Why are people uninterested of fighting other styles?

Says the guy who also says:

Which is obviously wrong.

But hey, I could care less. My experience differs, that's all.

how is a fight in a ring, not a real fight. its a fight, just with rules. the only reason its not a "death match" is that its stopped prior to getting to that point. to kill a human with your bare hands is literally beating a dead horse in. you need to beat a man to the point he is unable to defend himself or ko'd and then beat him some more.

give me example of real fight other than "one without rules" as I have already mentioned above, there are mutliple situations of fights without rules, yet they are all vastly different.

a school yard fight has no rules
a prison yard fight has no rules
a bar fight has no rules
a coliseum fight has no rules

which ones a "real fight"??
 
Last edited:
I think it just depends on what the individual is looking for:
-People who genuinely just want to learn as much as they can about fighting will probably be open to other styles.
-People who are just looking to compete in one style as a sport may not believe that they have much to gain from training with other styles.
-People who have a (weirdly) strong sense of pride in their style usually fit into one of three groups in my experience:
1. They want to beat up everyone else to prove their style is best.
2. They are scared to train with anyone because they don't want their style to look inferior.
3. They are secretive and don't want to share their super awesome classified moves with anyone else

PS- that's not to say that there aren't normal people from the first two categories who have pride in their style. Some people are just over the top with it.
 
how is a fight in a ring, not a real fight. its a fight, just with rules. the only reason its not a "death match" is that its stopped prior to getting to that point. to kill a human with your bare hands is literally beating a dead horse in. you need to beat a man to the point he is unable to defend himself or ko'd and then beat him some more.

give me example of real fight other than "one without rules" as I have already mentioned above, there are mutliple situations of fights without rules, yet they are all vastly different.

a school yard fight has no rules
a prison yard fight has no rules
a bar fight has no rules
a coliseum fight has no rules

which ones a "real fight"??
Even these have rules. Usually they do not finish brutally. Most fights that are small scale end either in few hits, right away when someone shows.dominance or within a KO. We as man know how to regulate ourselves in a fight with untold rules. Sure when there are weapons it is another story. Female aggression goes bit further to be.honest than male aggression. This can be seen particularly well in kids and in their interactions. Especially males can become peetty good friends after a fight. We fight for a hierarchy and dominance not.to kill.
 
this whole "real fight" stuff everyone yaps about online is bullshit.

any form of combat sport is just as much as a real fight if not more. Yes there are rules, but the fights go the distance where as most "real fights" are typically a few seconds before someone stops, runs away, or breaks it up, or calls the cops. What all you guys consider "real fights" are usually something along the line of bar fights or since most of you are kids, meeting at the flag pole at 3 o clock. Most people in society are not dangerous criminals willing to kill you over an altercation. Those people exist but the majority of them are in prison. (i work in a jail) and the way most jail/prison fights go are either quick brawls that get stopped by the guards fairly quick, or some type of sneaky dirty unfair planned out number attack or stabbing. the point im trying to make is that level of intensity and willingness to kill or inflict damage or harm are different in every situation, yet they could all be classified as "real fights" since there are no rules. A gladiator fight in the coliseum had no rules, thats a "real fight", a bar fight has no rules, thats a "real fight", a fight in the walmart parking lot is a "real fight" with no rules. Those are all "real fight" but the level of intensity and willingness are different across for each situation. Most people are not thinking or willing to do a coliseum death match in the parking lot. However for the physical act of fighting, whats used in MMA, which is the act of fighting, is whats most successful, its simply human fighting. At the bar i could say something like please dont hurt me, let me buy you drink, and slip some poison in the drink i buy you. is that MMA no. is it fighting, no. but its something that could be done in a no rules "real fight". In the walmart parking lot I could decide to run you over rather than get out and fight. thats not fighting, but its something that can be done in a no rules "real fight". the possibilities, scenarios, and examples are endless. But as far as actually engaging in physical confrontation and the act of fighting, MMA is it. All this real fight bullshit I see all over sherdog is usually posted by keyboard warriors that dont know wtf they are talking about. such as punches to the body in a "real fight" yes they work in "real fights" and "fake fights".

