PDA

View Full Version : Fights and "fights"



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

jackal
7/16/2005 10:25am,
Hi everyone. This is my first thread (YAY!), hope you get something out of it.

As a CMA person i'm interested to hear people's thoughts on the following issues that i have seen come up here on bullshido, regarding comps and realism and stuff like that. Before i go on i wanna say that i am actually genuinely interested in hearing what people think about what i'm about to say to please don't waste my time (and everyone else's) by trolling too much.

1. If techniques forbidden by the rules of many competition formats such as eye gouges and groin shots are ineffective (a common argument on bullshido), why make them illegal at all?

2. If competition fights like UFC etc are so similar to real fights (again common argument), why have i never seen a real fight that has lasted more than 20 seconds at a stretch where comp fights go for longer, with multiple rounds?

:wrestlera

Camus
7/16/2005 10:40am,
1. If techniques forbidden by the rules of many competition formats such as eye gouges and groin shots are ineffective (a common argument on bullshido), why make them illegal at all?

2. If competition fights like UFC etc are so similar to real fights (again common argument), why have i never seen a real fight that has lasted more than 20 seconds at a stretch where comp fights go for longer, with multiple rounds?

#1 Because while the inclusion of said 'dirty' techniques does not change the nature of the fight drastically, it does put fighters at greater risk of injury, which is important not only for safety, but also marketability. Having half your fighters out with torn corneas and bite marks doesn't make for a successful sport.

#2 This is speculation based on subjective personal experience. I could easily argue the opposite as I've seen 'street' fights last much longer than that; however, that adds nothing to any serious discussion.

Liffguard
7/16/2005 10:40am,
I'm not too sure about no. 2 but as for no. 1. No one is saying that eye-gouges or groin shots are ineffective. What many people are saying is that they are NOT guaranteed fight-enders. They can and do work but they are not so deadly or reliable as to instantly guarantee victory as some people claim. They are illegal because when they do work they can compromise fighter safety.

Bruce W Sims
7/16/2005 10:42am,
I think some of the energy about "forbidden techniques" comes from the injunctions of such books as the Okinawan WU BEI ZHI. In that work 7 techniques are identified that are forbidden use because the likely consequences out-strip the justification for using them in a typical altercation. Note I use the term "typical". A shot to the groin may be nothing to us today, but back a century ago taking away a persons' ability to father children and perpetuate his line was out of all proportion to the typical fight. Same thing goes for a technique that would, say, completely tear loose the rotator cuff and make a person unable to provide for his family. fact is that back 100 years ago there were a lot worse things than dying that could come out of a fight. Eyes were off-limits for the same reason.

As far as competition and fighting I think it depends on where a person is standing. People on the outside of a ring are free to make any observations they care to. perceptions change when the audiance member gets to enter the ring and experience the technique for himself.

Lastly, I don't think we have mentioned intent but it definitely plays a roll. Most fight as "challenges"-- punch one, puch two, punch three, roll on the ground, garnish with a couple of parting whines. A real fight means that concern for ones own safety or the safety of the other person is no longer a factor. People who have witnessed a person in a blind rage such that two and three shots are required to down him will immediately recognize what I'm talking about. Bernie Lau (a retired LEO and Ai-Ki practioner) wrote well of pretending that Aikido was indicated for use by Law Enforcement for this very reason.

My sense is this is why there are so many threads about the nature of working with resistant partners, but it is still not the same thing. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Knightmare
7/16/2005 11:13am,
I think some of the energy about "forbidden techniques" comes from the injunctions of such books as the Okinawan WU BEI ZHI. In that work 7 techniques are identified that are forbidden use because the likely consequences out-strip the justification for using them in a typical altercation. Note I use the term "typical". A shot to the groin may be nothing to us today, but back a century ago taking away a persons' ability to father children and perpetuate his line was out of all proportion to the typical fight. Same thing goes for a technique that would, say, completely tear loose the rotator cuff and make a person unable to provide for his family. fact is that back 100 years ago there were a lot worse things than dying that could come out of a fight. Eyes were off-limits for the same reason.

