Why is everyone obsessed about "Street" effectivness?

Question

Many people think being more effective on the street means being a better martial artist. This is because we all want to be tough, and when we lose in the ring (or cage or whatever), we look for an excuse for why we lost, and still view ourselves as the better fighter.

What is a streetfight? Fighting on the street? Fighting with no rules? No. It is someone attacking another person without consent of that person. I would like people to know that people such as Kimbo Slice are not streetfighters. Kimbo Slice follows specific rules in his fights, and agrees to fight. I like to call these fights "Backyard Fights". The term streetfighting is misunderstood.

I think the true answer we are all looking for is sport fighting. There we can show off our skills. And why spend thousands of dollars in lessons to defend the $100 maximum dollars of things you carry on the street? If they's really trying to kill you, they'll have a gun, probably rendering your "Practical Techniques" useless. (There are some acceptions, for example kidnapping)

So if you want to show off your skills, don't look to the street, look to the ring!

Who agrees? :)

Answer 1

I don't think so. A streetfight to me is a fight in an urban environment where there are no rules. It is the true test of fighting ability and should only be undertaken by the toughest, strongest of men.

Answer 2

Certainly if you have skills to show then by all means go to the ring or cage but the vast majority of people do not take up a martial arts class to compete in the ring.

Why did you take up martial arts?? why did any of us??

For me it was, if im honest, too much tv. But for others some of whom are friends of mine it was because they had been attacked or felt they needed to arm themselves for the world in which we live in.

I seriously doubt that if you look up "streetfight" in the dictionary you will get an answer but it is a slang term we ourselves have put on confrontation out of the area such as a ring or dojo where there are rules..... on the street you will get hurt maybe even killed.

And to say that if someone really wanted to kill you they would have a gun.... im sorry but your chattin c**p... do you think that when a fight kicks off in your local bar or at the chip van afterwards that either of the people fighting wants to kill the other??? no they dont but it can and does happen.

There are essentially 3 types of fight

1. the most common and we will call it the 3 second fight, it is when you are in a pub/club and something happens and you have 3 seconds to react to the other guy..... bouncers or doormen know this situation all to well.

2. we will call this the ambush... where you are jumped from behind as in a mugging

3. not so popular these days but we will call it a straightener... where you have an issue with somone and you decide to "sort" it out

and in answer to your question no i do not agree and i would doubt that if anyone who has ever been in a real life scrape would agree with you

Answer 3

Umm im pretty sure that the reason martial arts styles were invented was to be iffective in a real fight. The big problem nowadays with alot of schools is that it is all about competition istead of actual effective fighting.  Doesnt that defeat the true purpose of martial arts. Jiu jitsu was invented because when strikes were useless against armored samurai the only thing your could do is break joints. Thats exactly the reason as to why i quit tkd. It was useless on the ground so i joined wrestling

Answer 4

I somewhat agree. I have said before that if self defense is your primary reason for learning martial arts, you would be better off carrying weapons and training how to use them. The main reason I train is because it is fun - self defense is just a side benefit. However, even though I haven't been in a fight in 20 years, I still want what I am learning to have "street effectiveness." By that I mean I'm not interested in flashy jumping spin kicks, weird stances, honing my chi, etc.  

Answer 5

Street effectiveness is extremely important. In the ring there are rules, in the street or any place outside of a sanctioned event, there are no rules.

Kimbo Slices illegal backyard fights were in fact street fights because there were no rules. There were just a bunch of guys standing around watching.

While someone who has a gun is in fact dangerous, they are not absolutely unstoppable against an unarmed opponent. If you have ever seen a Krav Maga pistol disarm, you would understand why. Everyone with a gun assumes that the person they have the gun pointed at will be fully compliant. What they do not realize is that a skilled martial artist will wait for his opening, and quickly snatch the gun and point it in a different direction while tackling the gun weilder to the ground.  Once the gun is no longer pointed in the direction of the martial artist, the gun weilder is at a great disadvantage.

Anyone weilding a gun has a lot to be afraid of. People with cell phones are everywhere. Using a gun in the commission of an assault or a robbery carries a 10 year mandatory minimum prison sentence in many jurisdictions. In any conflict between two people, an unarmed martial artist is less likely to be charged with a felony than an armed citizen.  

Answer 6

Because there are a lot of MMA fans who are dazzled by the bright lights, s**y ring girls, and huge crowds.  

The large majority of those people have never trained in a TMA, but they are convinced that MMA is better.  Why?  Because somewhere some idiot commentator spouts off about things he doesn't understand like "street fighting" just to fill dead air and justify his paycheck.  