While there is some truth to what you say you are buying too much into the myth that mma is necessarily close to real fighting.
Prison fights are really not representative since they are usually over so quick and in a controlled environment.
Aside from keyboard warriors or people who dont train and watch deadly kungfu movies lets look at some facts.

While MMA training prepares you very well for real altercations and the fights itself are as real as sport encounters go it is true only to say that 'it is as close to a real fight as possible in a sports environment'.

I agree with you the scenario and level of intensity of attack is what counts and how far people ae willing to go. Problem is this can change things so much so that the mma comparison becomes very dubious.

So we are taking about most common on average scenarios
The clearest example is BJJ and wrestling, the two most popular bases in US mma, and neither would be recommended at all in most situations in a real fight.

BJJ and wrestling
- both almost useless against more than one opponent
- even in 1 on 1, others guys friends or even bystanders who think you are beating him up might decide to kick or stamp on your head if you are on the ground, with shoes resulting in you possibly getting permanant damage. To go the the ground in most real recounters whether street or bar is not advisable and can be suicidal.
- both very limited or useless against someone with a knife or other weapon, or if they pick up a makeshift weapon. Many tma techniques would actually be preferable here and will usually be striking based although it is true any barehanded style will struggle here.

Even an idylic 1 on 1 with no other variables
- any shoes make kicks more dangerous.What if even he is wearing steel toe boots?
- the groin shot, Bas Ruttens go to real fight move. Look at Alessio Sakkara vs Ron Faircloth, a several tiers lower level mma fighter. After the deliberate groin shot 10 seconds into rd 2, Sakara was literally rolling around on the floor for 10 minutes. And this was wearing a protector cup and without shoes. Even an average joe with intent could potentially do this as an equalazer against a highly trained fighter and it could have a reasonable chance to work effectively.
- other dirty tactics or illegal strikes. Trouble is, it works in real fights as seen even many times in mma with ' accidental' eye pokes like Liddel was expert and finished or disrupted fights with. Would completely change the nature of the game.

Yes a guy who trains mma could use these tactics also but if both are using dirty tactics it really evens the odds much more in a real fight and the result wont look like mma a whole lot anymore.

We can conclude that generally standup is far preferable in a real fight situation and to get off the ground asap if it goes three, even if you are on top in many situations. Very different from mma fighting and training where grappling tends to predominate alot.
So for self defence and real fighting, sonething like Boxing is generally far greater than BJJ in most situations whereas we know in an mma environment a pure BJJ guy would usually win.

So again, not that someone who spars live in a good system wouldn't beat most untrained guys or many tma guys who dont spar in a real fight, but he would have to adapt what he does so it will look very different, and the other variables to consider mean what is done in the ring environment may not be applicable or may even be dangerous to try.

Something like Bas Ruttens self defence tactics would be recommended for most real fight situations. Far more close to Krav Maga than BJJ (Bas actually did some collaboration with the Krav guys also)

 
Last edited:
While there is some truth to what you say you are buying too much into the myth that mma is necessarily close to real fighting.
Prison fights are really not representative since they are usually over so quick and in a controlled environment.
Aside from keyboard warriors or people who dont train and watch deadly kungfu movies lets look at some facts.

While MMA training prepares you very well for real altercations and the fights itself are as real as sport encounters go it is true only to say that 'it is as close to a real fight as possible in a sports environment'.

I agree with you the scenario and level of intensity of attack is what counts and how far people ae willing to go. Problem is this can change things so much so that the mma comparison becomes very dubious.

So we are taking about most common on average scenarios
The clearest example is BJJ and wrestling, the two most popular bases in US mma, and neither would be recommended at all in most situations in a real fight.

BJJ and wrestling
- both almost useless against more than one opponent
- even in 1 on 1, others guys friends or even bystanders who think you are beating him up might decide to kick or stamp on your head if you are on the ground, with shoes resulting in you possibly getting permanant damage. To go the the ground in most real recounters whether street or bar is not advisable and can be suicidal.
- both very limited or useless against someone with a knife or other weapon, or if they pick up a makeshift weapon. Many tma techniques would actually be preferable here and will usually be striking based although it is true any barehanded style will struggle here.

