How close do UFC fights come to real life self defence?

J

JKD_Silat

Guest
RMACKD said:
Those are the rules currently. But the rules when the tma and rbsd people were coming into it was no biting or eye gouging. Neither which are severely disabling techniques. Biting and eye gouging is a very small part of the martial arts arsenal and if you can not fight well without those two techniques then you probably going to get stomped on in a streetfight. There is a vid on the internet with a kung fu guy fighting an mma fighter andwhen the fight went to the ground the kung fu guy tried to claw his eyes but the mma dude just broke with his arm with a key lock and walked out unscathed. Besides that where is the litimus test for streetfighting? Are you going to beat up that drunk at the bar? That will prove nothing. Fighters are also able to turn on that switch that turns them from an average person to an aggressive "beast" I guess you could say. The adrenaline rush before a fight also is more similar to what you will feel when you are about to fight on the street than doing some role playing sparring in class. How do people know that there eye gouges or bite techniques will work on a partner if you can not use them in all out sparring? But even if the eye gouges and biting were not allowed in the early UFC's that would still mean that the mma fighters were better at groundwork, takedowns, striking, ect and the other fighters might have been better at 2 techniques. Those are not very good ...odds. The fights in the UFC do take a while because the fighters are pretty equally in skill. However when Vitor Blefort fought a practicioner of an RBSD system (under rules that allowed biting and eye gouging, the man actually viciously attacked another mans eyes in another match) it happened very quick. TMA's and RBSD lack testing grounds, you can not prove somethign is better in a life and death situation without doing it.

Agreed. "Testing grounds" are vital. I train in Jeet Kune Do, where we actually spar and try things out on each other "live". We are anything but compliant when we spar, because that would actually hurt our brothers development, and encourege a false sense of security. Sparring in all ranges of combat, armed unarmed, multiple assailents ect. is great laboratory, designed specificly to expose weaknesses to be improved upon, and raise awareness.
 
J

JKD_Silat

Guest
MJS said:
One thing that I'd like to say regarding the eye gouges and bites. IMO, they are not meant to be fight stoppers. At the very least, they can be simple distractions, used by the defender to set up other moves. They are right up there with a pinch, spitting, a low line kick, etc., to momentarily distract the attacker from his primary attack, so that you can execute your defense a little easier.

Mike
I agree completely. Even throwing change in your pocket, or whatever happens to be in you hand at the moment can serve a simmilar purpose to distract, or bridge the gap to engage. I'd like to make one point. In self defense, the goal is not to "win", but to go home to your loved ones. Even if that means doing enough to facilitate escape, and run.
 
OP
Corporal Hicks

Corporal Hicks

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 27, 2004
Messages
565
Reaction score
6
Location
England
sgtmac_46 said:
Again, the only difference between the UFC style competition and the street is the element of surprise. That's it. The techiques are the same. The only difference is that you get to deliver the punch with the other person not expecting it. That's why street fights are over so fast, not because there's a different technique that works in the ring versus the street. An understanding of Speed, Surprise and Violence of Action is all that's missing between the MMA ring and the street. Anyone thing otherwise, pick a street fight with an MMA practioner and we can solve this argument real quick. As i've said before, if eye gouging is all people are worried about, big deal. How hard is it to add eye gouges to an MMA system? As far as bites, i've been bitten in fights and it isn't a big deal. The pain I felt was very distant and dissassociated. I found the experience more annoying than painful or disabling. The last guy that did it found getting his head bashed in to the asphalt afterwards more disconcerting that I found his bite. I can further back this up by saying that i've been bitten by a couple of police K9's, including my Belgian Malinois, and no human being bites like that. Again, the experience was one of pain disassociation and I was able to work through it. A human bite is nasty, but it does nothing to render someone combat ineffective. Eye gouges are a different story, but again, you can't eye gouge anyone if you get knocked unconcious or tied up on the ground.
pick a street fight with an MMA practioner and we can solve this argument real quick?

Right that works! Why do MMA practioners think they are always superiour to us? It depends on the environment your in? Remember that MMA and BJJ is a recent system and has not have the refining of other arts had over thousands of years. Why do MMA and BJJ always shut up if you mention JKD too? Cos its superiour? Cos you cannot beat it?
 

Bod

Purple Belt
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
393
Reaction score
11
Location
London UK
TKD and Japanese karate, JKD and so on are all recent systems without thousands of years to settle in.

