UFC vs. the Street

[Gumbi]

Too sporty.

 

UFC is childs play compared to no-limits fighting.

 

I've never seen or heard of a street fight lasting 10 minutes.

 

These guys aren't fighting with cocaine addicts, drunks, or armed or multiple combatants, or any combination of that.

 

At first i thought you were just trolling, now I realize you're actually being serious

 

Child's Play? By all means, go to a local MMA gym, or even BJJ studio and tell them they dont know the dangers of t3h d34dly str33t!

 

Cocaine addicts and drunks- last I checked, their elbow escapes, sprawls, and armbars arent particularly tight. Drunks are incredibly easy to deal with, for the simple fact that they're disoriented.

 

Lets examine a little more in depth what you're thinking:

 

1:Fights arent lasting 10 minutes-

 

well, the majority of street fights you're witnessing dont have trained fighters involved. In the event that a trained fighter gets into a street fight, its often not very long indeed. Tank is a classic example of a street fighter, yet he gets submitted by Frank Mir in 46 seconds (without so much as hitting Mir once). He was also beat to hell by Cabbage as well, and lasted a few seconds against Kimo. This is as tough a street fighter as you're going to see- his daily routine consisted of getting into fights at the bar.

 

Someone else had mentioned that bouncers claim that fights only last a few seconds- that strictly due to a 3rd party intervention in which case it d matters less what you are or are not trained in. We're talking about a fight for you life per say, where there IS no intervention from another person.

 

To rely soley on other people to break up the fight all the time and to think they will do so is a dangerous assumption.

 

2: Cocaine addicts and drunks

 

Drunks I find are actually easier to deal with than sober people, however they share a common trait with druggies- increased pain tolerance. Fights that end in MMA are not due to pain, but to biology. Granted, I have a fellow bouncer who had to fight someone on PCP- he broke his arm and the guy didnt miss a beat, however, when choked, the results were the same. It doesnt matter how tough you are or how many drugs you take- a choke is a choke, and it will ALWAYS have the same effect, much like getting shot in the heart.

 

3: multiple attackers

 

First off, multiple attackers isnt a fight- its called getting jumped, and it always favors those with more numbers. I have yet to see an effective system for dealing with multiple attackers, but if a guy has his friends, dont you have yours?

 

The same goes for armed attackers- yet to see an effective system for that.

 

So Im failing to see how MMA does anything but good for you, what do you see?

[Hudson]

Please refrain from using phrases like "t3h d34dly str33t" - I don't say it, don't say it to me.

 

Maybe "childs play" was a bit of an extreme, but my point stays the same - there are rules and regulations in UFC that can't compare to unregulated fighting.

 

I also don't believe MMA's are the tried and true super effective arts the UFC makes them out to be - there are plenty of traditional arts and students in them that are just as street effective.

[Luckykboxer]

ITs absolutely zero indication on how a street fight would go.

 

Every single athlete that fights in the UFC has cross trained in multiple martial arts.

 

IT is no longer, and hasnt been sicne the 1st UFC, a showdown of different arts, but rather a showdown of well trained athletes using all the skill they have learned to outwit and outmatch each other.

 

I can tell you from experience that a UFC ruled fight, and a no rules fight are quite different.

 

I have had many fights under both set of rules.

 

Street Rules are much more brutal , and have no thought towards the longevity of the fighters.

 

UFC rules are much much more forgiving, and are designed to allow the fighters to last much longer and hopefully develop the sport into the evolution of Boxing that It should be.

 

Anyone that tells you a person fighting under UFC rules will dominate a pure Street Fighter each using their rules is an ignorant person speaking out.

 

Now the fact that most UFC fighters are in better physical condition then most street fighters, and most UFC fighters have a longer liftime in the sport then you get an influence that effects teh outcomes.

 

But I will tell you now, that if you give two men with everything else being equal fighting under UFC rules for one and no rules for the other, I will always bet on the No ruled fighter to win.

[Drunken Monkey]

winning a ufc match doesn't actually mean you win the fight either.

 

there was that gracie vs sakaruba where sakauyba as forced to tapped out with a dislocated shoulder or something from an armbar, right?

 

but...

 

gracie had to be carted away to hospital.

 

the other guy could still continue with the fight albeit with a duff shoulder.

 

(names might be wrong but i think the guys will know it)

 

did gracie really win the fight?

 

if it was a street fight, who would be the real winner?

[VinnieDaChin]

although it isnt just like the street- the ufc is a good basic guide for what martial arts to do what (although everyone trains in the same things these days.) a street fight is different than a cage fight, but a cage fight does have enough elements, with few enough rules (have to make it legal in the country, afterall) to sort of mimic it. yea, in a street fight you may face weapons, multiple opponents, etc... and yea, street fights look different. but in street fights there isnt a super trained ufc fighter vs another super trained ufc fighter, its two punks trying to hurt eachother. still, the ufc has proven the effectiveness of certain arts, and, lets face it- anyone that trained in those same arts would probably win a street fight.