Even an idylic 1 on 1 with no other variables
- any shoes make kicks more dangerous.What if even he is wearing steel toe boots?
- the groin shot, Bas Ruttens go to real fight move. Look at Alessio Sakkara vs Ron Faircloth, a several tiers lower level mma fighter. After the deliberate groin shot 10 seconds into rd 2, Sakara was literally rolling around on the floor for 10 minutes. And this was wearing a protector cup and without shoes. Even an average joe with intent could potentially do this as an equalazer against a highly trained fighter and it could have a reasonable chance to work effectively.
- other dirty tactics or illegal strikes. Trouble is, it works in real fights as seen even many times in mma with ' accidental' eye pokes like Liddel was expert and finished or disrupted fights with. Would completely change the nature of the game.

Yes a guy who trains mma could use these tactics also but if both are using dirty tactics it really evens the odds much more in a real fight and the result wont look like mma a whole lot anymore.

We can conclude that generally standup is far preferable in a real fight situation and to get off the ground asap if it goes three, even if you are on top in many situations. Very different from mma fighting and training where grappling tends to predominate alot.
So for self defence and real fighting, sonething like Boxing is generally far greater than BJJ in most situations whereas we know in an mma environment a pure BJJ guy would usually win.

So again, not that someone who spars live in a good system wouldn't beat most untrained guys or many tma guys who dont spar in a real fight, but he would have to adapt what he does so it will look very different, and the other variables to consider mean what is done in the ring environment may not be applicable or may even be dangerous to try.

Something like Bas Ruttens self defence tactics would be recommended for most real fight situations. Far more close to Krav Maga than BJJ (Bas actually did some collaboration with the Krav guys also)



yeah i agree with what you are saying I just dont like the term "real fight" because a boxing match is a real fight it just has rules, and the chances for injury are just as great, if not higher, because "real fights" or "street fights" are generally very short and broken up quickly, where as a boxing match is agreed to go X amount of rounds or KO. And many times "real fights" or "street fights" are somewhat structured as people many times agree to fight and they generally stop once someone is hurt or there is an obvious winner, so you could even view it as a poorly structured boxing match for example. The term "real fight" because it has "no rules" is bullshit. I would disagree in regards to prison fights. Prison fights are probably as close as your going to get to a "real fight" as the guys many times use weapons, unfair and sneaky tactics are used, people are jumped, setup, beaten badly, and the guys many times fight with the intent to kill, despite the fact they are in a structured environment. Fights in public society are in a structured environment too and bystanders typically get involved, friends, the police etc.

check this out, these are all "real fights" because theres no rules.



heres a "real fight" as well because theres "no rules" however you can see that one situation is vastly different from the other. So which one is a "real fight" and which one is a "fake fight"



to me, I consider something like the video above much more along the lines of a "real fight" than something like this.



lastly the stuff that other guy was talking about earlier is about how dangerous "real fights" are and the level of violence etc of them. but in reality what you guys are referring to as "real fights" are alot lower level of violence. Compare the walmart parking lot video to a boxing match. yet somehow the walmart parking lot video is a "real fight" becuase theres "no rules" and a boxing match is not, when only a few punches were thrown in the "real fight" and a boxer is going to take much more damage than the "real fight" with no rules.

i have seen that bas rutten video before, its good stuff and I am a fan of bas and his techniques, hes got alot of great stuff. besides muay thai, I have studied, and trained a bit in stick and knife fighting, self defense, situational awareness, body language, firearm training, protection dog training, many types of things.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like you have most of the bases covered for learning good self defence training and application. Which is why I was very surprised you said this:
Just that some are alot more practical than others. MT is my thing, but i can openly admit that if someone was to only learn 1 martial for self defense, BJJ is probably the best to learn as its the most dangerous, greatest size equalizer, etc. etc. Generally speaking grappling beats striking.

BJJ is a terrible recommendation for self defence if you could only learn one style.
A good hands focused standup style would be the way to go, boxing, MT, kickboxing, or any good standup art with live training would all be far superior in most self defence situations than BJJ for the reasons cited above.
You could also add some takedown defence training and basic submission knowledge later as well as the additional training methods you mentioned. For self defence in general in most situations striking > grappling.