One of the oldest verifiable arts is Cornish wrestling (500 years old, some would say 1500 years old). It is virtually indistinguishable from the much more modern Judo (about 150 years old). Why? Because they are sports with similar training methods and clothing.

Generally people will work out what works and doesn't in a given environment in about 50 years or so.

Apart from the yoga aspects, inherent in many chinese martial arts, the rest can be figured out by anyone with the will and competence. However most people restrict themselves to a small subset of self-defence/fighting.

This is gradually happening with the UFC, where only one-on-one fighting within a certain environment is considered. That's fine by me, and I'm sure it has huge self defence benefits. It's not the be all and end all of fighting though.
 

bluenosekenpo

Orange Belt
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
86
Reaction score
4
Corporal Hicks said:
Remember that MMA and BJJ is a recent system and has not have the refining of other arts had over thousands of years.
hhmmm??? mma is a direct decendant of pankration, the following provides a general outline, sound familiar? that would put it at ~ 3000 years old. doesn't sound too recent to me.

http://www.hellenism.com/olympics/ancientgames/pankration.htm

bjj? taken from japanese jj, which was used by samurai in feudal japan. seems like it's been around for awhile too.

personally, people get too caught up in the hype of their chosen way. all arts have merit but it is ultimately the student who will prove the validity and effectiveness of an art, not the reverse. imho
:asian:
 

CMack11

Orange Belt
Joined
Sep 16, 2004
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
Location
Texas
Corporal Hicks said:
pick a street fight with an MMA practioner and we can solve this argument real quick?

Right that works! Why do MMA practioners think they are always superiour to us? It depends on the environment your in? Remember that MMA and BJJ is a recent system and has not have the refining of other arts had over thousands of years. Why do MMA and BJJ always shut up if you mention JKD too? Cos its superiour? Cos you cannot beat it?
I could be wrong, but I think you missed the point of what he was trying to say. I don't think he was saying, "go pick a fight with an MMA practicioner and you will get beaten down."

I think it was more, "Go pick a street fight with an MMA practicioner and you will see that what they train translates to street fighting pretty well."

I know for darn sure I'm not going to go pick a fight w/ most guys in the UFC any time soon.
 
OP
Corporal Hicks

Corporal Hicks

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 27, 2004
Messages
565
Reaction score
6
Location
England
CMack11 said:
I could be wrong, but I think you missed the point of what he was trying to say. I don't think he was saying, "go pick a fight with an MMA practicioner and you will get beaten down."

I think it was more, "Go pick a street fight with an MMA practicioner and you will see that what they train translates to street fighting pretty well."

I know for darn sure I'm not going to go pick a fight w/ most guys in the UFC any time soon.
I think I did, sorry!
 

Bod

Purple Belt
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
393
Reaction score
11
Location
London UK
BlueNoseKempo
hhmmm??? mma is a direct decendant of pankration, the following provides a general outline, sound familiar? that would put it at ~ 3000 years old. doesn't sound too recent to me.

http://www.hellenism.com/olympics/a.../pankration.htm

bjj? taken from japanese jj, which was used by samurai in feudal japan. seems like it's been around for awhile too.

Your history is a bit out bnk. UFC is by no means a direct descendant of Pankration. Pankration was an ancient olympic competition with few rules. Then there was a 3000 year gap. I'm sure people all over the world were fighting no rules competitions in the mean time, but that is not 'direct descent'.

BJJ is taken from Judo and not Japanese Jujitsu. Judo was developed to be considerably different from much of the Japanese Jujitsu that preceded it. Also the BJJ guys developed BJJ further tan the Judo from which it evolved.

Although there is nothing new undere the sun, nothing is truly old either.
 

bluenosekenpo

Orange Belt
Joined
Apr 12, 2004
Messages
86
Reaction score
4
Bod said:
Your history is a bit out bnk. UFC is by no means a direct descendant of Pankration. Pankration was an ancient olympic competition with few rules. Then there was a 3000 year gap. I'm sure people all over the world were fighting no rules competitions in the mean time, but that is not 'direct descent'.

BJJ is taken from Judo and not Japanese Jujitsu. Judo was developed to be considerably different from much of the Japanese Jujitsu that preceded it. Also the BJJ guys developed BJJ further tan the Judo from which it evolved.