Thus, the urban legend is born that TMA is outdated, won't work, or is watered down.  

Throw in on top of this the people who watched "Human Weapon" and thought that one episode on _________ was the coolest thing they ever saw.  So that must be the "best style" because a champion fighter in it could beat a second rate MMA fighter or a semi-pro football player with a couple of years of judo.

Answer 7

i agree with the difference between attacks and kimbo style competitions. but the rest of your assumptions are felonious. i dont particularly care to look tough. i care about survival. i use verbal skills and avoidance 99.9% of the time and it has served me very well. not all attackers are trying to kill you but you must assume they will.  as far as practical techniques being useless, youre full of it. ive defended against fists, chokes, bottles, ball bats, and more with "useless practical tehniques". and im no bad *** by any means. i dont seek fame, fortune, to show off skills. i just want to get home. and you dont know me, so i find your assumptions about this offensive. im a very learned martial artist with practical knowledge who knows the difference between martial arts, self defense, and sport combat. im thinking you dont really grasp the dichotomy.

Answer 8

you want to learn ineffective street defense do you?

i do not learn martial arts in order to show off, i learn them for many other reasons, one being to be able to protect myself.

and the places where i have trained, if you even mention you want to fight or show off or cage fight, then you are asked to leave and you will not be shown anything.

Answer 9

....Because humans are a perfectionist species....T_T in order to compensate for losing somehow on "the street" they search for a different method and different style that can be applied to the situation, it's simple problem solving.... instead of using their brain and changing, refining, and tweaking the techniques they already know for application, the first method is the method of the rational martial artist, the second path is the method of the resourceful martial artist, which one is better? The rational artist learns quicker but the resourceful one practices the variations, and is able to change and alter his technique on the fly.

Kimbo slice is..... I suppose he's a bad person, I don't know him personally, so maybe he has reasons for doing what he did for money and "backyard fights" are basically organized streetfights.... and glorified....

People tend to forget that martial arts are not about the forms and rigid techniques, it is about taking the concept of a form and using it, the basic idea, fuse technique with technique, for example, many people argue that Wushu is useless in a real fight, no it's not, it's effective psychologically, an untrained fighter is very easily frightened by a spinning jump kick nine feet in the air followed by 2 side somersaults without arms and continuous butterfly kicks, it's quite impressive and doing those attacks trains the legs and balance as well as flexibility, the concept of Wushu also involves dramatic speed and using momentum to achieve that speed while using, say, a 10 pound Kwandao.... Using that concept, a wushu fighter with techniques that don't work on the "street" has astonishing balance, speed, and the ability to combine that with momentum to strike as hard as a boxer who is trained in a "street applicable sport"

That example was admittedly a tad lengthy but I feel it explains my idea that every martial art's technique should not be prized and placed above the understanding of the martial art's concept. With that, all concepts are really equal, no martial art is better on the "street" than others, some just take less refinement to use on the "street"

Answer 10

i somewhat agree.

a streetfight is a fight in the street. as for kimbo..he's a street boxer more than anything. when you and someone else agree to meet at the park after school...you are streetfighting. when someone calls you a b*tch and slaps you across the face and you start fighting...you're streetfighting.

i think the answer we are all looking for is being effective fighters. we each have our own goals as far as where we want to be effective. of course you're right that sport competition is a good place to test yourself in a morally acceptable and legal manner.

but i'll tell you from personal experience that what you get in sport fighting is a far cry from what you will see in a real self defense scenario. yes, even in mma. it isn't even close.

it's "real" in the sense that they are fighting fast, hard and mean. but there are no weapons. there are no multiple attackers..etc...etc.

what you call streetfighting...everyone else calls self defense. and there is a huge difference.

i think your priorities are way off...i dont study self defense to protect my personal artifacts...which btw are often worth well over 100 bucks. i study self defense to save my LIFE ...not my wallet or shoes.

and self defense doesnt always have to be physical. but psychological as well...learning how to conduct yourself. learning how to AVOID the situation altogether.

to answer your question...why does everyone obsess with being street effective?....because thats where it really matters!! ...you said yourself if you lose in the ring, or cage...you just look at the tape and see what you could've done differently, what you could do next time...ie...you live to fight another day. in a real self defense scenario...you never know. the whole idea is to go home...to survive..not to defeat your attacker.

sport arts teach you to stand and fight until the man submits, or is ko'd. (or points) ...all of that goes out the window in a real self defense situation.

