain or rope. Because the motions involved in the one handed strikes can be applied to just about any one-handed weapon.
It's also that I feel like when you say that kendo's mentality is ending a swordfight in one blow... I don't know, it just seems like a boxer who throws no jabs. This would probably make abundant sense on a battlefield with multiple swordsmen in armor, but if we're talking unarmored dueling, Western fencing is very mobile, and it's also about wearing your opponent down, and this sounds more apt to me. If a fencer finds an opening like say your arm is open, or your leg, he'll cut it. And the thing is, if you have a bladed weapon, a single cut can bring a person into shock, and if your body goes into shock, you're in bad shape. It's why knife fights are so lethal, a madman flailing wildly with a bladed weapon with no idea what he's doing can slash you. But I defer to you on this, you're more versed in swordfighting than I.
Also, there seem to be no end to schools of Japanese swordfighting. Would you have a resource to... I hesitate to say "which is best?", but at least to tell the differences between them?
There is really no 'best' school for Japanese Swordfighting. They are all fundamentally the same movements, with variations on how to recieve and attack. I have no doubt western fencing is very useful, it's hard to say which is more effective. Japanese Swordfighting is based around the Katana, while Fencing is based around the Rapier (I believe). Both are about speed, but one is designed around a much more powerful sword against an armored opponent. Realtistically, training on the weighted chain or the hanbo will be more useful the 'modern' fight, which is a bar fight or mugging scenario.
Exactly! Rivaltuna's acting like just because this isn't Diablo II and you won't find the Bone Snap Unique Maul lying around that weapons won't be found anywhere. That's what improvised weapon means.
The bottom line is if you're fighting someone, you take any and every measure you can to tilt the odds in your favor. No one would ever fight hand-to-hand if there's anything around that they can use to throw or swing or strike with. It's like the myth about cowboys dueling at high noon, if that ever happened it was a rare occurrence indeed because no one in their right mind would fight someone fair when they could wait in an alley or somewhere and shoot them in the back. People don't fight fair, you shouldn't expect them to in a real-life context, and you shouldn't have qualms about not doing so yourself when your life is on the line.
Alright Highroller, you have now proven to me beyond any doubt that you are absolutely clueless when dealing with martial arts.
I have been practicing JKD for 6 years now, btw. Total Approach JKD.
But the fact that you say Muay Thai kicks are inefficient just says to me that you're trying to look smart talking to someone who's entire life revolves around martial arts.
Also, in the street, good luck finding a weapon. In a bar, or a house, it's much easier, but i was referring to a fight outdoors rather than inside.
PS. I'm curious as to exactly how many ways jackie chan can kill me with a toaster.
Rivaltuna, what exact scenario are you thinking about? A random mugging? It's true that it would be hard to find an improvised weapon if taken by surprise, but if you are walking alone at night, it's best to keep something handy to begin with. Realistically, the improvised weapons don't come into play in the first few blows unless you already have one (which is why I keep a pen or my keys in hand if I'm in that kind of situation). If you can defend yourself long enough to get away, or you find yourself approached slowly, it's much easier to find something. I work in Baltimore, and while there isn't a wealth of debris lying around, even in the worst neighborhood there are branches, rocks or broken pieces of concrete lying around. Being stopped in an alley or in the street also has different advantages. Usually, plenty of room to run is all you will really need.
Also, in the street, good luck finding a weapon. In a bar, or a house, it's much easier, but i was referring to a fight outdoors rather than inside.
if it's outdoors, and it's one on one, how does martial arts help you? Why are you fighting? Who is more likely to survive such a situation, Quinton Jackson or David Belle?
My money is on Belle, running away or retreating away.
If you stay and fight because you're a good fighter, how so you know he's not going to pull a knife? Or have keys in his fist? Or just be better than you? And given it's a stranger, how do you know he wont just kill you or maim you if he's winning (especially if you hurt him in the fight)? How do you know you will not be seriously injured even if you do "win"? My idiot friend in law school last year apparently punched somebody in the head and broke 2 fingers in a fight that could easily have been avoided. The bill for the Orthopedic surgeon pinning just those two fingers and the aftercare was over $10,000.
What do you "win" if you defeat this stranger in a fight outdoors? Points? Money?
I really believe that too many Students of the fighting arts do not do everything possible to avoid fighting. I'm not saying they look for fights but they seem far less ready than average people to just "let stuff go". They cite being disrespected or their girl being disrespected, and how they just stood up for themselves, and frankly all *I* see is TWO guys who each want to prove they're a studly fighter, trying to back the other down. Or if it's a stranger encounter, thinking "I can take this guy. Why should I run?"
Fighters in this thread citing how many "real" fights they've been in on the street, to establish credibility here. If you avoid trouble, why should that number ever be more than 0 or 1?
PS. I'm curious as to exactly how many ways jackie chan can kill me with a toaster.
the only way he can kill me with a toaster involves throwing it and hitting me in the head, because with the condition of his knees, I know he cant catch me if i run.
I don't think that invalidates any of the excellent discussion about fighting styles here, but in discussing these 1 on 1 fights with strangers, the other guy is always an unknown, a complete wildcard, who could be 10x the fighter you are, or completely overmatched by you. With a stranger you don't know if he's going to walk away after a stiff pop to the nose, or become enraged and try to smash your head in with a chair as soon as your back is turned after the fight is "over".
Any fights that don't involve the words "sucker punch" or "dirty" are basically "duels" where both guys kind of want to fight, and give implicit consent. It's a ritualistic exercise in macho. To everybody else watching, it's free MMA watching two chumps. Except the fighters don't get any prize money and there's no referee except the crowd that steps in after one guy is bleeding and insensate.
If anybody can cite more than one "real" street or bar fight on their resume, then it seems likely to me that they're not trying hard enough to avoid fighting.
If anybody can cite more than one "real" street or bar fight on their resume, then it seems likely to me that they're not trying hard enough to avoid fighting.
I've been sucker punched several times. (only once did i really deserve it.)
and in all honesty the option to flee never really occured to me. my instinct said fight back, so i did. it was never really a conscious effort with me.
I have been practicing JKD for 6 years now, btw. Total Approach JKD.
I notice how you didn't think to recommend JKD to the OP.
But the fact that you say Muay Thai kicks are inefficient
They are inefficient. Especially the spinning hook kick, which isn't even seen often in Taekwondo matches, and should not be attempted in real life. But Jeet Kune Do does throw kicks differently from Muay Thai fighters. Indeed, Jeet Kune Do doesn't borrow much from Muay Thai for that very reason, the attributes of Muay Thai fighters are generally poor. Their footwork is poor, they throw their punches from too high, their kicks are thrown in arcs that are wide. It is definitely not the art the OP should derive most of his training from.
Really the most useful art the OP could learn aside from Concepts JKD (which, for anyone else who's reading, as razzliox has been banned, is different from Jun Fan/Original JKD. You don't want to enter into the latter until your attributes have been honed enough in the former.) is Western boxing, which would be far, far more beneficial to his attributes training, especially in the area of footwork. Kali would also be useful, both for attributes training and to expose him to a soft martial art, which would be very beneficial since he's coming from Taekwondo and is going to need to get rid of those hard blocks.
just says to me that you're trying to look smart talking to someone who's entire life revolves around martial arts.
The bravado you are demonstrating by repeatedly saying you are a "professional martial artist", a claim you have yet to substantiate, as though this should automatically make your opinions correct is the exact mindset that Bruce Lee worked against.
Also, in the street, good luck finding a weapon. In a bar, or a house, it's much easier, but i was referring to a fight outdoors rather than inside.
No you weren't.
