How close do UFC fights come to real life self defence?

[sgtmac_46]

The reason for that is because the BJJ had been being tested on the streets of Brazil for years. They knew what worked because they tested it. It wasn't the fault of the Gracies that the first few contestants demonstrating other styles were clueless because they assumed it would work as advertised. That was the point.

 

[Strat_Tones]

Good point! The quality of people in the first few UFC events were really no match for Gracie. Notice though that by 3, when Gracie fought Kimo, and then went quite the distance with Severn, it was apparent that the quality had greatly risen.

Mike

You are correct that the talent pool in MMA has risen greatly, but you are wrong on a few points.

When I was a semi-traditional martial artist, I thought Kimo did great against Royce Gracie, and I thought Severn almost beat him. After training Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu for a while now, I can certainly say that Kimo never had Royce in trouble, AT ALL, and Severn, while he lasted a long time, did not have the tools to beat Royce. And no, I'm not a Gracie nuthugger. I've just had skilled BJJ people in positions similar to Kimo vs. Royce and then find out they were only setting me up, just like Kimo vs. Royce.

 

[Strat_Tones]

The reason for that is because the BJJ had been being tested on the streets of Brazil for years. They knew what worked because they tested it. It wasn't the fault of the Gracies that the first few contestants demonstrating other styles were clueless because they assumed it would work as advertised. That was the point.

This is very true. In many parts of Brazil, Jiu-Jitsu players are looked at as bullying scum, because they constantly pick fights to test their jiu-jitsu. I know a few Brazilians (and non-Brazilians) who have trained BJJ in Brazil. It isn't (or wasn't, back in the day) uncommon to learn a new position, and then go pick a fight after class to test it out. BJJ was developed for self-defense, not for fighting in a ring. It always makes me laugh when people think that BJJ players will fare poorly in a street fight -- this art was forged on the streets!!!

 

[Strat_Tones]

Sorry, one more post. I swear this one will be on topic.

I agree that the UFC doesn't EXACTLY resemble a street fight. Everyone knows that. But if you're using that as an excuse to avoid training in MMA, then you're deluding yourself.

However, for real-life self defense, there is simply no better training than MMA style training, no matter what you're background.

Spouting theories on self defense, knife attacks, biting, eye gouging, broken glass, concrete, etc. is absolutely worthless. The only thing that will save your skin (other than a gun/knife/etc) is lots of real training, with proven techniques, against a resisting opponent.
If you spend the majority of your time training in the empty air, or with a willing opponent, then you are not training for real life. Simple as that, and irrefutable.

 

[MJS]

You are correct that the talent pool in MMA has risen greatly, but you are wrong on a few points.

When I was a semi-traditional martial artist, I thought Kimo did great against Royce Gracie, and I thought Severn almost beat him. After training Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu for a while now, I can certainly say that Kimo never had Royce in trouble, AT ALL, and Severn, while he lasted a long time, did not have the tools to beat Royce. And no, I'm not a Gracie nuthugger. I've just had skilled BJJ people in positions similar to Kimo vs. Royce and then find out they were only setting me up, just like Kimo vs. Royce.

Just for clarification, I was not attempting to compare any of the Gracie fights, but simply comparing two fighters to those in the first few UFC events, showing that as time went on, the fighters got better. Seeing that you're addressing Kimo and Severn in your post, I'll reply to that.

Severn, like many of the first contenders, entered as a one dimensional fighter. He was using strictly wrestling, and it was not until UFC 5, that you actually saw him throw any serious blows. In UFC 4, he basically layed on Gracie, keeping him against the fence. Gracie was finally able to get a triangle.

As for Kimo. I just finished watching the fight in question. Gracie was doing his textbook moves: Get to the clinch and pull the person into the guard, and work from there. Kimo was giving him some probs. early on due to the fact that it was almost 2min. before the fight went to the ground. Twice, Kimo got his back. Both fighters were extremely tired by the end, but it was Royce who was not able to continue.

As for this:

I've just had skilled BJJ people in positions similar to Kimo vs. Royce and then find out they were only setting me up, just like Kimo vs. Royce.