[Chirath]

UFC is the closest to a real fight. However most street fights involve multiple opponents. So your hardly want to go into groundwork. You want to be able to hit fast and hard and try and leg it if possible. UFC is good for one on one fights. And will get you used to hits. It won't get you 100% prepared for a street fight but will do a pretty good job in preparing yourself.

[Gumbi]

Maybe "childs play" was a bit of an extreme, but my point stays the same - there are rules and regulations in UFC that can't compare to unregulated fighting.

 

Bear in mind that the first UFC's allowed practically everything that could be thought of, minus biting and eye gouging. This does NOT mean that biting and eye gouging didnt occur, however. If it were done, fighters were merely fined and at no point was the fight interrupted.

 

Most of the rules instituted in modern day MMA arent incredibly extreme either, for example:

 

headbutts- headbutts are pretty blunt, but do a great job of opening up cuts, which is why they're not allowed anymore (due to too many cut stoppages, which themselves I think are a bad hangover from boxing- MMA should NOT be stopped due to cuts)

 

elbows- this actually is much more of a grapplers weapon than a strikers weapon. They'd be especially usefull when on an opponents back as an alternate to a RNC or use as a setup. As it is right now, modern day MMA makes it very difficult to ground and pound someone when you have their back, but with the use of elbows, you'd see a much different result.

 

Eye gouging and biting are also incredibly overestimated. They are best used in a grappling situation where one has control over his opponent (far too easy to move when not in a grappling situation). In such a scenario, biting and eye gouging rely on superior technical position in terms of their effectiveness. An eye gouge/bite from the mount will be far more effective than one from the guard, or one from underneath the mount. Biting and eye gouging have their place in a fight, but are too often overestimated in value.

 

I also don't believe MMA's are the tried and true super effective arts the UFC makes them out to be - there are plenty of traditional arts and students in them that are just as street effective.

 

Well, some may argue that TMA's are effective, however, modern day mixed martial arts have proven which arts are THE MOST EFFECTIVE. Sure, someone can make a TMA work for them, but is that the art or the practicioner who's winning the fight?

 

Mixed martial art events in NO WAY favored any particular martial art. There was no conspiracy to degrade TMA's in any way. In fact, they were as unbiased as could possibly be. The reason why styles such as BJJ, Wrestling, Judo, and Muay Thai are so good is due to their constant success by numerous different practioners. If one person wins with a style, one could argue that such a person is just an incredible athlete. The track record of these particular arts begs the differ, in that NUMEROUS people have tried and used these styles effectively in the ring and have been successful.

 

Beyond that, if other styles such as karate or kung fu were incredibly effective, dont you think that fighters would train in them? There are no individual stylists in MMA- everyone crosstrains with what works effectively for them. Such styles may have merit and can be effective, but results show that these are THE MOST effective.

[Gumbi]

ITs absolutely zero indication on how a street fight would go.

 

Every single athlete that fights in the UFC has cross trained in multiple martial arts.

 

IT is no longer, and hasnt been sicne the 1st UFC, a showdown of different arts, but rather a showdown of well trained athletes using all the skill they have learned to outwit and outmatch each other.

 

trained in what have been determined to be the most effective styles- a mixed martial artist sounds a hell of a lot better than a single style practitioner

I can tell you from experience that a UFC ruled fight, and a no rules fight are quite different.

 

I have had many fights under both set of rules.

 

Street Rules are much more brutal , and have no thought towards the longevity of the fighters.

 

UFC rules are much much more forgiving, and are designed to allow the fighters to last much longer and hopefully develop the sport into the evolution of Boxing that It should be.

 

Once again, MORE misconceptions. Watch the first UFC's along with any other early MMA event- I've yet to see a street fight that was more brutal than seeing someones skull crushed from repeated elbows from a mounted position, or seen someone lose their teeth from a punt to the jaw. The brutality of a fight is generally contributed to the mismatch of skill and weight between opponents, and UFC is no different. The reason why UFC matches are what they are is because BOTH FIGHTERS ARE WELL TRAINED. There is no easy way to defeat a trained fighter- the chances of him getting ko'ed are slim- he trains in it every day, same with getting submitted- he trains in submissions every day.

 

I'll once again use Tank since hes a perfect example of a street fighter vs a UFC fighter- he goes out there and EXPLODES. I think we're in agreement that he holds nothing back. In doing so, ALL of his recent fights against modern day mixed martial artists have been massive defeats.