The chances of someone picking up a weapon randomly lying around in the middle of a fight is negligible, and the chances of it being USEFUL are astronomical. In Krav Maga, it takes MONTHS of steady practicing and situational awareness training to decide what the most effective weapon in the room is, and usually it's something portable that you can throw into their face as you press for a lethal neck combination strike.
There is really no 'best' school for Japanese Swordfighting.
I can't imagine there would be, and I hesitate to say "most practical" because... Well... Honestly the only situation I would imagine using a samurai sword in this day and age is if I happened to find myself on the movie set of a Tarantino film.
Could you elaborate on "variations on how to receive and attack"?
If anybody can cite more than one "real" street or bar fight on their resume, then it seems likely to me that they're not trying hard enough to avoid fighting.
I have no doubt that many of those people could easily destroy me, as I stated previously. That wasn't my point. My point is that those are Martial Arts that are best applied while in peak physical condition, and have a very head-on mentality to combat. The idea of going to a gym and challenging someone is indicative of that head-on mindset.
First, your presumption is wrong about BJJ. You do not have to be in peak physical condition to have BJJ be effective, in fact that's one of the best things about it.
Secondly, that was not the reason I challenged you to go to a BJJ gym. The reason I challenged you to go to a gym and try it was because you stated:
Quote from Jay13x »
Every Martial Art you listed is a 'Sport' Martial Art, meaning while it can be effective the rules around the competitive aspect prevent you from learning to fight for real. For example, Ju Jutsu forbids Skin Grabs.
It seems to me that you imply that because BJJ is also a competitive sport, it would not be as effective in street fighting and that's just not true. The Gracie challenge is there to show you that it is an effective martial art and you can use it in street fights.
If you truly believe that BJJ isn't effective, take the Gracie challenge and I guarantee you will come back convinced.
Quote from jay13x »
For the layperson, the kinds of Martial Arts I described are much more useful for self-defense. I'm not saying other Martial Artists aren't good fighters, I'm saying that if the average person found themselves in a situation where fighting was the only way out, the training from the type of Martial Art I'm talking about would serve them better. Read on as I talk about this more.
Of all the Martial Arts out there as far as 'for a layperson' IMHO it's BJJ because within just a few months, you will find it more effective that any striking art out there in terms of self defense. Once you take a fight to the ground and you know what to do - if your opponent has only studied striking, they lose.
I say this because some of people (yourself included) are talking about using improvised weapons and yet you don't consider real life consequences for doing so.
I believe you advocated me to go challenging people to fights without rules. That is starting a fight, and not a fight anyone should ever wish to take part in, I must say.
What you're addressing is prevention and I think that is a different topic altogether.
I disagree. Knowing how to avoid a fight and having the humility and respect to avoid conflict is intrinsically a part of martial arts, or should be.
My favorite quote on martial arts came from Jackie Chan's autobiography, in which he got into fights as a kid and he describes his father as saying, "I didn't teach you martial arts to get into fights. I taught you martial arts so you would never have to." This to me has always been poignant. It's not about punching and kicking, foremost above all physicality is discipline.
It seems to me that you imply that because BJJ is also a competitive sport, it would not be as effective in street fighting and that's just not true. The Gracie challenge is there to show you that it is an effective martial art and you can use it in street fights.
I mean, Brazilian ju jitsu is a great martial art, I don't think anyone's going to dispute this. But usually in a street fight you wouldn't want to take things to the ground, and all the more is this the case if he's armed or if there's more than one person that you're fighting.
I say this because some of people (yourself included) are talking about using improvised weapons and yet you don't consider real life consequences for doing so.
Yes, there are real life consequences for using improvised weapons, and there are also real life consequences for fighting without using improvised weapons; fighting in real life has legal consequences to say the least, which is why the point about not starting a fight and having the goal of all fights that you're in in real life being zero is a sound one (not saying you were disagreeing with this, just reemphasizing.)
But the point is that if someone starts a fight, especially if he's really going after me, I'm going to be grabbing anything I can find and throwing **** at him. I'm going to be doing whatever I can with whatever I have. It would be foolish not to, especially should that person be armed himself. I'm talking about self-defense situations in which someone is engaging and threatening me and running is not an option, either because I cannot or because I have people I need to protect.
You were earlier mocking the idea of weapons and talking about hand-to-hand combat. I say again, if someone's assaulting me in real life, I'm not worrying about ideas of fairness.
I believe you advocated me to go challenging people to fights without rules. That is starting a fight, and not a fight anyone should ever wish to take part in, I must say.
Wow.
Highroller, don't insinuate things that I didn't say. I think you know that I meant that I don't advocate starting random fights with random people on the street, especially since I did clarify what I meant.
You were earlier mocking the idea of weapons and talking about hand-to-hand combat. I say again, if someone's assaulting me in real life, I'm not worrying about ideas of fairness.
Yes, because it's not relevant for this reason:
A) Street fighter could have a weapon
B) Trained fighter could have a weapon
A) Street fighter could have a knife
B) Trained fighter could have a knife
A) Street fighter could have a gun
B) Trained fighter could have a gun
We're not talking about weapon fighting, nor is it productive to discuss using weapons while fighting because the conversation can't really continue.
Example:
A) 'Insert any martial art here' is the best for self defense.
B) What if your opponent has a gun? Might as well learn how to use a sniper rifle.
If that is not reason enough, there are plenty of legal reason why should shouldn't use weapons.
Finally, if the first two still are not reason enough - it still doesn't reflect what happens in real life.
I mean, Brazilian ju jitsu is a great martial art, I don't think anyone's going to dispute this. But usually in a street fight you wouldn't want to take things to the ground, and all the more is this the case if he's armed or if there's more than one person that you're fighting.
Also any Martial Art that claims that it can teach you to take on multiple opponents is BS. Secondly, why wouldn't you want to take a fight to the ground in a street fight?
Secondly, why wouldn't you want to take a fight to the ground in a street fight?
it takes your best option in any fight-- TACTICAL RETREAT-- out of the equation.
It might be fine for subduing some drunk guy at your house party, or cooling off some angry person by submission or even fighting a rapist if you're one on one. But once you're grappling an opponent, you're utterly helpless against anybody else who shows up.
You're not battling over territory. You're trying to preserve your safety.
The fact that this doesnt instantly occur to you implies the mentality of somebody who wants to fight, not to run. To people who really look at fighting as a last resort, grapping an opponent in a bar sounds extremely hazardous.
it takes your best option in any fight-- TACTICAL RETREAT-- out of the equation.
No it doesn't. If I'm on the ground with someone who doesn't know any kind of grappling, I can get on my feet whenever I want.
It might be fine for subduing some drunk guy at your house party, or cooling off some angry person by submission or even fighting a rapist if you're one on one. But once you're grappling an opponent, you're utterly helpless against anybody else who shows up.
First you're claiming that it's effective but only if you're not fighting multiple opponents.
Again, there is no Martial Arts that will let you take on multiple opponents. Plenty claim they can, but in real life - its never a good option.
The fact that this doesnt instantly occur to you implies the mentality of somebody who wants to fight, not to run. To people who really look at fighting as a last resort, grapping an opponent in a bar sounds extremely hazardous.
Just because I'm confident in my abilities as a fighter doesn't mean that I WANT to fight.
If running/walking away is an option I would suggest taking it. But this isn't the topic we're discussing. We're discussing what styles work best when running/walking away isn't an option.
If anybody can cite more than one "real" street or bar fight on their resume, then it seems likely to me that they're not trying hard enough to avoid fighting.
Ha! Very true. No falso bravado here. The only bar fight I've ever been in was backing a way from two morons after the US lost in the World Cup, then move in and use my EMT skills to help the loser (the winner fled).
Doesn't mean that these things don't run through my mind all the time, especially when I'm approached by a stranger on the street.
