Which arts are closest to a real fight?

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Have done a survey in the past about this 9 out of 10 end up on the ground
Seems it is the other way around and not even that less than 10% of REAL fights ended on the ground


Oh and in a Real fight you are most likely to face an unskilled person so what does it matter who is the best,

UFC Pride or Pancrase prove who's best bust that doesn't mean that the others won't work in real life against the unskilled attacker

Everyone has a TV but not everyone needs to have the best TV some are satisfied with the fact that they can just watch TV, they don't need the sharpest biggest and brightest picture

Not everyone needs the best MA, they just need one that works for them and no UFC has ever disproven that the others work in real life situations


Best MA ...Common sense

[darrianation]

I second Toudiyama[NL]!

[Zero18]

wow!

Great job! Those Damn water bottles kick ass! Not!
Suck it up tough guy. tell me when you really survive some dangerous situation.

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Also no ART is closest to a real fight, it is the kind of sparring/competition that can be closest to a real fight.

In that MMA events like UFC or Pride come closest but are still nowhere near a real fight, for the events the 9 out of 10 to the ground is true, in real life most people do not want to roll on a dancefloor with broken glass unless they are a Fakir or something

Maybe we should start a poll about it here: How many of your real fights ended up on the floor? and what are you a grappler, a striker or allround?

[darrianation]

I have been in 8 street fights since the age of 16 and only one went to the ground. I am not counting any fights before this because ementary and fights in junior high really don't count in my book and are generally not as serious.

[osopardo]

Originally posted by MuayThaiFighter
...In every one of my fights one of us always ended up on the ground.

Might wanna pay more attention to your balance and footwork

Seriously tho', some points have been made regarding the difference between grappling, grabbing and "going to the ground" which need to be taken into consideration.

Being grabbed by the front of the shirt as a set up to a punch is not the same thing as having your opponent shoot for a single-leg or a hip throw or a head lock/choke maneuver. Those are very high risk moves in a no-rules encounter, and they usually backfire. The examples you cite indicate the results but not necessarily the intent.

My point is that going to the ground is to be avoided, even if that's the style in which you're most proficient.

While I recognize the importance of training in BOTH striking AND grappling, I maintain that "going to the ground", meaning intentionally taking your opponent to the ground to wrestle him with judo, jiu-jitsu type techniques, is effective only if you have an unlimited amount of time and are guaranteed that no one will interfere. That's just not the way it works "out there" where the objective should be to finish it quickly with as little comitment as possible. Minimal commitment, meaning using one fist or one foot or one elbow or one knee to incapacitate your opponent while maintaining your balance, mobility and attention open to other options, like focusing on the next attacker, or running.

[jubei__kun]

my opinion and it is just an opinion is that in terms for real fighting

u need to know a combination of both striking and grappling doing 1 or the other is too risky for real fighting.

I mean the weakness of just doing muay thai is that it is strictly strikes only, there is no defense against throws or grappling the fighter usually tries to keep them at a distance, but eventualy the grappler will move in and take the fighter down. At this point the muay thai fighter is helpless.

Then the weakness of grappling for real fighting is that it is never as simple as a 1 on 1 fight (ie. ufc/ pride etc) there r always the chance of another oponent coming in mid battle or starting 1:2 or whatever. Generally even the best grappler has a hard time dealing with more than 1 fighter. And sure there r technques for dealing with more than 1 oponent but these r sloppy and ineffective at best. If a grappler grapples some1 to the floor then starts doin his stuff (locks, chockes etc) and another attacker appears he'll just kick the grappler on the floor best the grappler can do is let go and run away.

when i say know both to be a real fighter i dont mean be a stricker and a grappler simply because even if u r a muay thai fighter that knows ju jutsu lets say if u start grapplin an opponent u may be better prepared to defend urself against him of course but the rule about more than 1 oponent still applies. The best thing for dealing with more than 1 oponent is infact san shou which is similar to muay thai only that it allows short brief intervals ( 2-4 secs max) of grappling to simulate dealing with more than 1 oponent.

so the idea is combine grappling (so u can defend against grappling more effectively) and learn san shou or a similar fighting form.

[jubaji]

Originally posted by osopardo



My point is that going to the ground is to be avoided, even if that's the style in which you're most proficient.

While I recognize the importance of training in BOTH striking AND grappling, I maintain that "going to the ground", meaning intentionally taking your opponent to the ground to wrestle him with judo, jiu-jitsu type techniques, is effective only if you have an unlimited amount of time and are guaranteed that no one will interfere. That's just not the way it works "out there"

B.S.

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Originally posted by jubaji



B.S.

Great argument!

[osopardo]

Originally posted by jubaji
B.S.

Originally posted by Toudiyama
Great arguement!

LMAO!

