Jun Fan Gung Fu (JKD)

[Karateka]

Once again, I am not here to disrespect, just to point out my views.

 

I am a tournament fighter. I have been in street fights. I can fight. I have one almost every one. I have used Kumite and Kata techniques to win. Even though we skin touch, we still have the speed and power, just control, which is what most Martial Arts are about.

 

There is no better style of fighting, just what suits you.

 

 

[Tim Greer]

It makes sense that it could possibly make you hesitate or hold back or get used to holding back and not really be making any real contact like you would in a "street fight" with no rules, etc. and it might be true to a point, but if we're talking about the difference between hitting hard and really hitting hard to do serious harm, it might not be so far removed.

 

However, it's definitely not the same for many people. Variables like fear, panic, unfamiliarity, surroundings, unexpected and serious results, etc. are removed. This makes a very large difference in how someone fights, how aggressive they are and the decisions that make, as opposed to a controlled fight of any kind -- and I mean _any kind_. Any fight that has even one rule, or that you know will be stopped if you're knocked out cold or dying, definitely changes the variables of the fight. There's a comfort zone, you know the limits of how badly you are going to possibly be injured.

 

That's not to say controlled fights are safe and you don't stand a chance of being injured, but most of these controlled fights tend to frown upon techniques that are used for nothing else other than crippling, maiming or killing an opponent.

 

In a controlled fight, there's no chance of multiple people ganging up on you, having knifes suddenly enter the scenario, guns, anything. No rocks, broken glass, gravel or pot holes on the pavement of a parking lot of a badly kept shopping center. They will have to stop if so much damage is done, or they will be forced to stop. This increases your safety (comfort zone). This can't be ignored in any controlled fight, it makes a difference.

 

Anything else, making it the same, would indeed be the same, and that would simply be a fight, not a tournament, no rules, people get seriously hurt, crippled or killed. It would be a disturbing thing to see people test their abilities by testing the boundaries to such a degree, so all we can rely on is controlled fights. NHB and UFC are a complete joke to me to watch, they have those elements that do indeed provide a safety zone. Even in a NHB fight held in a 3rd world country with "no rules", I don't think the crowd is going to be "okay" with the victor of the fight continuing to slam his opponents head into a curb until he's dead, given that the opponent has been unconscious for a few minutes and isn't contributing anything to the event, other than showing how limp a body can be.

 

It's also worth mentioning, that in some of these controlled fights, that some styles do work better than others. Some are more effective, due to the environment. This can limit a fighter's style. I.e., a lot of the NHB and UFC fights, look like a boxing ring, or have a cage with canvas in the middle. Ref's, a nice mat to bounce on and not too much (albeit, enough for most things) room to move around in. Often, gloves are used, making grabs, strikes and the like much less effective.

 

I've seen a lot of people use those are examples of what art is superior than other arts, based on the results of the art the winner used in the UFC or NHB fight. I've seen the video's of some of them, and they all end up being these ridiculous, WWF wresting looking events. Simply because that was what they all ended up doing. Be it they entered saying they were a Wing Chun stylist, or BJJ, they all did the same thing. I look at it this way, it doesn't matter if someone's a great BJJ or Kung Fu stylist, if they are in a boxing ring, with those limitations, Mike Tyson would rip their head off, no if's, and's or buts about it.

 

Due to these reasons, people have claimed that certain style's are weak. Well, I've seen lot's of styles put into a NHB of UFC mix, and they never end up doing them. People claim that's because they try and fight like the other guy, because they see how much better it is. This is preposterous. Simply put, due to limitations set by rules or equipment, a lot of the brutal effectiveness of many arts, are diminished and useless, yes. But, that's a given, given the variables.

 

Had some of these been real fights, it's not easy to always say how seemed more able, but things would change drastically -- but then again, who's going to demonstrate this effectiveness in the name of 'sport'? That would be insane. Of course, that refusal of some practitioners to go out and commit these actions to "prove" something, are why some people contend this to be a fact and how some arts are weak. I believe some art's are indeed weak, and simply because some aren't for me. I.e., in NHB and UFC, you see a lot of big, fat, slow fighters using their weight and power to win the fights, trying to take each other to the ground -- and often completely ignore any other strategy and don't bother with much fighting while standing. Even if fights usually go to the ground, it's foolish to have that be your best position, since you'd realistically not want to be there, but you do want to be prepared if you do get there -- and you likely might.