I too have a background in BJJ, so I think its safe to assume that anyone who has done any grappling, has been in both the top and bottom position. One thing to keep in mind here: We are looking at a fight from the early 90's. The majority of fighters then, did not have the exp. on the ground as they do today. Again, Gracie was, in all of his fights, doing his textbook moves..clinch, and pull to the guard. Due to the fact that not many fighters knew much about grappling, let alone the guard, it was fairly easy for Royce to dominate in this position. Look at the fights of today and what do you see? Ground and Pound from the guard position. Once fighters started to understand the ground game, they were able to begin to be able to counter the move that won so many fights. Its easy to vie for position and work the guard when nobody is punching you, but when those strikes are added in, it changes the game entirely.

Thank you for the discussion.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Sorry, one more post. I swear this one will be on topic.

I agree that the UFC doesn't EXACTLY resemble a street fight. Everyone knows that. But if you're using that as an excuse to avoid training in MMA, then you're deluding yourself.

However, for real-life self defense, there is simply no better training than MMA style training, no matter what you're background.

Spouting theories on self defense, knife attacks, biting, eye gouging, broken glass, concrete, etc. is absolutely worthless. The only thing that will save your skin (other than a gun/knife/etc) is lots of real training, with proven techniques, against a resisting opponent.
If you spend the majority of your time training in the empty air, or with a willing opponent, then you are not training for real life. Simple as that, and irrefutable.

Interesting post. I have to say that I agree and disagree with some of what you're saying here. MMA does bring the fight aspect closer to a street fight, compared to point sparring, but we need to keep in mind that it is not the end all-be all of real self defense. I agree with your statement that it is important to make sure that training is done with resistance and aliveness. That is something that I have been saying for a long time. However, we can't forget that the ring is not the street. Not taking into consideration mult. attackers, weapons, the environment that you're in at the time, etc. is a mistake!

Keep in mind that we fight like we train. That being said, while it does not take a rocket scientist to do a groin kick or eye jab, the fact remains that MMA does have rules and the fighters need to gear their training for those rules. When you're in the heat of battle, you're going to fall back on whats been drilled into you. Forgetting that while you have your opp. mounted in the street, he could be gouging your eyes or biting you is also a mistake.

If one is serious about SD, they should make sure that they address all possible areas into their training. Punching, Kicking, Clinch, Grappling, Weapons, Mult. attackers, knowledge of SD laws, etc. is key to being as effective as one can get.

Mike

 

[FearlessFreep]

One thing to keep in mind, I think, in all ths is that all MA were designed for fighting, for combat. Whether you train in them as a sport, an art, or a fighting skill is really a matter of the student and the instructor, you are going to get a much different result depending on how you approach it. If you train TKD for point sparring or for Olympic sparring or for combat, it's going to be different. If you train it for fighting it's going to be *much* different because if you go in with an attitude that 'this is to protect myself from someone who *really* wants tohurt me and he doesn't play by the rules!', you suddenly have also sorts of new ways to attack and new targets to train for. Most MA have a *lot* of techniques that are simply not allowed in the sparring arena, which means if you train for sparring then you may be missing some important combat techniques but if you train in the full MA, and train for combat/SD, you're probably in pretty good shape. Anyway, most or all TMA were designed at one point as fighting techniques against real opponents who wanted someone dead; if being ready for that matters to you, then the techniques are in there

Any sporting event, even those that allow for mixed approaches, are going to be artifical, as has been pointed out Nice padded floors (not hardwood or concrete or asphalt), no street poles or tables to duck behind, limited room for evasion, no buddies with bottles or shivs hidden in boots or, no eye gouging or biting or... Even if person A using style X can beat person B using style Y in the limited format of an organized sparring match; does not mean that X is better than Y at street-fighting/SD or is 'designed for the street' or whatever. Could be that A is merely better trained and better conditioned than B, could be that A is better at applying X in that situation than B is with Y. Could be the rules don't allow all of Y to be used because they don't allow breaking knees and snapping elbows and crushing trachea, etc...etc...

What you see in a ring is, well, what you see in a ring. People good in a ring are good and what it takes to be good and a ring. I think extrapolating much beyond that is....not easily done

 

[Baytor]

Sorry, one more post. I swear this one will be on topic.

I agree that the UFC doesn't EXACTLY resemble a street fight. Everyone knows that. But if you're using that as an excuse to avoid training in MMA, then you're deluding yourself.

However, for real-life self defense, there is simply no better training than MMA style training, no matter what you're background.