[Toudiyama[NL]]

Going to the ground isn't something you want to do near a dancefloor riddled with broken glass or in a very busy club
1 minutre on the floor and the doormen would pick you up and throw you out

Our roads are asphalt and bricks, not a place were you want to roll , in Brazil there is probably less hard roads so one would go much quicker to the ground

[jubaji]

Originally posted by Toudiyama[NL]
Going to the ground isn't something you want to do near a dancefloor riddled with broken glass or in a very busy club
1 minutre on the floor and the doormen would pick you up and throw you out

Our roads are asphalt and bricks, not a place were you want to roll , in Brazil there is probably less hard roads so one would go much quicker to the ground

[MuayThaiFighter]

Originally posted by osopardo


Might wanna pay more attention to your balance and footwork

Seriously tho', some points have been made regarding the difference between grappling, grabbing and "going to the ground" which need to be taken into consideration.

Being grabbed by the front of the shirt as a set up to a punch is not the same thing as having your opponent shoot for a single-leg or a hip throw or a head lock/choke maneuver. Those are very high risk moves in a no-rules encounter, and they usually backfire. The examples you cite indicate the results but not necessarily the intent.

My point is that going to the ground is to be avoided, even if that's the style in which you're most proficient.

While I recognize the importance of training in BOTH striking AND grappling, I maintain that "going to the ground", meaning intentionally taking your opponent to the ground to wrestle him with judo, jiu-jitsu type techniques, is effective only if you have an unlimited amount of time and are guaranteed that no one will interfere. That's just not the way it works "out there" where the objective should be to finish it quickly with as little comitment as possible. Minimal commitment, meaning using one fist or one foot or one elbow or one knee to incapacitate your opponent while maintaining your balance, mobility and attention open to other options, like focusing on the next attacker, or running.

I never said I was the one to go to the ground infact I never do but chances are an unskilled fighter will go to ground, which proves that at least one person does go to the ground.One on one and you better win the fight when you get opponent to ground but if you have opponent on ground and some of his buds jump out of no where you are screwed unless you have enough time to take off.

[MuayThaiFighter]

Originally posted by jubei__kun
my opinion and it is just an opinion is that in terms for real fighting

u need to know a combination of both striking and grappling doing 1 or the other is too risky for real fighting.

I mean the weakness of just doing muay thai is that it is strictly strikes only, there is no defense against throws or grappling the fighter usually tries to keep them at a distance, but eventualy the grappler will move in and take the fighter down. At this point the muay thai fighter is helpless.

Then the weakness of grappling for real fighting is that it is never as simple as a 1 on 1 fight (ie. ufc/ pride etc) there r always the chance of another oponent coming in mid battle or starting 1:2 or whatever. Generally even the best grappler has a hard time dealing with more than 1 fighter. And sure there r technques for dealing with more than 1 oponent but these r sloppy and ineffective at best. If a grappler grapples some1 to the floor then starts doin his stuff (locks, chockes etc) and another attacker appears he'll just kick the grappler on the floor best the grappler can do is let go and run away.

when i say know both to be a real fighter i dont mean be a stricker and a grappler simply because even if u r a muay thai fighter that knows ju jutsu lets say if u start grapplin an opponent u may be better prepared to defend urself against him of course but the rule about more than 1 oponent still applies. The best thing for dealing with more than 1 oponent is infact san shou which is similar to muay thai only that it allows short brief intervals ( 2-4 secs max) of grappling to simulate dealing with more than 1 oponent.

so the idea is combine grappling (so u can defend against grappling more effectively) and learn san shou or a similar fighting form.

You obviously know nothing about MuayThai.

Muay Thai is more then just strikes we have kicks,knees etc.we also have stand up wrestling.We often try to get in close and wrestle person to go for back position or simply to get the clinche,swing person around and start kneeing etc.We just don't go for take down.

"but eventualy the grappler will move in and take the fighter down. At this point the muay thai fighter is helpless."

What a bunch of B.S. once again you have no clue what you are talking about.

It isn't as easy as you make it seem since we use alot of knees.We could easily knee a grappler while he shoots in for take down at same time a grappler may know how to block a knee and be able to take a muaythai fighter to ground but in the end the fight can go either way.

As muaythai fighters we start from a distance and then we try and get in close for grappling just a grappler does except we grapple standing until we get the clinche or are able to go for the back,either way we work ourselves in close too.

Although muaythai fighters do fight from distance and come in with multiple punches and kickes etc.we do still try to get in close when we see fit.

However since I do pankration we not only fight muaythai and come in close for clinche and stand up wrestling we also go in for throws and take downs just as seen in wrestling,jujitsu,judo etc.

[Roland]

Originally posted by Toudiyama[NL]
Going to the ground isn't something you want to do near a dancefloor riddled with broken glass

You need to go to better clubs.

Dance floors LITTERED with broken glass?