Although there is nothing new undere the sun, nothing is truly old either.
i think i left a link to follow that explained what pankration is, point taken though, i shouldn't have said direct, but you'd have to be extremely naive and narrow minded to think that pankration didn't have an impact on the current MMA's.

bjj? judo influence? yup. judo founded in late 1800's by j. kano, derived from japanese jj, but made kinder and gentler for sport(and public consumption). so, historically speaking it is in fact derived from jjj.

however, if these are your views on the history of these arts, that's ok, we just read different books.
 

Bod

Purple Belt
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
393
Reaction score
11
Location
London UK
I was a bit intrigued by some of the claims from the site:

Rules of the Game
All the holds used in wrestling and all the blows used in boxing were allowed. The only things forbidden were biting and gouging. Therefore, the pankration was the most dangerous and toughest of all events, since victory was sought with no consideration of the danger to the body or the life of one's opponent.

The pankration had two forms:

Kato pankration, in which the contest continued after the opponents fell to the ground. It was used in games.
Ano pankration, in which the opponents had to remain standing. It was used in training or in preliminary contests. This was a much lighter and safer form.
Pankratiasts did not wear gloves as competitors in boxing did, so the blows were not as painful; however, a pankratiast was allowed to hold his opponent with one hand and hit him with the other, unlike boxing.

Later on finger snapping was also banned. The rules progressed as competition did.

I'm surprised they think the standing game was safer than the ground game. Ground fighting is generally safer to practise than standing fighting in my experience. Also gloves do not make punching more painful. In fact gloves make boxing safer for both opponents. I know this having spoken to some ofthe guys at my boxing gym who do bare knuckle fighting on the side.

As for BJJ having a Judo influence, well that is pretty much accepted as the chap who taught Helio Gracie was from the Kodokan. A small amount of time doing both will convince you that they are very similar arts.

Still, arts grow. Things get rediscovered, just as the Gracies introduced the world to wrestling again, 40 years after Judo was the 'ultimate' martial art.

History is interesting, but is ultimately a distraction. Only training, now, will make you (and me) a better fighter.
 

sgtmac_46

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
4,753
Reaction score
188
Corporal Hicks said:
pick a street fight with an MMA practioner and we can solve this argument real quick?

Right that works! Why do MMA practioners think they are always superiour to us? It depends on the environment your in? Remember that MMA and BJJ is a recent system and has not have the refining of other arts had over thousands of years. Why do MMA and BJJ always shut up if you mention JKD too? Cos its superiour? Cos you cannot beat it?
Don't forget...JKD IS MMA. Doubt that? Remember what Bruce said: What works! UFC isn't a style...It's ALL styles that work. CMack11 was right, though, my point wasn't that an MMA practioner would beat everyone, just that the best way to test it would be to do it on the street.
 

sgtmac_46

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 19, 2004
Messages
4,753
Reaction score
188
Bod said:
Your history is a bit out bnk. UFC is by no means a direct descendant of Pankration. Pankration was an ancient olympic competition with few rules. Then there was a 3000 year gap. I'm sure people all over the world were fighting no rules competitions in the mean time, but that is not 'direct descent'.

BJJ is taken from Judo and not Japanese Jujitsu. Judo was developed to be considerably different from much of the Japanese Jujitsu that preceded it. Also the BJJ guys developed BJJ further tan the Judo from which it evolved.

Although there is nothing new undere the sun, nothing is truly old either.
I think the point is that we all keep coming back to no rules fighting that involves punching, kicking, grappling, wrestling, etc. In that sense, MMA is the world's oldest style of competition.
 

wingchun100

Senior Master
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
3,300
Reaction score
522
Location
Troy NY
I saw a UFC championship fight the other and noticed how almost all of the time the fights end up ground fighting of some kind. Is the UFC rules of fighting closer to self defence than to sparring do you think? Or does it depend?

Cheers

It's real to an extent. A lot of fights go to the ground, but then again you wouldn't see a situation where two guys were grappling on the ground for a half hour or more. (I remember an early UFC fight where one guy had mounted the other, but then it stalemated...and the clock went over FORTY minutes.) At some point, an officer would come along to break it up.
 

TaiChiTJ

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
491
Reaction score
47
We all imagine the fight, where we use our training and skills. We may or may not include in this imagining low light conditions, uneven terrain, multiple attackers, objects like cars or furniture in our way, knives and guns, the impact of our emotional state as the encounter proceeds, becoming partially incapacitated during the fight, attackers under the influence of powerful mind-altering substances or the need to defend a friend or loved one as well as ourselves.

It is a daunting prospect.

