I agree with the overall tone of the article; the best arts for fighting are the ones that feature sparring as a main part of the art. Although this isn't some new or ground breaking development.
However I think there are a lot of things that go into a person selecting a martial art. If someone A) is healthy and B) wants to defeat someone in "unarmed 1 v 1 combat" then there is no reason that person doesn't take up boxing, judo, BJJ, MT, kickboxing, Sanda, savate, sambo etc.
But what about people with health problems like severe asthma? Or people with physical deformities or ailments that make the core movements of those arts impossible? Would you tell someone with severe asthma to sign up for BJJ where a good set of lungs goes a long way? Or would they be better suited to something less strenuous? They won't get good at fighting else where but is it better than nothing? Even if we ignore fighting, don't those people still deserve to expereience the same brotherhood and sense of community we get from BJJ, boxing etc? I think we all agree that if a fit healthy person signs up for something like Aikido with the sole intent of being good at fighting that they are just deluding themselves. But I think its perfectly acceptable for others who are unable due to whatever reason to enjoy the same fighting arts we do.
Also it doesn't address the differences between genders. Meaning that the physical confrontations a man will experience and those that a woman are likely to experience are fundamentally different. 99% of what men call "self defense" is really "mutual combat". Where two people refuse to deescalate a situation due to ego and engage in a "fight". However women experience this much less, but are more likely to be met with force n the form of domestic violence, sexual assaults, etc.