I can't imagine there would be, and I hesitate to say "most practical" because... Well... Honestly the only situation I would imagine using a samurai sword in this day and age is if I happened to find myself on the movie set of a Tarantino film.
What about a baseball bat? A pipe, an umbrella, a stick, etc? But like I said, training in using a weighted chain (which would be substituted for a belt, something most men have on them on a regular basis) or bojutsu (specifically the hanbo) would be more useful for all of those, anyway. Swordplay is just fun.
Could you elaborate on "variations on how to receive and attack"?
Sure. The movements are all generally the same, but the preferred postures, whether or not they block or avoid primarily, etc, all vary. I haven't studied too many, but that has always been the major difference. Outside of a samurai fight, the variations don't really matter.
First, your presumption is wrong about BJJ. You do not have to be in peak physical condition to have BJJ be effective, in fact that's one of the best things about it.
Fair enough. Maybe I just encountered the wrong groups of BJJ practicioners.
Secondly, that was not the reason I challenged you to go to a BJJ gym. The reason I challenged you to go to a gym and try it was because you stated:
It seems to me that you imply that because BJJ is also a competitive sport, it would not be as effective in street fighting and that's just not true. The Gracie challenge is there to show you that it is an effective martial art and you can use it in street fights.
If you truly believe that BJJ isn't effective, take the Gracie challenge and I guarantee you will come back convinced.
You are proving my point while trying to disprove it. I've got nothing to prove, and the Gracie challenge is exactly the mentality of a combat sport: proving you are better than other people or that your style is superior. Besides, members of the Bujinkan are forbidden from competing in tournaments. Let me be clear - I'm expressing my opinion on what I believe to be the most useful things to learn. Nin Jutsu isn't the only place to learn them, it just has what I believe to be one of the best approaches to training you to respond to a threat. You are talking about fighting. I'm talking about surviving. I don't care if your grandmaster can beat my grandmaster. I don't care if your average student could beat mine in a match. Even amongst the Bujinkan I woudn't say I'm particularly skilled, so I wouldn't want to be the one representing my style anyway. I've got too much else going on in life to commit the kind of time and energy it takes to master the skills involved.
Of all the Martial Arts out there as far as 'for a layperson' IMHO it's BJJ because within just a few months, you will find it more effective that any striking art out there in terms of self defense. Once you take a fight to the ground and you know what to do - if your opponent has only studied striking, they lose.
I completely agree with you, except I don't only study striking in the Bujinkan. Grappling is involved as well, since that is where most fights that don't end in the first few seconds will end up. I've seen a lot of the Bujinkan's more competitive minded cross-train in BJJ and vice versa. Yeah, it's useful for grappling, I never disputed that.
I say this because some of people (yourself included) are talking about using improvised weapons and yet you don't consider real life consequences for doing so.
Except when my opening move is a ball point pen through the soft tissue of your arm and I'm already 20 feet away and still running. Would you consider improvised weapons useful then?
I think we are having a fundamental misunderstanding of what constitutes a 'street fight'. As I said earlier, martial arts for me isn't about winning but surviving a fight. In my mind when I say 'street fight' I'm referring to a situation where my life or my health is in significant danger, not simply a fighting match set outside of a dojo. There is a lot more to fighting than physical skill, especially in a real world scenario. Tactics and keeping track of the environment are also important. I can't tell you how many times being trained to be aware of my environment has helped me out as an EMT.
A) 'Insert any martial art here' is the best for self defense.
B) What if your opponent has a gun? Might as well learn how to use a sniper rifle.
Haha, that's exactly the example one of my old instructors used to emphasis never fighting fairly. If they have a sniper rifle, you should get a rocket launcher.
If that is not reason enough, there are plenty of legal reason why should shouldn't use weapons.
This is very true, which is why I always carry a pen rather than a knife. I can do just as much damage when properly used. I'm almost always wearing a belt too, which would substitute for a weighted chain or rope. The belt slides off rather having to remove that prong used to keep it in place, so I can remove it faster. If I have the 2 or 3 seconds I would need to remove it, I would use it to keep an attacker at a distance.
Also any Martial Art that claims that it can teach you to take on multiple opponents is BS.
Yes and no. There is no fighting technique that can teach you to fight multiple opponents, but there are strategies that can be used. Any coordinated group though will take down the most skilled of fighters. Just like the knife, multiple attackers means you will get hurt. The best strategy is to get through the group quickly, or if they don't have you surrounded run the opposite way.
Secondly, why wouldn't you want to take a fight to the ground in a street fight?
The multiple attacker scenario is a good one, but also because it delays your ability to get away. That and I don't want to give anyone any more time to land a lucky blow. But it depends, if your life isn't in danger and its just two alpha males growling at one another, going to the ground isn't that bad an idea.
---
There are an infinite number of 'but what if...' scenarios that can be used to destroy any theory. What I express is just my opinion that learning an adaptable skill that would serve you the best in the real world, because I've applied that adaptability and philosophy to other aspects of my life, which is why I'm successful in what I do.
It might be fine for subduing some drunk guy at your house party, or cooling off some angry person by submission or even fighting a rapist if you're one on one.
For subduing a drunk guy, yes. If a rapist is attacking you, it would be useful if you've been taken to the ground and he or she is on top of you (because again, you're not wanting to move towards the opponent but away), but more useful than this is kina mutai, which seeks well-placed bites to the nipples, the cheek, the neck, the lats, the inner thigh, and other uninterrupted bite points. These are bite points your opponent will not be able to easily counterattack you in or bite you back, and his or her impulse will be to try to shake you off, which is exactly what one wants in that situation.
Tell you what, go to a Muay Thai gym or a MMA gym and tell them you want to fight those guys with no rules and see how well you do.
Umm...
Yes, because it's not relevant
It's entirely relevant.
It's extremely relevant if we're talking about BJJ, because if the guy has a blade on him, Brazilian Ju Jitsu isn't going to help you.
We're not talking about weapon fighting,
Actually we are.
A) 'Insert any martial art here' is the best for self defense.
B) What if your opponent has a gun? Might as well learn how to use a sniper rifle.
This is not the discussion. This is you making fun of the discussion. There is a difference.
Also any Martial Art that claims that it can teach you to take on multiple opponents is BS.
I'm not disagreeing with you here. But the fact remains, if two or more people are after you than grappling has dramatically reduced its effectiveness.
Secondly, why wouldn't you want to take a fight to the ground in a street fight?
Because the goal is to avoid the fight entirely. Submission holds are fine when, as dcartist said, you want to subdue someone who's gotten unruly. The basics of it might be useful if you're planning against an attempted rape, although kina mutai would be far more useful because a well-placed bite will leave the opponent few options other than to try to shake you off.
But if I'm being assaulted or mugged, I'm not interested in putting the guy in a sleeper hold. I'm not interested in triangle choking him. I'm interested in running the hell away. You're basically opting to remove all mobility, which isn't the point at all. The point is to get away. If I'm fighting, the reason I'm fighting is because running away is not an option, which means I am now seeking to make running away an option.
BJJ is most effective when you're facing a single unarmed opponent and you don't intend to run and you intend to take the fight to the ground or your opponent already has. Which isn't common. For instance, if someone's a bouncer in a club, or here's an example, a friend of mine is a security guard at a jewelry store, these are both occupations where the guy would want to move towards the conflict, where his intended goal is to diffuse the conflict, and his intended goal is to get his opponent into a submission hold. But even there, he's not going to want to take the fight to the ground. He's going to want to go for the sleeper hold or something.
No it doesn't. If I'm on the ground with someone who doesn't know any kind of grappling, I can get on my feet whenever I want.
And if you know ahead of time that (1) he doesn't know any kind of grappling AND (2) its going to be just you and him for this little love-fest, then free to go for the takedown.