 

I wouldn't dare make the mistake of assuming any style is weak. People think Tai Chi and think of elderly citizen's trying to stay fit or active. You look into Tai Chi Chaun and see how there's a great number of techniques for real fighting, brutal.. breaks, locks, throws, strikes, etc. Sealing artery's, the breath, bone and joint misplacements and breaks, nerve cavity presses and a whole lot more. In fact, some very effective techniques. This is the same for Karate, there's so many styles... I'm sure some suck, but I've seen some styles that have techniques (and practice them myself) that have some very effective techniques that I don't see having much chance of failing, provided they are executed properly.

 

I personally don't take much creed in any tournament, they aren't meant to show everything in every aspect... They might mean absolutely nothing. That, however, doesn't mean that when faced with a real altercation against a skilled fighter in a street brawl, that the same person that wasn't trying to seriously harm someone in a tournament of sport, can't or isn't going to be able to seriously harm someone if they feel a real threat to their body or life. Of course, this is all my opinion, each person and situation is different... there's too many variables.

 

 

[Apollo]

Thaiboxerken- No, of course I don't mean Dim Mak. Dim Mak is not real.

 

Thaiboxerken, those rules were copied straight out of the UFC rules my friend. Pride has less limitations (such as kicking a downed opponent.) But even in Pride, there are still no elbows to the head.

 

Thaiboxerken, since you have never fought in a Muay Thai Ring, and I am guessing you have never fought MMA style, you can't argue like someone who has been. I have been in MMA fights in Japan, and full contact stand up matches in Japan. (where any style can compete) No one there thinks it is a real fight, or even close.

 

Maurice Smith, Bas Rutten, listen to their interviews of http://www.kickboxing.com. Their idea of self defense is a gun. (if thats what they like, more power to them.) They are not trained to fight on the street, but in a ring.

 

Again, if point karate fighters want to play tag sparring to improve reaction, speed, etc. then more power to them.

 

"At least a MMA competitor can actually fight in a street brawl."

 

Some people join the martial arts to get enough confidence so they can avoid fights. 99 percent of the time you can just apologize for whatever the problem is or run away. That phrase wasn't a good argument.

 

Tim Greer:

 

Very nice post, I agree.

 

 

[thaiboxerken]

Yes they are sports. I haven't competed but I am a trainer of amatuer fighters in these events.

 

If you don't think Maurice Smith or Bas Rutten can whip butt in a street brawl, you're out of your mind. A gun is perfered, or any weapon, but such items cannot always be carried. They train for the ring AND the street. I'm sure these fighters train in self-defense methods.

 

Karate fighters can play tag all they want. To me, it's boring and doesn't do anything more than prove who can touch who first.

 

In MMA and Muay Thai, at least we can know who is able to punch hard and put all their knowledge together in a continous fight.

 

 

[Apollo]

The only "self defense" that Bas Rutten and Moe Smith train in is the basic "he grapbs your hair, you take hsi arm and do an armlock" type scenarios. That is for their videos on Panther Productions. They train for the ring, NOT for the street.

 

I think Moe and Bas can handle themselves excellently in a real situation, I never doubted that. My point was that they know their training is for sport, not for a real encounter. There is a BIG difference, as real street training also involves a lot of mental training, firearms and first aid training, etc.

 

Muay Thai fighters (by themselves) have never done well in MMA. (Anthony Macias in UFC 4 was beaten by Dan Severn, Moe Smith has a halfway decent record, but he sucked in Pancrase when he didn't know submissions, the same with Bas Rutten.) So I guess there is no point in training in Muay Thai either, according to your reasoning?

 

 

[thaiboxerken]

If there was no point in training Muay Thai, why do 80% of MMA fighters train in Muay Thai. It's apparent that the dominant styles in MMA are Muay Thai and Boxing for stand-up and BJJ for groundwork. This cannot be disputed. Give me a break.

 

_________________

 

Just kick 'em, they'll understand.

 

This Message was edited by: Patrick on Jun 27, 2001 11:44am

[Apollo]

I know it is worthwhile to train in, I was being sarcastic. It is not set in stone that you have to train BJJ, Muay Thai, and boxing.

 

What about all the wrestlers that have beaten the crap out of experts in BJJ? (Sakuraba beating 4 Gracies, Mark Coleman beating Alan Goes, Dan Henderson knocking out Renzo Gracie, etc.)

 

 

[Patrick]

Ken,

 

Please check your PMs, thank you.