 

As far as the rules being forgiven, its all about stopping the fight when a clear cut winner is established. Should it be a street fight with no ref intervention, that particular fighter could keep going, and even kill his opponent if he wanted. Also bear in mind that UFC fights would be just as brutal and you claim them not to be, had there not been a referee to intervene when someone gets knocked out or submitted. In a real fight, it would be not be stopped, but we already know who would've won

 

 

Anyone that tells you a person fighting under UFC rules will dominate a pure Street Fighter each using their rules is an ignorant person speaking out.

 

I just did- and I used Tank as my example. I'll go even further and offer Gannon vs Kimbo. The very fact that you're so easily negating the incredible skills of modern day fighters is what makes YOU ignorant.

 

And another question- why does EVERYONE insist that should a cage fighter get into a street fight, hes going to fight ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF THE UFC!?

 

After he knocks you down, do you think Tim Sylvia is going to refrain from stomping your skull into the pavement because its "against the rules?" Do you think that Frank Mir wont claw your eyes to lift your jaw so he can slip in a RNC? Maybe Tito wont throw elbows because you can lead with the point of the elbow......

But I will tell you now, that if you give two men with everything else being equal fighting under UFC rules for one and no rules for the other, I will always bet on the No ruled fighter to win.

 

Hey, no argument there. But you said all else being equal, which would mean skill as well. That means that the no rules fighter would indeed have had training in mixed martial arts, no? Otherwise all else wouldnt be equal. That right there would prove my argument

[Luckykboxer]

Gumbi you need to recheck your facts.

 

MMA isnt one or two styles, there are literally parts taken from dozens of different styles, it is truely a blending of the arts.

 

It is not as you put a showdown of different styles.

 

Also to use Tank Abbott as you example of a kick * street fighter is laughable.

 

Tank is a pit fighter, I fought in some of the same "cards" as he did. When he was in his prime, and the last 5 years are two totally different things.

 

I would laugh at the thought of handling Tank now. As his major weakness is well known, and very easily passed.

 

Also your assumptions of UFC fights being as brutal as I claim them not to be, well I know many UFC fighters, and with the exception of a very fwe they are none of them bloodthirsty, or wanting to beat people to a pulp.

 

Even teh loud mouths like Tito Ortiz are pretty much pussycats. There is a big difference between a true no holds barred fighter, and I speak from experience in both arenas.

 

And yes no holds barred fighers do cross train in different styles.

 

It appears to me you have a little bit of a starstruck attitude.

 

There is a huge difference between the two games. Big difference in how they are fought.

 

You will never see the amount of fights go to the ground in no holds barred, true no rules fighting, as you do in UFC.

 

No Holds Barred, NO Rules Fighting is the closest thing to real fighting, because it quite simply is real fighting.

 

Once you start adding rules you start catering to a certain type of fighter, and a certain style that they are trying to market.

 

Trust me no holds barred fighting would never be successful mainstream today.

 

UFC style does have an appeal, and does have a chance to become big, maybe even biggger then boxing eventually.

 

But like the best boxers in the world, they are extremely good in their game, but once you change the game, and take away rules, and allow more various weapons and techniques, they become less efficient and more open to getting beat and bad.

 

Now like professional boxers the UFC fighters are in exceptional shape, and that in and of itself would win them many fights in the streets against untrained people.

 

their training is just phenomenal as well, and that would them even more fights against even some who have training. Like that Joke of a fighter David Abbott(Tank).

 

but when you have a true no holds barred fighter, that has great conditioning and training, I guarantee you the fight will look nothing like a UFC fight. And Even if the UFC fighter wins, it will not even come close to looking like a UFC fight.

 

Now if you have experience lets hear it, but As i suspect if you are just talking because you own the ultimate UFC collection.... gee wiz so do i /cheers... or PRide, Or any of the other ones out there, then maybe you should lay off of the specal features and actually think about what the rules in the UFC do to change the fights?

 

you dont think that all those rules are in effect to actually encourage grappling do you?

 

NAwwwwww

 

you dont think that the Gracies, who started the UFC in the first place as a marketing campaign, used it as a platform to give themselves the edge over other styles?

 

Nawwwwww

 

you dont think that since the first couple UFCs that when fighters cross trained to become more complete fighters that it had anything to do with why the Gracies got out, since they are all undersized, and you dont think that since it is so much less violent then ho rules fighting that it is being accepted more and more, and is actually becoming a reality show do ya?

[Hudson]

I will agree that the UFC is the closest thing to a real fight you can watch on TV - but it is by no means a true representation of a street fight. It's far, far from it.

 

A street fight isn't against a guy who will let you tap out, who will only break your arm as a last resort, who won't pull a knife, and in most cases has similar technique to you.

 

Gumbi, let me ask you a question - what exactly is your experience with "t3h d34dly str33t" as you like to call it?

 

As for my experience, most of it comes secondhand from war stories from bouncers I know. It's far too violent a life for me.