Otherwise, I don't really see you being able "get on your feet at any time" when you have somebody in the guard, or half guard, or the mount. It takes a little time to extricate yourself, and get up, especially if the guy on the ground is only trying to slow you down so his friend can hit you.
First you're claiming that it's effective but only if you're not fighting multiple opponents.
No. I'm claiming it doesn't give you the option to run away. That's all. All combat situations are fluid. What starts out as a 1 on 1 fight can suddenly become 1 on 3, in which case running might be the best option.
What starts out as 1 on 1 against a wimpy looking pushover, can suddenly become "Holy crap, he's wicked fast and better fighter than me".
What starts out as 1 on 1 "fair fight", can turn into unarmed vs a guy with a knife, or a razor in the boot, once he figures out you're a much better fighter than him.
Again, there is no Martial Arts that will let you take on multiple opponents. Plenty claim they can, but in real life - its never a good option.
Yes... but bulldoze through past one guy, or headbutt one guy in and break free, or make space with a pool cue and run, are certainly options. As long as you're standing, and just trying to maintain distance, you have the option to run in a 1 vs 2 or 3.
Just because I'm confident in my abilities as a fighter doesn't mean that I WANT to fight.
If running/walking away is an option I would suggest taking it. But this isn't the topic we're discussing. We're discussing what styles work best when running/walking away isn't an option.
We're talking about what martial art is best for "street fighting".
The best way of handling a street fight is to walk away.
The second best way of handling a street fight is to run away.
The third best way to handle it is to hurt somebody enough to be able to run away.
The worst way to handle a street fight is to roll around in the guard for 5 minutes trying to get an ankle lock, on the floor of a dingy, sticky bar.
The kinds of fights where two people roll around on the floor where nobody else intervenes, are basically the kind of fight that is basically a duel or MATCH. If nobody interferes, its because it's a contest between you and the other guy for seeing who is the tougher and more skilled *******... er I mean... determining who is the "better man".
I've been sucker punched several times. (only once did i really deserve it.)
and in all honesty the option to flee never really occured to me. my instinct said fight back, so i did. it was never really a conscious effort with me.
I've never been sucker punched in my life. Imagine that.
Its not an issue of "deserve".
Its getting yourself into situations where somebody might sucker punch you.
I remember I used to work with a 40ish former NFL linebacker, who became an orthotist, and he had hands that looked like... catcher's mitts, I kid you not, like ****ing bear claws. He was just all out of proportion to normal humans I knew, and about 6'1", but freakish size and quick as Hell (he did tell me that as freakishly strong and fast as he was, he said that going against magically talented Barry Sanders, he felt like he was made of stone...
Well this orthotist always put on this big show of being a calm individual, and not ever seeking a fight... he'd always protest that he avoided conflict, but I swear, EVERY DAMN Week, he'd come to us with a story about some guy who pissed him off and got up in his grill over something, whether it was traffic related, or at the Walmart... it was always something, and it was never his fault. He'd always get up in their grille, at which point they'd back down. But just listening to him, you could tell that he just acted like he would never back down from anything, and kind of liked being the biggest and baddest, and that he consciously or subconsciously intimidated people.
When you're big and bad, and you know it, you might put yourself in situations where you end up getting sucker punched, or into a fight somehow.
I'm not saying this is you.
But I've never been sucker punched. I've never been in a situation where somebody wanted to sucker punch me. My parents would be shocked to hear I got in a fight with somebody. What successful person does that? Did Jerry Yang get in fist fights? Did Roger Federer? Tiger Woods? Dr. Drew? President Obama?
Why should I?
How is "street fight" even in our vocabulary, except as a relatively rare emergency situation involving CRIMINAL VIOLENCE against your person?
I want to be able to defend myself on the street by traveling in good numbers, being physically fit, avoiding dangerous situations, backing away from conflict with humor and good will, and if truly threatened, prepared to act submissive, then suddenly strike hard and run when the opportunity presents itself.
Martial arts training will definitely help with that, but IF I let my martial arts ability to go to my head in even a SMALL way, it will probably increase my risk of eventually being hurt.
The best of both worlds is a supremely skilled martial artist who loves to fight in the ring, and shudders at the idea of risking his body without a paycheck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Okay, lets see what you stated to make your case:
You seem to think that because there are no rules on the streets that suddenly a trained fighter isn't as good a fighter as he would be on the street and that's complete bull☺☺☺☺.
I've been in and seen fights (as a trained fighter and I have friends that are trained fighters) beat the snot out of jackasses who think cause they own the streets they can knock out anyone.
Trained fighters learn to defend people who are attack them and know how to fight. Street fighters are not trained and don't know ☺☺☺☺ about fighting (despite what their egos may tell them).
Remember Roger Huerta? He beat the crap out of a football player that was much bigger than he was.
Hell, come to the warrior's cove (or any gracie endorsed gym) we have the gracie challenge and we'll fight people right off the street to prove our ☺☺☺☺ works. No gloves, no nut cups, no mouth pieces, and the only time the fight stops is when someone gets knocked out or taps.
You make it seems like trained fighters don't know how to protect themselves against eye gouges or other kinds of strikes.
Tell you what, go to a Muay Thai gym or a MMA gym and tell them you want to fight those guys with no rules and see how well you do.
As far as weapons go you think a trained fighter is going to just let some jack ass grab a weapon and strike him with it? You think the trained fighter won't grab a weapon too?
You must be joking.
Have you ever been in a triangle choke? You think you can just bite someone while you're in a triangle choke? Your assertion tells me you have no idea what you're talking about.
I did address them and then I dismissed them because the logic is bad. Like yours is here.
In this conversation it isn't.
I don't, it's called SARCASM. I used grenade launcher to make it obvious that I was being sarcastic, which is also why I used pulse rifles and light sabers as examples.
Again, I don't think you've ever been in a real fight outside of HS (if even that). You think people are going to have time to look around for a weapon or that a trained fighter is just going to let him waltz over and grab one?
Usually people fight in the heat of the moment and most of the time street fighters in particular make mistakes like throwing their arms up, pushing and talking ☺☺☺☺.
Yep - not so much now cause I'm older (and I don't live in the city), but when I was younger and going to bars and clubs I was in my share of fights.
Look man, no offense meant, but I'm convinced, utterly and thoroughly convinced by what you've said on this subject that you have absolutely no working knowledge of martial arts whatsoever.
Muay Thai is EASILY one of the best striking martial arts, if not 100% the best. Wide kicks? Right, because the front kick and pendulum kick are both wide. The spinning back hook kick goes wide enough to block it with a karate kick block (that will end up breaking your wrist if you actually catch it. Which you won't.) /sarcasm
The chances of someone picking up a weapon randomly lying around in the middle of a fight is negligible, and the chances of it being USEFUL are astronomical. In Krav Maga, it takes MONTHS of steady practicing and situational awareness training to decide what the most effective weapon in the room is, and usually it's something portable that you can throw into their face as you press for a lethal neck combination strike.
I get it if you watch MMA once in awhile and read the wikipedia entries and like to think you're well versed in martial arts, but the REAL martial artists here all see right through it.
▲
▲ ▲
Judo and Muay Thai yes, karate no. Karate is just as bad for fighting as TKD is, and TKD is much harder to do.
I didn't see this, so I apologize for not responding sooner. I think I address this in other posts, but let me restate. There is nothing wrong with combat sports - and as I stated they are excellent fighters. However, mentality-wise they are still training you in the context of a tournament. For a lay person, its more valuable to have experience in a martial art whose mentality is centered around someone is trying to kill you, and how to kill them back first (or really, just neutralize the threat) .
