Would being a brawler be the best training method?

**Virus** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:10am

I've heard it said that if you really want to learn how to handle a real fight, then go and get yourself into real fights. This means fights at bars, clubs ect. with glass, bottles, pool cues, multiple opponents in other words "t3h str33t". I know a guy who thinks he's hard becase he'll go into a pub, find someone that looks weak and try to start some ****. Most often they back down and this fuels his ego, convincing him that he is t3h d3adly. Now, are people that get into brawls on a regular basis (but don't do martial arts training as such) the best fighters? If live drills and sparring are a better training method than dead patterns does that mean that t3h str33t is better than sparring? It seems logical, but is it possible to develop a high level of technical skill in the grappling and ground game by doing this? My question is this; taking aside the legal and ethical ramifications of brawling, would it lead to being a better fighter than by using combat sports and training methods?

Edit: Please move this to another forum if that would be more appropriate.

**Cullion** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:14am

How would we scientifically assess the truth of this proposition ? what set of statistics could we analyse ? I doubt if the needed statistics (whatever they measure) have been recorded anywhere.

**Virus** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:28am

That's entirely correct, It's impossible to gather reliable data on "streetfights" as they mostly come down to anecdotal reports. If only we had 50,000 videos of martial artists in "t3h str33t" orgainsed by style, weight of combatants, training times ect. Let me rephrase my question then; in your opinion, do you believe that brawling would produce a better fighter than by using combat sports and CS methods?

**Shuma-Gorath** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:28am

Originally Posted by Virus

I've heard it said that if you really want to learn how to handle a real fight, then go and get yourself into real fights. This means fights at bars, clubs ect. with glass, bottles, pool cues, multiple opponents in other words "t3h str33t". I know a guy who thinks he's hard becase he'll go into a pub, find someone that looks weak and try to start some ****. Most often they back down and this fuels his ego, convincing him that he is t3h d3adly. Now, are people that get into brawls on a regular basis (but don't do martial arts training as such) the best fighters? If live drills and sparring are a better training method than dead patterns does that mean that t3h str33t is better than sparring? It seems logical, but is it possible to develop a high level of technical skill in the grappling and ground game by doing this? My question is this; taking aside the legal and ethical ramifications of brawling, would it lead to being a better fighter than by using combat sports and training methods?

Your friend learns to fight by intimidating the physically inferior? That aside, this is possibly the worst idea ever since your "training" is guaranteed to get you arrested or injured every single time you do it. You also won't develop any technical skill since you are improvising for all your fights and it will take tens if not hundreds of encouters to build up any kind of meaningful data based on your success.

Now that I think about this, every person who's ever talked to me about "street fighting" has a mullet and drives some sort of courier van. Get off the internet and ship me my gloves, slacker.

**Virus** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:32am

He's not my friend. I just know the guy.

**Shuma-Gorath** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:36am

Originally Posted by Virus

He's not my friend. I just know the guy.

Trivial distinction.

**Goju - Joe** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:37am

There are people who come from shitty abusive homes where they were beat on daily. Got into fights weekly at school and fight anywhere and any time they can. They don't give a **** for themselves, for you or anyone else and fight to hurt. Even though they may never had formal training people like that are dangerous, and are known as sociopaths or psychopaths.

If that's your goal then brawling is for you.

**BigNinjaPimp** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 11:43am

Well no, cause most of the people you have street fights with are untrained fighters.
and a person who boxes or spars reguarly should have an advantage against the average Joe who gets into a few bar fights occasionaly with other average joes.
Unless the boxer/martial artist strait up sucks at fighting.

**Cullion** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 12:00pm

I don't think there's anything particularly hardcore about always picking on people who are weaker than you. But otherwise, sure if you do something a lot you're bound to get better at it (as long as you survive and don't receive a crippling injury).

**Lu Tze** · Posted On: 1/01/2006 12:19pm

Originally Posted by Virus

That's entirely correct, It's impossible to gather reliable data on "streetfights" as they mostly come down to anecdotal reports. If only we had 50,000 videos of martial artists in "t3h str33t" orgainsed by style, weight of combatants, training times ect. Let me rephrase my question then; in your opinion, do you believe that brawling would produce a better fighter than by using combat sports and CS methods?

In theory, if you survive then yes you'll probably pick up a few tricks, not nescasarily better than people who train less 'directly', but you should be able to hold your own.

I't's much more likely that at the very best you'll end up with a really interesting face (not in a good way) and barred from every venue in your area, at the worst you could end up crippled or dead.

You think that's worth it, then knock yourself out fella. Me, I'll stick with learning my tricks second hand thank you.