 

 

[thaiboxerken]

Sakuraba isn't just a wrestler. He's a submission fighter. He actually learned more than just how to pin a person. Oh, and the amount of people training in groundwork now is pretty much because of BJJ. AS for coleman and severn.... they really don't use much technique to win fights, they are just BIG.

 

 

[Tim Greer]

"Oh, and the amount of people training in groundwork now is pretty much because of BJJ."

 

Training in groundwork for _what_ though? Many of these techniques they base their ground fighting skills on have been around in many arts/styles for a very long time. I'm not saying you aren't aware of this, but for the sake of viewers reading this thread, although BJJ is great to know and know well for a lot of people, there are still many other styles that deal with ground fighting very effectively as well -- and it seems that a lot of people don't realize this, due to what's most the most popular effective styles right now (or for the last more than so-many years, I admit). However, it depends on the medium too.

 

Some things work better in different situations, BJJ, Boxing and other such things definitely work very well in UFC, NHB, but aren't always the best for everyone for every situation -- unless they are going to fight in a ring, in NHB/UFC, etc. Most of the UFC/NHB events I've seen (in fact, about all of them), consisted of two large men waiting for the opportunity for a take down. I don't think UFC/NHB does BJJ justice, or any art for that matter -- even if BJJ does work well or better than most in that meduim. In other words, I think it's a mistake to use UFC/NHB as factual effectiveness, based on rules, the variables involved, etc.

 

Boxing works very well for Boxing, in a ring, and very effective out of the ring too. But I wouldn't use Boxing to back up how much more effective it is than other styles, simply because you're not going to see those put to use very much, not in the same frequency, if at all, such as Boxing, BJJ, etc. I'm not going to go on about how people can't safely use certain styles for demonstration or fighting either. I've just seen a lot of Boxing, NHB/UFC, BJJ'ers get really hard up about how it's just flat out the most realistic art. I believe it is in a manner of speaking, because as you've even said yourself, more people can learn to use it effectively in a real situation faster than most other styles. For a lot of people, it's a good, fast and effective choice. It might be all they need. However, with Boxing and a lot of BJJ techniques, you have to pretty much rely on your body mass and strength, which not everyone is build to be able to take advantage of them. That's certainly a good argument as to why people say "What art is best, or best for you?".

 

Most people are out of shape, slow, and, to be blant, fat slobs. Also, there's the skinny, wirely types too. Few people are in shape and built to effectively use these techniques that you see in NHB/UFC. This is a good example of a lot of fights with a lot of big men, and mostly using very little talent. Don't get me wrong, that's not to say BJJ doesn't take talent, or any other arts used. I've just seen too many of those events and NONE of them were at all impressive. No matter what art these people claimed to use, they always (ALWAYS) ended up using basic BJJ techniques and boxing. People come in claiming to be Wing Chun experts and end up making a fool of themselves, almost like they wanted to be taken down. Any event that the fighters usually rely on take downs to be effective, is something that most people will recognize as limiting. That's not to say, once again, that those arts are limiting, but it is in that medium and doesn't make a good example.

 

I've used some simply (for lack of a better word) awesome ground fighting techniques in many styles, such as Tai Jutsu, various styles of Kung Fu, etc. It would be a mistake to assume that these art's dismiss this or rely on mainly on stand up and striking techniques. Not only do they deal with ground fighting very effectively, but they help you to deal with not going down in the first place, whereas (and I hate to say it) that BJJ lacks. Obviously BJJ does deal with that, but I can definitely say not on the same level. It's just different.

 

I think a great combination of the many styles that do have realistic and effective techniques definitely are the best choice, and you do that, don't you, Ken? I don't know what you've taken, other than what's on your signature, but I get the feeling that you aren't much interested in many arts that are going to demand a very long time (years) to properly train in to be able to actually effectively deal with and use these methods, am I wrong? If not, I'd suggest you check out some various styles of Kung Fu that deal with a lot of variables, Tai Jutsu is great too.

 

In fact, being very proficient in some of those styles of Kung Fu or TaiJutsu would, in my opinion as well as many other's I know that have deal with them and studied them as well as BJJ and TB, etc., that you could effectively take on such a practioner without learning any in-depth aspects of those other arts, if any at all, and be the victor of the fight. Of course, I'm sure you realize that, even if you aren't familiar with the styles of techniques I speak of or don't agree on those particular styles. Of course, we all have our own opinions and this is mine, I suppose.