That's exactly right. I had to leave the school I originally trained in because the son of the owner was getting heavily into MMA and the arrogant attitudes of everyone involved were getting a little unbearable - and were not benefitting anyone's training (plus the whole emphasis of the senior-level classes became focused on MMA-style 'sparring'. I ended up finding a marine who rented out a basement twice a week, and I've never looked back. He has amazing guest instructors come through on a regular basis, and encourages to attend all the seminars that come through (like Kacem Zoughari). My old school wouldn't even tell us when their own instructors were in town (who they would train with), and forbid their employees from getting training from other bujinkan practicioners. So there are good and bad schools everywhere.
Although I don't think the Sanchin kata is necessarily a deal-breaker, I've never found it to be very practical in teaching people how to breathe.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
I'm not familiar with every martial art school, but I have to disagree with you.
As a trained fighter (BJJ, kickboxing, TKD) I can tell you that there's nothing wrong with my mentality nor the mentality of any other trained fighter that I know.
When myself or friends that I know that are trained fighters, have gotten into fights in the past did what we're trained to do. We did not think:
"Well this is a tournament and we have to obey tournament rules"
Even in a tournament context, no trained fighter ever thinks that. They think something a long the lines of I'm going to knock this guy's head off.
In training we do not train in the context of a tournament (unless someone is training to go to one or helping someone who is). Go to a BJJ gym and challenge someone there. I guarantee you even if they do have the mentality you're suggesting (which is imho utter nonsense, no offense) they will still beat a street fighter easily.
My Recent Craft Projects:
Custom EDH Spell Book Deck Box
Custom EDH Deck Boxes
3D Magic Card Abacus 1 2 3 4
URURU Jhoira
BGWBG Teneb
BRGBR Karrthus
WUBRG Scion of the Ur-Dragon
BBBBB Balthor
RGWRG Uril
UBRUB Garza Zol
WUBWU Sharuum
UUUUU Arcanis
UBUBU Sivitri Scarzam
True that brother. However, some martial arts do not support tournaments and often ban them, purely cause they cannot be sure that people will come out of them alive if someone lacks control. In addition, many of the moves require the user to break bones, tear joints, kill people or throw them, amoung other horrid things. There would simply be too many banned moves and tournaments would be a waste of time, or if people were advanced enough, it would be boring as nothing would happen and if it did it'd happen very quickly, making it uneventful.
In Ninjutsu, even the most basic and fundamental moves can kill your opponent with the first strike. It would be far too difficult and boring to make tournaments for.
Pretty much sums up why I like green so much
On the internet, everywhere is Soviet Russia[/QUOTE]
This is emphatically true. In fact, my teacher even mentioned keys if all else fails.
Since you speak highly of kendo, and purkle as well, I'll look into it. Thank you. Although I've always found the footwork of Western fencing superior to kendo's.
Oh, you think that's cool, google "indestructible combat umbrella".
Kali is also fun because of its destructions. You'll check a person's punch, for instance, and then strike the bicep or the nerve. Then there's the grappling arts, which incorporate, for instance, the concept of uninterrupted biting. You should try it sometime.
And this all the more so.
purklefluff is right on the money, particularly in this:
What situations do you train for?
How you train is everything. What you train for, what you train until it becomes reflexive, is everything.
Notice I never said "useless" in my post. I'm saying it's a change in situation that you wouldn't be readily prepared for. And judging by your reaction to the idea of someone using a knife, I feel I'm completely justified.
Whoa there. It seems we have a difference of definition regarding street fighting, and I want to clarify my position.
To me a street fight is any fight that takes place out of a controlled ring with a referee and rules. In other words, the fights that take place in real life, street or otherwise. It has nothing to do with the level of training of the fighter, and to automatically dismiss these fighters as not trained is not something you can say as a blanket statement. Most people are, indeed, not people who know how to fight. But there are many martial arts geared toward combat in a scenario without rules. These people are absolutely trained. Paul Vunak focused his study on street fighting. He is absolutely a "trained fighter" by every stretch of the imagination.
I'm not talking about people who can't fight vs. people who study how to. I'm talking about people who train for a sports competition vs. people who train for combat in a scenario where no restrictions or rules apply. There is a major difference. This is not to discount the martial arts. It is instead commenting on the difference of how the fighters are training.
Do you?
Do you train eye gouging, headbutting, biting, etc.? Do you know, for instance, where the most effective places are to bite someone? Once again, it is about what you train for.
The fact that you're being this glib about a fight without rules is illustrating to me a serious problem.
Where is your leg in relation to someone while performing a triangle choke? Right.
Next time you practice BJJ with someone, note when you have the opportunity to bite your opponent's inner thigh. Or his cheeks. Or his nipples. These are key points on the body because a bite to them is difficult to deal with and a place you cannot be bitten back. And please note that I'm not saying that BJJ is bad or not useful, quite the contrary, but I'm asking you if you would know how to execute such an attack, or if you would find yourself completely caught off-guard by one.
No, making a foolish claim in an insulting tone and saying that it's sarcasm makes it no less foolish.
"The subject at hand doesn't include people using grenade launchers, nukes, light sabers, pistols, katanas, knives, lasers, or any other stupid weapon you might try to include in this conversation.
I am only addressing hand to hand combat here and nothing else."
Because I'm sure everyone you might encounter in real life is going to honor your code of fairness and remove anything they're carrying on them in order to fight you bare-handed.
Jeet Kune Do, whose philosophy is based around taking what is useful and discarding what is not, incorporates from Muay Thai a few kicks, primarily the rear leg hook kick to the thigh. What is noteworthy is that these kicks are thrown differently than Muay Thai throws them because they are thrown in Muay Thai in wider arcs, making them inefficient. The attributes of Muay Thai fighters are considered generally poor, which is why the OP should not be training in Muay Thai. Certainly not now. It will throw his attribute development in the wrong direction.
I assume you are now going to claim that this is because no one in Jeet Kune Do is a "REAL martial artist". In anticipation of this post, please post your credentials and some fighting clips so that I may build you your own school and start an internet campaign announcing that this martial art is a waste of time. Shouldn't be too hard for a fighter of your caliber to overwhelm us with your "REAL martial artist" abilities. I'm sure your authority and combat experience outweigh that of Dan Inosanto, because who told that guy he knew anything about fighting, or Paul Vunak, because who did he train? The Navy SEALS? Oh yeah, like a bunch of sailors would know anything about real life combat, right?
And do you often find yourself often turning your back on your opponents?
Jay13x said it better than I did.
So, you even go so far as to acknowledge that something thrown in someone's face would be useful in a fight. But no, there's no possibility you'll find anything like that around...
I have no doubt that many of those people could easily destroy me, as I stated previously. That wasn't my point. My point is that those are Martial Arts that are best applied while in peak physical condition, and have a very head-on mentality to combat. The idea of going to a gym and challenging someone is indicative of that head-on mindset.
I wouldn't challenge anyone directly, I'd let them think I was submissive and then sucker punch them. I'd act like I'd never had a day of training in my life, or like I was slightly drunk to put them a little off guard. I would run away. I would never knowingly put myself in a situation I would have to fight my way out of.
For the layperson, the kinds of Martial Arts I described are much more useful for self-defense. I'm not saying other Martial Artists aren't good fighters, I'm saying that if the average person found themselves in a situation where fighting was the only way out, the training from the type of Martial Art I'm talking about would serve them better. Read on as I talk about this more.
Yeah, keys are great weapons no one ever thinks to use.
The thing to be aware of with Kendo versus Western fencing techniques is that Kendo is designed to end a fight in one hit.
I would be aware that Kendo on its own isn't going to be as effective as constantly changing style. Simply switching from one to the other quickly can be very disorienting.
Awesome.
I already do that, although not specifically Kali. Numbing the arm so that its useless for a few seconds or more is always a good idea. Although I'm sure a great many people are better at it than I am.