I am reluctant to rule out any training approach however I can analyze any approach from many different angles and decide whether or not it is for me.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
21,451
Reaction score
6,312
I have done a mma fight and have had street fights and they are pretty similar. The skills transfer.

This is also the anecdotal feed back from others who have done both.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
21,451
Reaction score
6,312
It's real to an extent. A lot of fights go to the ground, but then again you wouldn't see a situation where two guys were grappling on the ground for a half hour or more. (I remember an early UFC fight where one guy had mounted the other, but then it stalemated...and the clock went over FORTY minutes.) At some point, an officer would come along to break it up.

In theory that should work in your favor as hopefully you are the innocent victim in that engagement.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
21,451
Reaction score
6,312
TKD and Japanese karate, JKD and so on are all recent systems without thousands of years to settle in.

One of the oldest verifiable arts is Cornish wrestling (500 years old, some would say 1500 years old). It is virtually indistinguishable from the much more modern Judo (about 150 years old). Why? Because they are sports with similar training methods and clothing.

Generally people will work out what works and doesn't in a given environment in about 50 years or so.

Apart from the yoga aspects, inherent in many chinese martial arts, the rest can be figured out by anyone with the will and competence. However most people restrict themselves to a small subset of self-defence/fighting.

This is gradually happening with the UFC, where only one-on-one fighting within a certain environment is considered. That's fine by me, and I'm sure it has huge self defence benefits. It's not the be all and end all of fighting though.


You didn't have the collaboration then or the numbers practicing martial arts or the technology to share Information like we do now. Martial arts in general is getting better.
 

Jason

White Belt
Joined
Apr 11, 2014
Messages
5
Reaction score
4
I saw a UFC championship fight the other and noticed how almost all of the time the fights end up ground fighting of some kind. Is the UFC rules of fighting closer to self defence than to sparring do you think? Or does it depend?

Cheers

It doesn't. UFC and those alike are social events that people can enjoy. It looks nothing like violence. The majority of martial artists/self-defense practitioners/competition fighters have a very skewed misconception of violence. MMA fighters are amazing athletes but training in that manner for personal protection can get you killed. You do want someone to end up on the ground but you want that to be the other guy because you are shutting him down. SUCCESSFUL VIOLENCE is not a dual. There is always someone giving the the violence and the one receiving it. Not a give and take. The only thing that you should be focusing on when approached with asocial behavior is finding a really important part of his anatomy and wrecking it so that it doesn't work anymore. Then you keep doing that until he can no longer function as a threat. Anything short of that and your idea of violence is wrong and can get you killed. Step into reality. Violence is one of the easiest things you can do. It is available to anyone and it can happen to anyone. Once someone gets it right on someone else there is nothing they can do. This we can both respect and take advantage of.
 
Last edited:

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
20,135
Reaction score
5,651
Location
Covington, WA
In my opinion, mixed martial artists are excellent fighters. At the level that most people train in martial arts, I'll take a friendly, amateur MMAist who is self aware over just about anybody else in a self defense situation.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 

punisher73

Senior Master
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Messages
3,734
Reaction score
788
In my opinion, mixed martial artists are excellent fighters. At the level that most people train in martial arts, I'll take a friendly, amateur MMAist who is self aware over just about anybody else in a self defense situation.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Agreed, also why MOST contact sport fighters will do better than most casual strip mall martial artists. The highlighted part is what is important I think. With more and more "MMA gyms" popping up we are starting to see the empty shell of MMA taught without the harder training aspects. Just like the spread of BJJ, we are seeing some schools that only teach sparring from the knees and what works in the sport arena and don't concentrate on the self-defense portions that were originally taught in GJJ. That doesn't mean that those arts aren't good or effective, but when the training paradigm shifts for ANY martial art the end result will also shift.

It doesn't take much to "tweak" your MMA program and understand the "hows" and "whys" that a good self-defense program teaches. An MMAist is VERY aware of distancing and environment, it's part of their sport. They also learn how to use the environment to work their techniques. I also get frustrated when people talk about a BJJer or MMAist and think the ONLY thing that they do is close the distance and then take it to the ground, as if that is their only option. It's not. In fact, I would say knowing how to avoid the takedown and having the ground skills to avoid and nullify the ground attack and get back up on your feet is a skill that ALL people should learn how to do. It should also be learned what to do IF you are both on the ground and can't disengage immediately what to do. There are many RSBD schools that do instruct what could be looked at as an MMA approach with all the dirty tactics included that is trained for self-defense.
 
Top