Spouting theories on self defense, knife attacks, biting, eye gouging, broken glass, concrete, etc. is absolutely worthless. The only thing that will save your skin (other than a gun/knife/etc) is lots of real training, with proven techniques, against a resisting opponent.
If you spend the majority of your time training in the empty air, or with a willing opponent, then you are not training for real life. Simple as that, and irrefutable.

I completely agree that training with aliveness is an important part of realistic self defense training. I also think a strong working knowledge of ground grappling is very important for a well rounded martial artist. On the other hand, I think that going to the ground really places you in danger in a "street" situation. For one thing, I've seen too many street fights where friends jump in. If you think your opponent's buddies won't jump in and club the back your head like a baby harp seal, you're in for a painful lesson.

 

[still learning]

Hello, We will never see real fighing and no rules in the ring of any kind (Romans did) . UFC does bring an almost like real fighting. I agree with the police officer in the early post, real fights are unpredictable.

Is there a way to train in real fighting situations? Can all the different variations of real fighting be taught? and defense learned? Is this what we all are looking for?

I like the idea of training hard, avoid all troubles and walk (run if needed) away, and live to enjoy the next day. Hospital bills, law suits and jail time may not be fun, if you decide to use your pride (Ego's) to fight back. ...Aloha ( (Yes! sometimes we need to fight back because of no choice.)

 

[sgtmac_46]

Interesting post. I have to say that I agree and disagree with some of what you're saying here. MMA does bring the fight aspect closer to a street fight, compared to point sparring, but we need to keep in mind that it is not the end all-be all of real self defense. I agree with your statement that it is important to make sure that training is done with resistance and aliveness. That is something that I have been saying for a long time. However, we can't forget that the ring is not the street. Not taking into consideration mult. attackers, weapons, the environment that you're in at the time, etc. is a mistake!

Keep in mind that we fight like we train. That being said, while it does not take a rocket scientist to do a groin kick or eye jab, the fact remains that MMA does have rules and the fighters need to gear their training for those rules. When you're in the heat of battle, you're going to fall back on whats been drilled into you. Forgetting that while you have your opp. mounted in the street, he could be gouging your eyes or biting you is also a mistake.

If one is serious about SD, they should make sure that they address all possible areas into their training. Punching, Kicking, Clinch, Grappling, Weapons, Mult. attackers, knowledge of SD laws, etc. is key to being as effective as one can get.

Mike

I'm not going to take issue with the bulk of what you said, but I do want to pose a question. Undoubtedly, getting eye gouged would be a very painful and a possibly fight ending thing.

Biting, however, has never seemed very effective to me. I saw this having been bitten a few times in fights. The interesting thing about being bitten was that during the fight, I never felt anything but a vague, distant pain. It was never enough to make me stop what i'm doing, or alter my strategy (except make me mad).

In addition, i've seen guys biting in a fight, and it was usually the guy losing who did the biting, and just after the bite occurred, the guy doing the biting invariably got seriously hurt, as the bitting seemed to make the bittee mad.

So, from a practical stand point, is the fact that UFC fighters can't bite, in anyway make it less effective for self-defense. I once saw a guy who got part of his ear bitten off in a fight, he didn't know it until the fight was over.

Unless someone bites me in the neck or the groin (ouch), it's not going to work anyway, so is this even a serious self-defense technique that someone can count on? Granted, if the chips are down and I have nothing else, i'll probably give it a shot myself, but how often does it change the course of a fight?

 

[MJS]

Sgtmac- I'll address 2 parts of your post.

1- Will a NHB fighter do well?? I guess it all depends on the person. As I said, NHB is not the end all be all to SD! You're going to fight like you train. We can't compare street to MMA due to the rules. Biting is one example that I used. Keep in mind that there are other things to take into consideration.

2- Biting in fact can be very effective. Paul Vunak has a tape out called Kino Mutai. He focuses strictly on how to bite. Like anything, it all comes down on how you apply it.

Mike

 

[loki09789]

Sgtmac- I'll address 2 parts of your post.

1- Will a NHB fighter do well?? I guess it all depends on the person. As I said, NHB is not the end all be all to SD! You're going to fight like you train. We can't compare street to MMA due to the rules. Biting is one example that I used. Keep in mind that there are other things to take into consideration.

2- Biting in fact can be very effective. Paul Vunak has a tape out called Kino Mutai. He focuses strictly on how to bite. Like anything, it all comes down on how you apply it.

Mike

Biting is a PAIN to deal with as a distraction technique, let alone as a dysfunctioning technique.

