most effective street fighting style?

[Tant01]

Too funny!

These Mario Sperry tapes are so badass, I don't even want them anymore! Act now!

...............

Thanks for the grin Mr. B. LOL

[shaolin-warrior]

These Mario Sperry tapes are so badass, I don't even want them anymore! Act now!

O.K. O.K. I don't even have a patio........

[shadex]

what style would you train in, if your purpose were to be a good street fighter?

I do train to be a good street fighter. I love all the old philopshy's and everything, but to me, martial arts is the epidomy of effectivness. If it doesnt work in a real scenerio then it's historical to me, nothing more.

I usually train in
Muai Thai for punches, kicks, and base graples, knee's and elbows
Snake/dragon kung fu for strikes and muscle/organ attacks
Jiu jitsu/judo/akido for grapples and throws
akido/Greek wrestling for movement and positioning
Jet kun do for momentum and power in the other arts moves
Muai Thai/shotokan for blocks and stance
Jet kun do/shotokan for movement
Ninjitsu for using your envirement as a weapon and misdirection/disarming

I've found that all martial arts except jeet kun do (because it pretty much is a pot luck of martial arts) is useless in a real fight alone. Jiu Jitsu is great...if the oppoenent is alone. Mui thai is great for multiple opponents when your trying to just cause damage, but if you are grounded your screwed, where in jiu jitsu you need to knock them down to really be able to use the bread and butter of the art.

And personally i find the current sporting term of mixed martial arts as insulting when compared to street fights, because most MMA guys get there butts kicked in real fights simply because 1. there is no rules, 2. there are no rules on where to strike, 3. there are no rules on how many people can be involved, 4. the time limit is up to your suroundings and the cops. Mainly because the word has become synonomous with UFC and the like. But again thats just my oppinion

[jubaji]

and isolated anectdotes count for nothing

most MMA guys get there butts kicked in real fights

Oh? "Most"? Do we have some statistical evidence to back up this claim?


No, we do not.

[Jace]

While all of you are bringing up very good points and counter points, I believe that you are all approaching this question from the wrong perspective. There are things you are not considering.

For one thing, training for a man and woman are going to have to be different and comparing the styles for the best self-defense needs then to also be different. Statistics show that men are more likely to get attacked by a group. Women are more likely to get attacked one-on-one and by someone they already know. These considerations are important when this kind of discussion arises. It might be more beneficial for a woman to know some BJJ ground techniques incase of a possible rape than a guy to know BJJ. The guy will probably want to remain standing in preperation for more than one attacker - so perhaps a striking art might be more appropriate.

The best thing to train in for self-defense is a self-defense course. No praticular name of a style should be attatched to it because obviously there are positive and negative qualities to all styles and methods. There are courses available (such as R.A.D.) that focus on specific points of self-defense.

Personally, I think that by trying to decide "what art is the best" for real fights, you are truely limiting your potential to become prepared for a real fight. Also, I think we can mostly agree that having some training, in any martial arts, is better than the "average joe" attacker that has none.

[Anti]

very nice, Jace

[Jace]

I just have problems with weapons as an effective means of self defense. It doesn't make sense for me to carry a weapon around with me all the time inbetween my classes on a university campus or into a grocery store. What about in an airport?

On top of that, it requires years of study with weapons to be able to use them properly when a life-threatening situation arises when you aren't expecting it. Biologically there are several things that happen when a person is attacked. One of the most notable things is the loss of fine motor skills - for example, being able to pull a knife out of your pocket. The more appropriate skills to learn first would be to defend with simple hand to hand exercises.

There are some things that could be argued. I've done a little training in escrima and many of those moves are gross motor moves. It doesn't take a lot of concentration or thinking to swing a stick and the art is pretty versatile. For example, a friend of mine knew a woman who practiced it and got attacked. She happend to have an umbrella with her that she could use effectively against her attacker the way she had been practicing with sticks.

Then again, it doesn't take a lot of concentration to fire a gun either. The problem I have with fire arms is that I would not want to carry one with me everywhere I go and the law-issues that arise. To be "self-defense" your reaction must be controlled. Just because you have been attacked, does not give you the okay to kill someone. Also - aiming the gun in a high-stress situation is going to take practice. Firing is easy, but hitting the target (praticularly in the way you intend to) is a little more difficult.

I'm not against weapons. I just think it is better to learn the basics first and then start training more refined methods of self-defense. It takes a lot more dedication to train in a weapons based art than one that isn't.

[jubaji]

effectiveness is not even an issue

I just have problems with weapons as an effective means of self defense. It doesn't make sense for me to carry a weapon around with me all the time inbetween my classes on a university campus or into a grocery store. What about in an airport?.

I dunno. It seems you don't have to search very hard to find examples of situations on college campuses and in grocery stores where a weapon might have come in handy. When you get to the airport you are in the presence of lots of armed people who are there to protect you, so I guess you can ease up a little.

[Jace]

There are situations where it would be beneficial, yes, but practical - no. Of course I'm going to a very small very safe university in a very small very safe town. If I were in a more populated area, I might consider carrying some form of weapon on me more often. I just don't think that advertising the fact that I have a weapon would be good.

It would be just my luck to come across someone who says, "she's got a weapon - that must mean she is looking for a fight" which is not the message I want to send out.

[jubaji]

Of course I'm going to a very small very safe university in a very small very safe town. .

Yeah, there were a lot of folks at a certain university in Virginia who used to say something like that...

[Jace]

It is not quite the same. A lot of people feel safer than they should, especially during their college years. I'm much more paranoid than that and fully know that things like that can/will happen. I'm not saying its a good situation, but I do think that violence is unavoidable.

That being said - from my understanding of what happend at Virginia Tech - no amount of martial arts skills would have saved me anyway. That was less of a situation where self-defense could have been used and more like...well - slaughter.

[jubaji]

Are you kidding? ONE person with a weapon and some gumption might have saved upwards of 28 lives that day!

[Jace]

Weapons are banned from universities. And while having a weapon might make me feel safer - I imagine if I had one it would make the people around me very uncomfortable.

[Red Rum]

At the end of the day, a lot of it is luck. You could arm yourself with a gun and you would stand a better chance than without a gun. But what if you are facing two guys with guns? Or three? Or four?

We live ina society where no-one is invincible. As we have found out to a great cost - it only takes one man to go off the edge. You could live a life where you carry every weapon known to man, a flak jacket, helmet and still get shot in the throat.

I think the original debate was about that chance confrontation with a guy on the street. For my two cents I believe MT if you are built for it and wing chun if you're not

[jubaji]

'effectiveness' is not even an issue in that case

Weapons are banned from universities. .

Yeah, and if they hadn't been banned at one particular university on one particular day...