As far as competition and fighting I think it depends on where a person is standing. People on the outside of a ring are free to make any observations they care to. perceptions change when the audiance member gets to enter the ring and experience the technique for himself.

Lastly, I don't think we have mentioned intent but it definitely plays a roll. Most fight as "challenges"-- punch one, puch two, punch three, roll on the ground, garnish with a couple of parting whines. A real fight means that concern for ones own safety or the safety of the other person is no longer a factor. People who have witnessed a person in a blind rage such that two and three shots are required to down him will immediately recognize what I'm talking about. Bernie Lau (a retired LEO and Ai-Ki practioner) wrote well of pretending that Aikido was indicated for use by Law Enforcement for this very reason.

My sense is this is why there are so many threads about the nature of working with resistant partners, but it is still not the same thing. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce


God, I hate you.

BSDaemon
7/16/2005 11:58am,
1. If techniques forbidden by the rules of many competition formats such as eye gouges and groin shots are ineffective (a common argument on bullshido), why make them illegal at all?
MMA is a sport, and none of the fans want to see their favorite fighters permanently maimed. If a fighter has gained enough control over his opponent to be able to gouge his eyes, then he can just as easily go for a knockout or submission. Nut shots just hurt to watch, nobody wants to see that. Sure these moves could be effective fight enders... but they don’t really require the skills that KO’s and Subs do. Its just dumb violence, it doesn’t belong in the sport.


2. If competition fights like UFC etc are so similar to real fights (again common argument), why have i never seen a real fight that has lasted more than 20 seconds at a stretch where comp fights go for longer, with multiple rounds?
This is because of your own limited experience. But the reason fights are short on “the street” is that unskilled fighters who have no respect for the abilities of their opponent, do not properly defend themselves, are lacking the conditioning to last for extended periods, and end up punching themselves out of gas instead of pacing themselves and picking their shots. MMA might have some similarities, but because of the rules it is quite different than “real” fights... rage is replaced by intelligence, brutality is replaced by skill. The rules are there to make the sport better for both the fans and the players. And MMA is the best sport ever!

CanucKyokushin
7/16/2005 1:36pm,
Lastly, I don't think we have mentioned intent but it definitely plays a roll. Most fight as "challenges"-- punch one, puch two, punch three, roll on the ground, garnish with a couple of parting whines. A real fight means that concern for ones own safety or the safety of the other person is no longer a factor. People who have witnessed a person in a blind rage such that two and three shots are required to down him will immediately recognize what I'm talking about. Bernie Lau (a retired LEO and Ai-Ki practioner) wrote well of pretending that Aikido was indicated for use by Law Enforcement for this very reason.

My sense is this is why there are so many threads about the nature of working with resistant partners, but it is still not the same thing. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

BruceSorry for derailing this thread.

No,I'm sorry.But that's not me or rather not how I am.The few fights i've been in I've always worried about the other individual.One time I even tried my hardest to calm everyone involved.But to no avail.

Edit:The" guy in the blind rage".WTF,thats when you run .if you can't run,then your in it for the long haul.

And as for the thread:'The use of eye gouges and groin shots are not effective'.In fact they can be against most individuals.The argument here at bullshido is that A person in situations of self-defense cannot only count on those techniques.He/she will need other techniques that they can rally upon if they don't work.

drillpogodrill
7/16/2005 1:52pm,
I have seen a lot of streetfights that went five, ten minutes. Also, biting, eye gouging etc. Are very effective, but ANYONE and everyone can do it. Bite a guy you're really fighting with and see if he doesn't bite you back.

Rah
7/16/2005 2:01pm,
In Cage matches, 1 trained fighter + 1 trained fighter = long match. Remember there have been short matches too however. Theres the video of that one on this site somewhere of the wing chun guy and the wrestler. The wc guy clearly undertrained, lost in a matter of seconds. Which leads onto:

Street fight: 1 trained fighter + 1 untrained fighter = very quick fight. OR

Street fight: 1 untrained fighter + 1 untrained fighter = very quick match (usually). As has been said people usually tire out, or a hole heap of people jump in to stop it, or arms are flailing wildly and one lucky participant gets in the haymaker that ends the show.