I would say sinking your chompers down to the bone on someones thumb would be really distracting as well as an effective way of disabling someone's ability to grab, clutch or even make a good fist for striking. The number of sensory receptors in the fingers is really high therefore the intensity of pain that they register is higher than a body blow in some cases.

Biting is effective, if anyone doubts it, just incorporate it into sparring or self defense scenarios once and see the effect on others and feel it on yourself....not fun.

 

[loki09789]

I'm not going to take issue with the bulk of what you said, but I do want to pose a question. Undoubtedly, getting eye gouged would be a very painful and a possibly fight ending thing.

This is a misconception because organs don't have sensory receptors in them. You can touch organs and not 'feel' the touch but 'feel' the effect in areas around the touch. Sort of like when you get numbed up by the Dentist. You can't feel that portion of your face, but you still register the 'touch' because of the areas around it.

Eye gouges won't cause severe amounts of pain relative to some other attacks. It will cause lose of vision/visual aquity/depth perception and such as well as some serious psychological impact if the bad guy is not absolutely berzerked.

 

[Adept]

Eye gouges won't cause severe amounts of pain relative to some other attacks. It will cause lose of vision/visual aquity/depth perception and such as well as some serious psychological impact if the bad guy is not absolutely berzerked.

I dont know, whenever I get poked in the eye with any kind of seriousness, it really frickin hurts. Like a red-hot poker being shoved into my skull. Obviously, it might not hurt as much as some other attacks, but it still causes a large amount of pain.

 

[Turbo]

Yes getting poked in the eye hurts, getting bit hurts....the only way you will know how close it comes is to step into a match...can be a ring, or cage....The guy across the ring is going to try and F... you up....

Look at V. Silva when he fights....even if I could use a eye gouge or a bit I still wouldnt think about getting in the ring with him. HE is still out to kill you legally within the rules (sometimes not within the rules).

You will learn alot from it thou!

 

[Baytor]

I think that something that a lot of MMA guys have going for them for self defense is their physical fitness. A lot of these guys work out hardcore and are that is something that will help them. While it's not even the biggest factor, it is one to consider.

 

[Danjo]

I'd like to hear Loren Christensen or Karazenpo or John Bishop weigh in on this. Police officers with a lot of experience in dealing with street situations. I read in one of his books that Christensen said his fights NEVER went to the ground.

 

[MJS]

Yes getting poked in the eye hurts, getting bit hurts....the only way you will know how close it comes is to step into a match...can be a ring, or cage....The guy across the ring is going to try and F... you up....

Look at V. Silva when he fights....even if I could use a eye gouge or a bit I still wouldnt think about getting in the ring with him. HE is still out to kill you legally within the rules (sometimes not within the rules).

You will learn alot from it thou!

I agree with the fingers in the eye. I mean, think about when something blows into your eye, an eye lash falls in, etc....it hurts and you certainly get a reaction.

As for Silva...yes, hes an awesome fighter. I have a few tapes of him fighting..definately a terror in the ring!! That is one of the reasons I always talk about keeping aliveness and resistance in training, because someone on the street who wants to carjack you, mug you, someone who thinks you cut them off in traffic and now you have a case of road rage to deal with, etc. is going to have that 'killer' mentality as well.

Mike

 

[Adept]

I'd like to hear Loren Christensen or Karazenpo or John Bishop weigh in on this. Police officers with a lot of experience in dealing with street situations. I read in one of his books that Christensen said his fights NEVER went to the ground.

All the LEOs I've talked to (online and off) said nearly all of their fights end on the ground, since thats where you usually cuff a suspect.

 

[Danjo]

All the LEOs I've talked to (online and off) said nearly all of their fights end on the ground, since thats where you usually cuff a suspect.

Like I said, I'd like to hear from any police officers out there that would care to respond to this. I do think that there is a difference between taking a suspect to the ground and handcuffing him there etc. and having the fight go to the ground. In the first situation, the officer is in control of the suspect, in the latter, the one in control is yet to be determined and the fight will be decided on the ground. When most people talk about a fight going to the ground, I believe that they are talking about the latter scenario where clear control or dominance had not been determined. After all, by the broader definition one could say that most of Mike Tyson's early fights "went to the ground" because that's where the opponents ended up. But the handcuffing and knockouts is not what I'm talking about. I'd like to find out what percent of fights end up on the ground when the outcome is undetermined.