The mentality you were responding to is one of the key philosophy differences I was speaking about. Improvised weapons are everywhere and very effective. I'm not just talking about picking up a random stick (although on my way into the office I noticed several that might do). Right now I can tell you I have over half a dozen weapons on my person. I have a pen (stabbing, distraction), my belt (striking, binding, distraction), my tie (binding, distraction), my keys (cutting, stabbing, distraction), a small amount of change (distraction), my watch (striking, distraction), my wallet (distraction, very effective as that is most likely what they'd want anyway), as well as work and personal cell phones (striking, distraction). If you noticed, I listed distraction for everything item I have, because they can all be used multiple ways, and the flinch reflex can usually buy you a precious second or two to either get away or finish the fight. In an environment like a bar, you have many, many more weapons within easy reach. Mugs, bottles, bowls of nuts, little plastic signs, chairs, other people. Improvised weaponry is everywhere and can be VERY effective. Using the space you are given is also useful. In a bar the environment can be a huge advantage in a fight, or avoiding a head-on fight.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
And this is why a claim like this:
Is false. Because if you're advocating running around challenging people to fights, then you've forgotten discipline and keeping your own ego in check.
Alright.
Fair enough. My question is what if you're holding something that isn't as graceful, or sharp, or long as a katana? I defer to you on this, because I don't know anything about Kendo, but it seems like the further you deviate from something like a Japanese sword, the less useful it becomes.
It's also that I feel like when you say that kendo's mentality is ending a swordfight in one blow... I don't know, it just seems like a boxer who throws no jabs. This would probably make abundant sense on a battlefield with multiple swordsmen in armor, but if we're talking unarmored dueling, Western fencing is very mobile, and it's also about wearing your opponent down, and this sounds more apt to me. If a fencer finds an opening like say your arm is open, or your leg, he'll cut it. And the thing is, if you have a bladed weapon, a single cut can bring a person into shock, and if your body goes into shock, you're in bad shape. It's why knife fights are so lethal, a madman flailing wildly with a bladed weapon with no idea what he's doing can slash you. But I defer to you on this, you're more versed in swordfighting than I.
Also, there seem to be no end to schools of Japanese swordfighting. Would you have a resource to... I hesitate to say "which is best?", but at least to tell the differences between them?
Exactly! Rivaltuna's acting like just because this isn't Diablo II and you won't find the Bone Snap Unique Maul lying around that weapons won't be found anywhere. That's what improvised weapon means.
The bottom line is if you're fighting someone, you take any and every measure you can to tilt the odds in your favor. No one would ever fight hand-to-hand if there's anything around that they can use to throw or swing or strike with. It's like the myth about cowboys dueling at high noon, if that ever happened it was a rare occurrence indeed because no one in their right mind would fight someone fair when they could wait in an alley or somewhere and shoot them in the back. People don't fight fair, you shouldn't expect them to in a real-life context, and you shouldn't have qualms about not doing so yourself when your life is on the line.
He lost his eye when some dude cracked him in the face with a beer mug. Just like that, he's rocking a glass eye for the rest of his life.
Pool cues, full bottles, empty bottles, anything can be a weapon and you don't see it coming. Do not fight strangers. It's just so ****ing stupid.
I have been practicing JKD for 6 years now, btw. Total Approach JKD.
But the fact that you say Muay Thai kicks are inefficient just says to me that you're trying to look smart talking to someone who's entire life revolves around martial arts.
Dan Inosanto is good, but Tommy Carruthers is in my opinion the living legacy to bruce lee.
Also, in the street, good luck finding a weapon. In a bar, or a house, it's much easier, but i was referring to a fight outdoors rather than inside.
PS. I'm curious as to exactly how many ways jackie chan can kill me with a toaster.
Yes and no. It would work with anything you have to hold with two hands. Like I said before, the movements are what is important, once you learn those you can translate it to any weapon. Although a baseball bat or a pipe or stick is most effective. However...
Far more useful than Kendo in the real world is training with a Hanbo (half Bo staff) or weighted chain or rope. Because the motions involved in the one handed strikes can be applied to just about any one-handed weapon.
There is really no 'best' school for Japanese Swordfighting. They are all fundamentally the same movements, with variations on how to recieve and attack. I have no doubt western fencing is very useful, it's hard to say which is more effective. Japanese Swordfighting is based around the Katana, while Fencing is based around the Rapier (I believe). Both are about speed, but one is designed around a much more powerful sword against an armored opponent. Realtistically, training on the weighted chain or the hanbo will be more useful the 'modern' fight, which is a bar fight or mugging scenario.
You two need to cool it on one another.
Rivaltuna, what exact scenario are you thinking about? A random mugging? It's true that it would be hard to find an improvised weapon if taken by surprise, but if you are walking alone at night, it's best to keep something handy to begin with. Realistically, the improvised weapons don't come into play in the first few blows unless you already have one (which is why I keep a pen or my keys in hand if I'm in that kind of situation). If you can defend yourself long enough to get away, or you find yourself approached slowly, it's much easier to find something. I work in Baltimore, and while there isn't a wealth of debris lying around, even in the worst neighborhood there are branches, rocks or broken pieces of concrete lying around. Being stopped in an alley or in the street also has different advantages. Usually, plenty of room to run is all you will really need.
And the answer? Lots of ways.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
My money is on Belle, running away or retreating away.
If you stay and fight because you're a good fighter, how so you know he's not going to pull a knife? Or have keys in his fist? Or just be better than you? And given it's a stranger, how do you know he wont just kill you or maim you if he's winning (especially if you hurt him in the fight)? How do you know you will not be seriously injured even if you do "win"? My idiot friend in law school last year apparently punched somebody in the head and broke 2 fingers in a fight that could easily have been avoided. The bill for the Orthopedic surgeon pinning just those two fingers and the aftercare was over $10,000.
What do you "win" if you defeat this stranger in a fight outdoors? Points? Money?
I really believe that too many Students of the fighting arts do not do everything possible to avoid fighting. I'm not saying they look for fights but they seem far less ready than average people to just "let stuff go". They cite being disrespected or their girl being disrespected, and how they just stood up for themselves, and frankly all *I* see is TWO guys who each want to prove they're a studly fighter, trying to back the other down. Or if it's a stranger encounter, thinking "I can take this guy. Why should I run?"
Fighters in this thread citing how many "real" fights they've been in on the street, to establish credibility here. If you avoid trouble, why should that number ever be more than 0 or 1?
the only way he can kill me with a toaster involves throwing it and hitting me in the head, because with the condition of his knees, I know he cant catch me if i run.
I don't think that invalidates any of the excellent discussion about fighting styles here, but in discussing these 1 on 1 fights with strangers, the other guy is always an unknown, a complete wildcard, who could be 10x the fighter you are, or completely overmatched by you. With a stranger you don't know if he's going to walk away after a stiff pop to the nose, or become enraged and try to smash your head in with a chair as soon as your back is turned after the fight is "over".
Any fights that don't involve the words "sucker punch" or "dirty" are basically "duels" where both guys kind of want to fight, and give implicit consent. It's a ritualistic exercise in macho. To everybody else watching, it's free MMA watching two chumps. Except the fighters don't get any prize money and there's no referee except the crowd that steps in after one guy is bleeding and insensate.
If anybody can cite more than one "real" street or bar fight on their resume, then it seems likely to me that they're not trying hard enough to avoid fighting.
I've been sucker punched several times. (only once did i really deserve it.)
and in all honesty the option to flee never really occured to me. my instinct said fight back, so i did. it was never really a conscious effort with me.
I notice how you didn't think to recommend JKD to the OP.