So in cage matches, both fighters in most cases have trained a huge amount of time for this. They know how to defend so enders such as wild haymakers just aren't going to cut it (at least not early on). Believe it not its actually a very tactical game in a way like playing chess. Sometimes you will sacrifice a hit to the body to get a hit to the head. Theres offensive play and defensive play, and misleading of the opponent. Its not simply a case of jump in there and hit like crazy. Secondly, the fighters are conditioned to last a long time. Fights last simply because they can.

Street fights GENERALLY end quickly simply because one person is significantly better than the other, or because they are both terrible and as has been said they leave openings or burn out quickly, or people jump in, or the police come, or they go to the ground and get swallowed by lava. That being said, there must be long lasting street fights out there though.Im sure there have been many street fights where both competitors were trained aswell. Probably led to a longer fight. The vast majority of fights i have seen however have involved alcohol so that in itself is probably the deciding factor in my experience of street fights. As i think has been said, you probably have limited experience of seeing street fights aswell.

Or of course all of this could just be me talking out of my rear
:wink:

en1gma523
7/16/2005 2:08pm,
1. If techniques forbidden by the rules of many competition formats such as eye gouges and groin shots are ineffective (a common argument on bullshido), why make them illegal at all?

2. If competition fights like UFC etc are so similar to real fights (again common argument), why have i never seen a real fight that has lasted more than 20 seconds at a stretch where comp fights go for longer, with multiple rounds?

:wrestlera


1) Having both taken and given solid eye gouges, I can say that while they may not be fight enders, they can cause serious damage (I have serious damage in my left eye from a fight). And that is the problem in the sports aspect if MA. I suffered permenant damage to an eye while in a real fight agaisnt someone who was trying to kill me, and I kept fighting even after I believed that my eye was permantly gone, I just took it to the ground. I beleive that eye gouges are good to have in your arsenal, but that they should not be relied upon. First of all, many people whom I have heard talk about how great eye gouges, don't train to attack against live, resisting oppenents. The thing is, if you can't hit me, you probably can't gouge my eyes, but if you can get decent jabs in, there is a good chance that you can.

2) In a sport fight, two trained people walk into a ring/cage and know that they are walking into a fight. They face off. In a street enounter, chances are that neither person has significant training, and the fight begins with a sucker punch or a blind side attack. I think this is where the difference comes in. If some big badass blasts me in the back of the head, the fight probably isn't lasting long. I'm either out, or I'm working really hard to get away.

chaosexmachina
7/16/2005 2:34pm,
The only surefire way to end a fight is to knock or choke out your attacker.

Jaguar Wong
7/16/2005 2:55pm,
...

And as for the thread:'The use of eye gouges and groin shots are not effective'.In fact they can be against most individuals.The argument here at bullshido is that A person in situations of self-defense cannot only count on those techniques.He/she will need other techniques that they can rally upon if they don't work.

I thought this was the case on Bullshido (for the most part anyway) as well. I think the big beef is with those that feel sparring is impractical because there are no eye gouges or groin shots allowed (we allow pulled groin shots if both participants are wearing cups), yet they feel that they will be able to land a life saving technique to a small moving target (eye/throat) against a fully resistant opponent without ever practicing to do so.

How do you expect to land a finger strike to the eye or spearhand to the throat (past a tucked chin and hands guarding the jaw) if you can't land a jab to the face?

That and I think it's safer to say that competitions like the UFC and PrideFC are closer to a no rules fight than chi sau, or one-step sparring (or even muay thai rules sparring) is. There are still events like Vale Tudo (IVC? or something like that) where the only rules are still no biting and no eye gouging. But the rest of the organizations are still trying to promote MMA as a sport, so the health of the fighters is much more important than seeing who's the best fighter, otherwise all of the fighters would have super-short (1-3 fight) careers because of maiming and other crippling injuries.