The idea that BJJ is the best choice for an individual self defence art is a complete misconception the Gracies have managed to falsely promote. Leaning some submissions yes, but trying to use BJJ as a self defence base would be one of the worst approaches one could make. It is a useful added ingredient for self defence for sure, but no way should it ever be considered a core self defence system for the majority of situations.
 
Sounds like you have most of the bases covered for learning good self defence training and application. Which is why I was very surprised you said this:


BJJ is a terrible recommendation for self defence if you could only learn one style.
A good hands focused standup style would be the way to go, boxing, MT, kickboxing, or any good standup art with live training would all be far superior in most self defence situations than BJJ for the reasons cited above.
You could also add some takedown defence training and basic submission knowledge later as well as the additional training methods you mentioned. For self defence in general in most situations striking > grappling.

The idea that BJJ is the best choice for an individual self defence art is a complete misconception the Gracies have managed to falsely promote. Leaning some submissions yes, but trying to use BJJ as a self defence base would be one of the worst approaches one could make. It is a useful added ingredient for self defence for sure, but no way should it ever be considered a core self defence system for the majority of situations.

I am friends with several 10th planet BJJ blackbelts. I know their skill level, what they are capable of, and how dangerous and effective BJJ is. High level BJJ, the guys are like Gorillas, or Chimps, or a Python.

The reason I said that, is because in a 1 on 1, BJJ is the best to know. It is the most effective and greatest size equalizer. Hence its success in the early days as well as today in MMA, it has proven itself in the cage, which is a 1 on 1 situation, a 1 on 1 fight. Yes theres rules, but the rules are limited to shit like no biting and groin shots etc. So its as close as your going to get to a "real fight". And yes in a "real fight" the guy might have a weapon, or run you over with his car, or has friends jump in while your on the ground, or have a gun, or mace, or a dog, or call the cops, or numchucks, or a unicorn, the possibilites are infinite. But saying something like oh BJJ is no good because you will be on the ground and you will get your head stomped in by his friends (i agree with the concept and it is indeed possible) is like saying practicing knife fighting is no good because he might have a gun, practicing gun fighting is no good because he might have a bomb, practicing bomb defusing is no good because he might know BJJ. and around in circles we go with the infinite possibilites. Theres too many variables to be considered, as well as the type of situation and what is a "real fight" or not.

in a 1 on 1 situation, toss 2 people in a pit and say go fight with no rules, no weapons, etc. just the act of 2 people fighting each other, BJJ has proven itself to be the most effective. We saw it in the early days of MMA and we see it today in MMA. MMA is as close as your going to get, in regards to 2 people fighting eachother with "no rules" with the exception of the bites, eye pokes, etc. and of course excluding all the other variables of weapons, friends jumping in etc. Let 2 guys "fight" BJJ is the most effective and greatest size equalizer, we saw it in the early days of MMA with no weight classes, and we can see it today how BJJ is the main base of MMA. in a 1 on 1 fight, grappling beats striking. For self defense infinite possibilities situations, that may not be the case I see your point and agree with you, but were comparing apples to oranges, of fight vs "real fight".

Going back to "real fights". Biting is overlooked, Paul Vunak has some god stuff on biting. Head butts are another great weapon. And so is the head stomp. People call it cheap or whatever, but since there are no rules, nothing is cheap. I view it as a highly effective technique. I made a video about it a while back but youtube took it down because it was too violent.

im glad were on the same page regarding intensity and willingness behind the attack. If you compare the video above of the first stabbing, you will see that some of the guys, do 1 "poke" and than stop, then try again, although they were trying to kill him, the willingness and level of intensity and agression was not the same as something like this. And since theres "no rules" you cant say what these guys are doing is "dirty" because.......theres no rules.



and the mystical knife fighting stuff is bullshit a knife fight is going to be alot more like this than "kung fu" knife fighting





it all boils down to fantasy martial arts vs reality
 
I am friends with several 10th planet BJJ blackbelts. I know their skill level, what they are capable of, and how dangerous and effective BJJ is. High level BJJ, the guys are like Gorillas, or Chimps, or a Python.