They are inefficient. Especially the spinning hook kick, which isn't even seen often in Taekwondo matches, and should not be attempted in real life. But Jeet Kune Do does throw kicks differently from Muay Thai fighters. Indeed, Jeet Kune Do doesn't borrow much from Muay Thai for that very reason, the attributes of Muay Thai fighters are generally poor. Their footwork is poor, they throw their punches from too high, their kicks are thrown in arcs that are wide. It is definitely not the art the OP should derive most of his training from.
Really the most useful art the OP could learn aside from Concepts JKD (which, for anyone else who's reading, as razzliox has been banned, is different from Jun Fan/Original JKD. You don't want to enter into the latter until your attributes have been honed enough in the former.) is Western boxing, which would be far, far more beneficial to his attributes training, especially in the area of footwork. Kali would also be useful, both for attributes training and to expose him to a soft martial art, which would be very beneficial since he's coming from Taekwondo and is going to need to get rid of those hard blocks.
The bravado you are demonstrating by repeatedly saying you are a "professional martial artist", a claim you have yet to substantiate, as though this should automatically make your opinions correct is the exact mindset that Bruce Lee worked against.
No you weren't.
"In the room" does not mean outdoors.
I can't imagine there would be, and I hesitate to say "most practical" because... Well... Honestly the only situation I would imagine using a samurai sword in this day and age is if I happened to find myself on the movie set of a Tarantino film.
Could you elaborate on "variations on how to receive and attack"?
This.
No one here is advocating starting a fight. What we're discussing is what to do once you are fighting and what styles work best in that context.
What you're addressing is prevention and I think that is a different topic altogether.
I can tell you from personal experience that is isn't always possible to avoid a fight, despite your best efforts.
I will also tell you that I have NEVER once started a fight. I only get physical when someone else gets physical with me.
First, your presumption is wrong about BJJ. You do not have to be in peak physical condition to have BJJ be effective, in fact that's one of the best things about it.
Secondly, that was not the reason I challenged you to go to a BJJ gym. The reason I challenged you to go to a gym and try it was because you stated:
It seems to me that you imply that because BJJ is also a competitive sport, it would not be as effective in street fighting and that's just not true. The Gracie challenge is there to show you that it is an effective martial art and you can use it in street fights.
If you truly believe that BJJ isn't effective, take the Gracie challenge and I guarantee you will come back convinced.
Of all the Martial Arts out there as far as 'for a layperson' IMHO it's BJJ because within just a few months, you will find it more effective that any striking art out there in terms of self defense. Once you take a fight to the ground and you know what to do - if your opponent has only studied striking, they lose.
I say this because some of people (yourself included) are talking about using improvised weapons and yet you don't consider real life consequences for doing so.
I believe you advocated me to go challenging people to fights without rules. That is starting a fight, and not a fight anyone should ever wish to take part in, I must say.
I disagree. Knowing how to avoid a fight and having the humility and respect to avoid conflict is intrinsically a part of martial arts, or should be.
My favorite quote on martial arts came from Jackie Chan's autobiography, in which he got into fights as a kid and he describes his father as saying, "I didn't teach you martial arts to get into fights. I taught you martial arts so you would never have to." This to me has always been poignant. It's not about punching and kicking, foremost above all physicality is discipline.
I mean, Brazilian ju jitsu is a great martial art, I don't think anyone's going to dispute this. But usually in a street fight you wouldn't want to take things to the ground, and all the more is this the case if he's armed or if there's more than one person that you're fighting.
Yes, there are real life consequences for using improvised weapons, and there are also real life consequences for fighting without using improvised weapons; fighting in real life has legal consequences to say the least, which is why the point about not starting a fight and having the goal of all fights that you're in in real life being zero is a sound one (not saying you were disagreeing with this, just reemphasizing.)
But the point is that if someone starts a fight, especially if he's really going after me, I'm going to be grabbing anything I can find and throwing **** at him. I'm going to be doing whatever I can with whatever I have. It would be foolish not to, especially should that person be armed himself. I'm talking about self-defense situations in which someone is engaging and threatening me and running is not an option, either because I cannot or because I have people I need to protect.
You were earlier mocking the idea of weapons and talking about hand-to-hand combat. I say again, if someone's assaulting me in real life, I'm not worrying about ideas of fairness.
Wow.
Highroller, don't insinuate things that I didn't say. I think you know that I meant that I don't advocate starting random fights with random people on the street, especially since I did clarify what I meant.
Yes, because it's not relevant for this reason:
A) Street fighter could have a weapon
B) Trained fighter could have a weapon
A) Street fighter could have a knife
B) Trained fighter could have a knife
A) Street fighter could have a gun
B) Trained fighter could have a gun
We're not talking about weapon fighting, nor is it productive to discuss using weapons while fighting because the conversation can't really continue.
Example:
A) 'Insert any martial art here' is the best for self defense.
B) What if your opponent has a gun? Might as well learn how to use a sniper rifle.
If that is not reason enough, there are plenty of legal reason why should shouldn't use weapons.
Finally, if the first two still are not reason enough - it still doesn't reflect what happens in real life.
Also any Martial Art that claims that it can teach you to take on multiple opponents is BS. Secondly, why wouldn't you want to take a fight to the ground in a street fight?
It might be fine for subduing some drunk guy at your house party, or cooling off some angry person by submission or even fighting a rapist if you're one on one. But once you're grappling an opponent, you're utterly helpless against anybody else who shows up.
You're not battling over territory. You're trying to preserve your safety.
The fact that this doesnt instantly occur to you implies the mentality of somebody who wants to fight, not to run. To people who really look at fighting as a last resort, grapping an opponent in a bar sounds extremely hazardous.
No it doesn't. If I'm on the ground with someone who doesn't know any kind of grappling, I can get on my feet whenever I want.
First you're claiming that it's effective but only if you're not fighting multiple opponents.
Again, there is no Martial Arts that will let you take on multiple opponents. Plenty claim they can, but in real life - its never a good option.
Just because I'm confident in my abilities as a fighter doesn't mean that I WANT to fight.
If running/walking away is an option I would suggest taking it. But this isn't the topic we're discussing. We're discussing what styles work best when running/walking away isn't an option.
Ha! Very true. No falso bravado here. The only bar fight I've ever been in was backing a way from two morons after the US lost in the World Cup, then move in and use my EMT skills to help the loser (the winner fled).
Doesn't mean that these things don't run through my mind all the time, especially when I'm approached by a stranger on the street.
What about a baseball bat? A pipe, an umbrella, a stick, etc? But like I said, training in using a weighted chain (which would be substituted for a belt, something most men have on them on a regular basis) or bojutsu (specifically the hanbo) would be more useful for all of those, anyway. Swordplay is just fun.
Sure. The movements are all generally the same, but the preferred postures, whether or not they block or avoid primarily, etc, all vary. I haven't studied too many, but that has always been the major difference. Outside of a samurai fight, the variations don't really matter.
Fair enough. Maybe I just encountered the wrong groups of BJJ practicioners.
You are proving my point while trying to disprove it. I've got nothing to prove, and the Gracie challenge is exactly the mentality of a combat sport: proving you are better than other people or that your style is superior. Besides, members of the Bujinkan are forbidden from competing in tournaments. Let me be clear - I'm expressing my opinion on what I believe to be the most useful things to learn. Nin Jutsu isn't the only place to learn them, it just has what I believe to be one of the best approaches to training you to respond to a threat. You are talking about fighting. I'm talking about surviving. I don't care if your grandmaster can beat my grandmaster. I don't care if your average student could beat mine in a match. Even amongst the Bujinkan I woudn't say I'm particularly skilled, so I wouldn't want to be the one representing my style anyway. I've got too much else going on in life to commit the kind of time and energy it takes to master the skills involved.