CanucKyokushin
7/16/2005 3:08pm,
How do you expect to land a finger strike to the eye or spearhand to the throat (past a tucked chin and hands guarding the jaw) if you can't land a jab to the face?

My answer to that is :why would I waste my energie on trying to gouge when I'll just try to Jab.If my opponent is trying to block his face and chest with his guards.Then in that case I'll just punch at his guards until I cause enough damage.

Just for the record I have not received any training in 'eye gouges' and 'ripping testicles' .

Cullion
7/16/2005 3:09pm,
1. If techniques forbidden by the rules of many competition formats such as eye gouges and groin shots are ineffective (a common argument on bullshido), why make them illegal at all?

There is a FAQ about this, look it up. To summarise: schools that claim that eye gouges and groin shots invalidate competitive full contact fighting aren't actually practicing those techniques against live opponents either, so any exaggerated confidence that they'll be able to pull that stuff off against a real opponent is bluster. You fight how you train, and nobody does full contact nut-strikes and eye-gouges in training except by accident.



2. If competition fights like UFC etc are so similar to real fights (again common argument), why have i never seen a real fight that has lasted more than 20 seconds at a stretch where comp fights go for longer, with multiple rounds?


Because elite MA atheletes don't back down the minute they get punched a couple of times in the face, or tackled to the ground. They are much fitter and tougher than a random bully, and their livelihood is on the line.

Lampa
7/16/2005 3:18pm,
I think some of the energy about "forbidden techniques" comes from the injunctions of such books as the Okinawan WU BEI ZHI. In that work 7 techniques are identified that are forbidden use because the likely consequences out-strip the justification for using them in a typical altercation. Note I use the term "typical". A shot to the groin may be nothing to us today, but back a century ago taking away a persons' ability to father children and perpetuate his line was out of all proportion to the typical fight. Same thing goes for a technique that would, say, completely tear loose the rotator cuff and make a person unable to provide for his family. fact is that back 100 years ago there were a lot worse things than dying that could come out of a fight. Eyes were off-limits for the same reason.

As far as competition and fighting I think it depends on where a person is standing. People on the outside of a ring are free to make any observations they care to. perceptions change when the audiance member gets to enter the ring and experience the technique for himself.

Lastly, I don't think we have mentioned intent but it definitely plays a roll. Most fight as "challenges"-- punch one, puch two, punch three, roll on the ground, garnish with a couple of parting whines. A real fight means that concern for ones own safety or the safety of the other person is no longer a factor. People who have witnessed a person in a blind rage such that two and three shots are required to down him will immediately recognize what I'm talking about. Bernie Lau (a retired LEO and Ai-Ki practioner) wrote well of pretending that Aikido was indicated for use by Law Enforcement for this very reason.

My sense is this is why there are so many threads about the nature of working with resistant partners, but it is still not the same thing. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

I remember you from the dojang mailing list! Can you get Craig to post here?


As to the original question, "real" fights are generally between people who aren't very well versed in avoiding any fight enders, so a wild shot is a lot more likely to end some random schmuck than a professional.

In UFC 1-6 most of the moves that are illegal now were perfectly acceptable. While the fights were somewhat different, the only really notable change was how many fighters were still capable of competing by the end of the tournament. In fact, if memory serves, the domination of CMAers was even more severe when the rules were less restrictive. Ron Van Clief, for example, was a certifiable badass, even at his age. Yet, he got his **** ruined.

OZZ
7/16/2005 3:37pm,
I agree with the argument that eye gouges and groin shots are not guaranteed fight-enders, and as such, should not be given the credence they sometimes are by people who want to pump up CMA, or even plain dirty fighting.
MMA tournaments and matches are a sport, there is no place in sports for such tactics. There is a line between the ring and the street, one would hope that a person with a strong tiger claw would not inflict the sort of damage they are capable of on someone who didn't deserve it.
I, too, have seen many street fights that lasted more than twenty seconds (and have been in a few that lasted a while as well), this depends on a lot of things, not just the skills of the fighters. The environment, the presence of law enforcement, the circumstances surrounding a fight etc. etc.
Each fight is its own particular animal..it is not really right to generalize about these things.