The reason I said that, is because in a 1 on 1, BJJ is the best to know. It is the most effective and greatest size equalizer. Hence its success in the early days as well as today in MMA, it has proven itself in the cage, which is a 1 on 1 situation, a 1 on 1 fight. Yes theres rules, but the rules are limited to shit like no biting and groin shots etc. So its as close as your going to get to a "real fight". And yes in a "real fight" the guy might have a weapon, or run you over with his car, or has friends jump in while your on the ground, or have a gun, or mace, or a dog, or call the cops, or numchucks, or a unicorn, the possibilites are infinite. But saying something like oh BJJ is no good because you will be on the ground and you will get your head stomped in by his friends (i agree with the concept and it is indeed possible) is like saying practicing knife fighting is no good because he might have a gun, practicing gun fighting is no good because he might have a bomb, practicing bomb defusing is no good because he might know BJJ. and around in circles we go with the infinite possibilites. Theres too many variables to be considered, as well as the type of situation and what is a "real fight" or not.

in a 1 on 1 situation, toss 2 people in a pit and say go fight with no rules, no weapons, etc. just the act of 2 people fighting each other, BJJ has proven itself to be the most effective. We saw it in the early days of MMA and we see it today in MMA. MMA is as close as your going to get, in regards to 2 people fighting eachother with "no rules" with the exception of the bites, eye pokes, etc. and of course excluding all the other variables of weapons, friends jumping in etc. Let 2 guys "fight" BJJ is the most effective and greatest size equalizer, we saw it in the early days of MMA with no weight classes, and we can see it today how BJJ is the main base of MMA. in a 1 on 1 fight, grappling beats striking. For self defense infinite possibilities situations, that may not be the case I see your point and agree with you, but were comparing apples to oranges, of fight vs "real fight".

Going back to "real fights". Biting is overlooked, Paul Vunak has some god stuff on biting. Head butts are another great weapon. And so is the head stomp. People call it cheap or whatever, but since there are no rules, nothing is cheap. I view it as a highly effective technique. I made a video about it a while back but youtube took it down because it was too violent.

im glad were on the same page regarding intensity and willingness behind the attack. If you compare the video above of the first stabbing, you will see that some of the guys, do 1 "poke" and than stop, then try again, although they were trying to kill him, the willingness and level of intensity and agression was not the same as something like this. And since theres "no rules" you cant say what these guys are doing is "dirty" because.......theres no rules.



and the mystical knife fighting stuff is bullshit a knife fight is going to be alot more like this than "kung fu" knife fighting





it all boils down to fantasy martial arts vs reality

Ouch bro.
 
Sounds like you have most of the bases covered for learning good self defence training and application. Which is why I was very surprised you said this:


BJJ is a terrible recommendation for self defence if you could only learn one style.
A good hands focused standup style would be the way to go, boxing, MT, kickboxing, or any good standup art with live training would all be far superior in most self defence situations than BJJ for the reasons cited above.
You could also add some takedown defence training and basic submission knowledge later as well as the additional training methods you mentioned. For self defence in general in most situations striking > grappling.

The idea that BJJ is the best choice for an individual self defence art is a complete misconception the Gracies have managed to falsely promote. Leaning some submissions yes, but trying to use BJJ as a self defence base would be one of the worst approaches one could make. It is a useful added ingredient for self defence for sure, but no way should it ever be considered a core self defence system for the majority of situations.
The good thing about grappling in a real world scenario is that you're less likely to get arrested than if you strike someone.
 
That is not entirely true, mma guys spar with Olympic taekwondo fighters and Olympic boxers (tyron Woodley did it, and Kevin Lee and other fighters have trained at major boxing gyms). Team alpha Male decided to bring in Jean claude van dam, even though hes not really a mma guy he fought more kickboxing. I don't know whether you mean that they don't fight anybody outside there style, but they definitely do train with other styles and what not. I bet they do have organized fights with them behind closed doors though sometimes too.
 
Back
Top