I completely agree with you, except I don't only study striking in the Bujinkan. Grappling is involved as well, since that is where most fights that don't end in the first few seconds will end up. I've seen a lot of the Bujinkan's more competitive minded cross-train in BJJ and vice versa. Yeah, it's useful for grappling, I never disputed that.
Except when my opening move is a ball point pen through the soft tissue of your arm and I'm already 20 feet away and still running. Would you consider improvised weapons useful then?
I think we are having a fundamental misunderstanding of what constitutes a 'street fight'. As I said earlier, martial arts for me isn't about winning but surviving a fight. In my mind when I say 'street fight' I'm referring to a situation where my life or my health is in significant danger, not simply a fighting match set outside of a dojo. There is a lot more to fighting than physical skill, especially in a real world scenario. Tactics and keeping track of the environment are also important. I can't tell you how many times being trained to be aware of my environment has helped me out as an EMT.
Haha, that's exactly the example one of my old instructors used to emphasis never fighting fairly. If they have a sniper rifle, you should get a rocket launcher.
This is very true, which is why I always carry a pen rather than a knife. I can do just as much damage when properly used. I'm almost always wearing a belt too, which would substitute for a weighted chain or rope. The belt slides off rather having to remove that prong used to keep it in place, so I can remove it faster. If I have the 2 or 3 seconds I would need to remove it, I would use it to keep an attacker at a distance.
In which fights are usually over in a matter of seconds.
Yes and no. There is no fighting technique that can teach you to fight multiple opponents, but there are strategies that can be used. Any coordinated group though will take down the most skilled of fighters. Just like the knife, multiple attackers means you will get hurt. The best strategy is to get through the group quickly, or if they don't have you surrounded run the opposite way.
The multiple attacker scenario is a good one, but also because it delays your ability to get away. That and I don't want to give anyone any more time to land a lucky blow. But it depends, if your life isn't in danger and its just two alpha males growling at one another, going to the ground isn't that bad an idea.
---
There are an infinite number of 'but what if...' scenarios that can be used to destroy any theory. What I express is just my opinion that learning an adaptable skill that would serve you the best in the real world, because I've applied that adaptability and philosophy to other aspects of my life, which is why I'm successful in what I do.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
For subduing a drunk guy, yes. If a rapist is attacking you, it would be useful if you've been taken to the ground and he or she is on top of you (because again, you're not wanting to move towards the opponent but away), but more useful than this is kina mutai, which seeks well-placed bites to the nipples, the cheek, the neck, the lats, the inner thigh, and other uninterrupted bite points. These are bite points your opponent will not be able to easily counterattack you in or bite you back, and his or her impulse will be to try to shake you off, which is exactly what one wants in that situation.
Umm...
It's entirely relevant.
It's extremely relevant if we're talking about BJJ, because if the guy has a blade on him, Brazilian Ju Jitsu isn't going to help you.
Actually we are.
This is not the discussion. This is you making fun of the discussion. There is a difference.
I'm not disagreeing with you here. But the fact remains, if two or more people are after you than grappling has dramatically reduced its effectiveness.
Because the goal is to avoid the fight entirely. Submission holds are fine when, as dcartist said, you want to subdue someone who's gotten unruly. The basics of it might be useful if you're planning against an attempted rape, although kina mutai would be far more useful because a well-placed bite will leave the opponent few options other than to try to shake you off.
But if I'm being assaulted or mugged, I'm not interested in putting the guy in a sleeper hold. I'm not interested in triangle choking him. I'm interested in running the hell away. You're basically opting to remove all mobility, which isn't the point at all. The point is to get away. If I'm fighting, the reason I'm fighting is because running away is not an option, which means I am now seeking to make running away an option.
BJJ is most effective when you're facing a single unarmed opponent and you don't intend to run and you intend to take the fight to the ground or your opponent already has. Which isn't common. For instance, if someone's a bouncer in a club, or here's an example, a friend of mine is a security guard at a jewelry store, these are both occupations where the guy would want to move towards the conflict, where his intended goal is to diffuse the conflict, and his intended goal is to get his opponent into a submission hold. But even there, he's not going to want to take the fight to the ground. He's going to want to go for the sleeper hold or something.
It's never a good option, but again...
We're talking about what happens when we run out of other options.
Which is why we're discussing things like having multiple opponents, like opponents having weapons.
Otherwise, I don't really see you being able "get on your feet at any time" when you have somebody in the guard, or half guard, or the mount. It takes a little time to extricate yourself, and get up, especially if the guy on the ground is only trying to slow you down so his friend can hit you.
No. I'm claiming it doesn't give you the option to run away. That's all. All combat situations are fluid. What starts out as a 1 on 1 fight can suddenly become 1 on 3, in which case running might be the best option.
What starts out as 1 on 1 against a wimpy looking pushover, can suddenly become "Holy crap, he's wicked fast and better fighter than me".
What starts out as 1 on 1 "fair fight", can turn into unarmed vs a guy with a knife, or a razor in the boot, once he figures out you're a much better fighter than him.
Yes... but bulldoze through past one guy, or headbutt one guy in and break free, or make space with a pool cue and run, are certainly options. As long as you're standing, and just trying to maintain distance, you have the option to run in a 1 vs 2 or 3.
We're talking about what martial art is best for "street fighting".
The best way of handling a street fight is to walk away.
The second best way of handling a street fight is to run away.
The third best way to handle it is to hurt somebody enough to be able to run away.
The worst way to handle a street fight is to roll around in the guard for 5 minutes trying to get an ankle lock, on the floor of a dingy, sticky bar.
The kinds of fights where two people roll around on the floor where nobody else intervenes, are basically the kind of fight that is basically a duel or MATCH. If nobody interferes, its because it's a contest between you and the other guy for seeing who is the tougher and more skilled *******... er I mean... determining who is the "better man".
I've never been sucker punched in my life. Imagine that.
Its not an issue of "deserve".
Its getting yourself into situations where somebody might sucker punch you.
I remember I used to work with a 40ish former NFL linebacker, who became an orthotist, and he had hands that looked like... catcher's mitts, I kid you not, like ****ing bear claws. He was just all out of proportion to normal humans I knew, and about 6'1", but freakish size and quick as Hell (he did tell me that as freakishly strong and fast as he was, he said that going against magically talented Barry Sanders, he felt like he was made of stone...
Well this orthotist always put on this big show of being a calm individual, and not ever seeking a fight... he'd always protest that he avoided conflict, but I swear, EVERY DAMN Week, he'd come to us with a story about some guy who pissed him off and got up in his grill over something, whether it was traffic related, or at the Walmart... it was always something, and it was never his fault. He'd always get up in their grille, at which point they'd back down. But just listening to him, you could tell that he just acted like he would never back down from anything, and kind of liked being the biggest and baddest, and that he consciously or subconsciously intimidated people.
When you're big and bad, and you know it, you might put yourself in situations where you end up getting sucker punched, or into a fight somehow.
I'm not saying this is you.
But I've never been sucker punched. I've never been in a situation where somebody wanted to sucker punch me. My parents would be shocked to hear I got in a fight with somebody. What successful person does that? Did Jerry Yang get in fist fights? Did Roger Federer? Tiger Woods? Dr. Drew? President Obama?
Why should I?
How is "street fight" even in our vocabulary, except as a relatively rare emergency situation involving CRIMINAL VIOLENCE against your person?
I want to be able to defend myself on the street by traveling in good numbers, being physically fit, avoiding dangerous situations, backing away from conflict with humor and good will, and if truly threatened, prepared to act submissive, then suddenly strike hard and run when the opportunity presents itself.
Martial arts training will definitely help with that, but IF I let my martial arts ability to go to my head in even a SMALL way, it will probably increase my risk of eventually being hurt.
The best of both worlds is a supremely skilled martial artist who loves to fight in the ring, and shudders at the idea of risking his body without a paycheck.