Answer 11

I totally disagree with you on several points:

First of all a street fight is not someone attacking another person without their consent. That is what i would define as self defense. A street fight is a clash of two ego's that takes two willing paticipants who are protecting those ego's. It is generally a one on one situation to see who the strongerperson is. 99% of the time it could be avoided if one of the people refused to fight and backed down. Slef defense is the 1% where you are given no other option. It is purely about survival.

I do not train to show off my skills. never have never will. Most people who know m casually do not even realize that I train. I am happy with who I am and do not need an ego boost from fighting in a cage. I know the effectivness of wht I do because we train it that way in class.

Most robbers or attackers who want your money, if they do not shoot you outright, don't want to hurt you. Why compounsd armed robbery with a murder charge, which will surely make the police track them harder then simple robbery. Chances rare very good if they don't pop you right off the bat they ar not going to unless you do something stupid.

I do agree that if somebody does want to show off their skills the ring is definetly the place to do it, vs the street. Street fighting is one of the lost ignorent pastimes their is, because nobody really wins.

I also define self defense as verbal skills and the attitude that let me difuse tense or potentially hostile situations. I do not specificly train karate for self defense, because in a traditional art there is so much more. Yes I can defend myself, however I use the other stuff I learn, the respect, self diicipline, and focus every day, where I have had to actually use physical self defense once in 18 years.

Answer 12

You think the true answer is showing off your skills? I disagree completely.

I don't train to protect the $100 (actually, considerably more, but whatever) of things I carry. I train to protect myself and my loved ones, which are worth more than any of it. If the other person happens to be trained in some form of martial art, I'm not surprised by it. If they're not, I have an advantage.

Not every killer uses a gun. Some use knives, some use hammers, some use their hands, some use poison... You get the point. I know that much of my training has dealt with all of these.

Further, in a public setting, the killer with the gun who is going to shoot you is outside any form of defense other than your awareness (which your training can heighten -- movement or the flash of light reflecting off a scope may give an individual a chance of escape. It's those same indications that counter-sniper teams use to locate potential threats). But, if we're talking an average killer, they will usually try to get close enough to take you to a second more isolated area to kill you so as to draw less attention and further control the situation. This is not kidnapping in a strict sense, as that second location may be only 100 feet away (say, from outside your front door to inside your bedroom). Much of my point here is covered in Gavin De Becker's "The Gift of Fear".

Finally, being a martial artist used to mean being able to defend yourself and fight without ego. When you fight in the ring or fight to show off skills, you're fighting to feed your ego. It is absolutely not the answer, and fighting for your life with an inflated sense of ego means you're too arrogant to know your own weaknesses. It's your weaknesses that will make you absolutely fail.

Answer 13

Street defense refers to self defense situations where you life may be at stake and there is nothing stopping them from killing except yourself. In the ring you have rules to keep it safe but entertaining. I consider MMA a sport, not a martial art. MMA may be fun and effective in the ring, but not in a real fight.

Answer 14

1. fighting is a poor choice for solving issues

2. toughness in what you can endure without quiting, not what you can do to another person. that is called brutality  and is never admired by wise men.

3. street fights are usually drunken/drugged slavering tests of stupidity.

4. self defense is another issue where martial arts and proper mind set are indispensable in critical situations.

Answer 15

In the street there are no rules and most of the time more than one person against you.

In the ring there are rules, doctors, and coaches. It's also a guaranteed one on one fight.

Showing of skills, especially in the ring is nothing but an ego boast.

The answer is not in the ring, all who think this are jaded.

The lessons are not for protecting possessions, but for protecting lives. That argument has no merit.

So in essence I disagree with you completely.

Answer 16

You hit the nail squarely on the head!!  

I agree wholeheartedly.

I heard a group of Karate Mom's (I practice Tae Kwon Do) commenting at demonstration that TKD was no good "in the street". This is after the Karate group did a musical form to "Eye of the Tiger."

I L'dMAO!!!  

Never bring a knife to a gun fight! And never assume you are Billy Bad ***, because you are probably not.  

Answer 17

The ring can be a great place to show off your skills and learn some good lessons but you can be totally reckless with you actions in the ring. You have doctors, medical help, and a ref to stop the fight. So is it a real fight? Yes and no.

You cant' do on the street what you can in the ring and get away with it. On the street there is usually no one to stop the action until it's OVER. Risky techniques have no place in the street unless you are a expert. I don't know many "experts." Even the experts have odds against them in a fight. Even Mike Tyson did. Why? Because anything could happen in the ring but the odds of anything happening are guaranteed on the street.

But if you have to fight the ring is the only legal place it should be done. As for fighting over $100 that is personal call and should have nothing to do with showing off.