I agree with a lot of what's been said so far, but one of the points I was trying to make in the OP was that fighting for your life (or the lives of your loved ones) is nothing like sporting combat, cage fighting or any other form of dueling by choice. I get so sick of people saying that if you don't prove your skills in a public, full-contact MMA context, you shouldn't be teaching self defense of any kind. I believe that self defense skills may be especially valuable to those of us who are not physically or emotionally inclined to subject ourselves to that level of abuse by choice. Opinions?
I read a book once called "Soul of the Sword" by Robert O'Connel. It's been while since I read it, and I've added a lot of thoughts since then, but he deserves credit for the original thought. That said, I'll answer for my own ideas below.
There are basically two types of combat in the natural kingdom. There is "inter-species combat" and "intra-species combat."
Inter-species combat is where one species attacks another. Lions vs. zebra, predator vs. prey kind of stuff.
Intra-species combat is between members of the same species. Rams butting heads, deer wrestling with their antlers, horses fighting for pecking order, etc.
Intra-species combat (same-species) is marked by strict rules. Typically it is not to the death (Tigers being a notable exception), but is a fight to prove dominance. Sometimes there is an audience, usually the female that the males were fighting over. Sometimes the fight is over territory. Different "weapons" are appropriate for different combat. Rattlesnakes will wrestle, but not bite. Deer will lock horns, but not kick. Dogs will wrestle, and use their teeth, but it's more of a fight for submission. There is typically a "challenge" issued and accepted, and there is a opportunity for the loser to leave. The goal is dominance, and social status, and the odds are close to even. Death or serious injury may occur, but it is not the goal.
Inter-species combat (different species) is typically a form of hunting. There are no rules, and it is deadly. Surprise attacks are usually the best strategy, and the defender's best option is usually to try to run. The attacker will choose the easiest target, with the odds heavily in their favor before the decision to commit to the attack is made. If the prey cannot run, then the weapons employed are not the same that are used to dominate others of the same species. Snakes bite in defense, deer kick, elephants charge, etc. That is, the rules and strategies are completely different between the types of combat.
Humans are one of the few animals to engage in both types of combat against others of the same species. Sport fighting, or sports in general are in the same arena as the "intra-species" combat. Fairness rules. Some playground fights, and by extension, "barroom" fights follow the same pattern. In fact, apart from a sporting event, these types of fight generally are considered "mutual combat" or "dueling" and are illegal. (They are also against my interpretation of my religion.) The parallels are obvious. Challenges are issued and accepted, dominance is the goal, audiences are present, rules are followed.
When humans prey on other humans, however, the rules disappear. Just like in nature, different weapons are appropriate, different strategies are used, and the ability to win a "mutual combat" situation is not a guarantee for a "prey/predator" situation. Cheating is the norm, on both sides. Both sides will try to manipulate the odds to their advantage. For the "prey" (us) the goal is survival. For the predator, the goal is to take something of value from the prey with as little effort as possible. Nobody is fighting for honor, or dominance. The prey must always be alert, because the predator is looking to catch the prey by surprise.
Unfortunately, many in the Martial Arts world, and a large majority of YouTube users can't tell the difference. They think a predator's advances are a chance to prove dominance. Bad idea. Many think that every fight is a "intra-species" fight, and they prepare themselves only for this type of combat. When the reality of a predator/prey situation hits home, they are simply not able to handle it.
The rare few (many who have gravitated to this forum,) don't give a rip about fighting for dominance (outside of sporting events), but only prepare for defending themselves or loved ones from predators. Mutual combat is largely ignored, because the logic is simple: Mutual Combat (intra-species) requires a challenge to be issued and accepted -- if you never issue or accept a challenge, you will never find yourself in a "duel" and any attack initiated without the acceptance of a challenge means that it is an attack from a predator, and should be dealt with as such.
This is where you see the dudes get their clocks cleaned, because they initiate an attack under "mutual combat" rules, and the guy who they've picked on responds with "predator/prey" rules. Again, bad idea for the aggressor.
Back to the O.P., after a long rabbit trail -- many consider "prey" behavior to be "cowardly." They won't accept the challenges, and when they do fight, they don't follow the rules. The "prey" does not inspire dominance. However, to the predator, the alert prey is their downfall. They can't catch them, and they probably don't want to.
In fact, anything from the predator/prey situation cold be called "cowardly" from judging the situation from a "mutual combat" perspective. Both predator and prey are not following the rules.
However, the term "coward" is nothing to those in the predator/prey situation. Nobody cares - the focus is on other things entirely.
