What good is sport martial arts?

[Master Dan]

I train all my students that can to use head kicks regardless of age and rank becasue if they never do that for say 6 years then all of suddent can they wont have the skill set? also if all are doing it then the reflex of protecting the head comes with that but we also train hands as well combined with everything.

However I do not believe in excessive contact to the head for minors so controled contact to the head is required.

Self defense is all about control being able to put what you want exactly where you want and how. People that depend only on blindly all out blasting at general areas may or may not do the job and is only good for a time or a season which fades.

 

[Master Dan]

Too be honest, I've seen it the other way around far more times. I don't know if it is a lack of self-esteem, a mis-perception or what. Fortunately many SD focused practitioners have publically stated that people take the arts for many reasons that are valid. Generally the biggest concern I see from my SD peers is the sports-only club advetising that they teach SD as a commercial gimmick. That is intellectual dishonesty and does a dis-service to the student.

If a martial art is a hobby only to a person, done to get into shape and off the couch then I say great! If it is for sport competitions only and gets them out from in front of the T.V. then I say great. And if someone is looking for a vehicle for personal protection and joins an appropriate school that actually covers SD, then I say great as well.

Just to throw in another perspective as to motivations of people and why they choose to stay or not realted to SD and Sport. The GM of Enerie Reyes Senior taught that when people first come in looking for SD and back in early 70's Sport was thought of as SD ( public perspetive) he said that it was motivated by Fear and Hate and that in the process of training a person forgets Fear and Hate as soon as they are tired so something else must replace that and a good instructor teaches Spirit. If there is a Spirit of MA in the Dojang that carries a person beyond Tired beyond Fear and Hate they will stay if not they will leave.

 

[puunui]

We are different in some regards. I'm not sure freestyle sparring is an apt description, but it is fine for the example. We might begin a scenario walking into a room and the lights are dimmed and then the person is attacked from the side. Or, we might start to good guy already on the ground wedged into a corner with the bad guy standing over him/her. We might start it sitting in a car or sitting in a chair or standing at an ATM or a counter. Each scenario is different. In one, it may be a carjacking at knife point. In another a couple of 'drunks' that have walked into the store and start hassling you. The bad guy is going to try to do whatever the bad guy is going to do in real life (within reason for safety considerations). If he's using a 'knife' it might be a magic marker or one of the knifes with the white chalk at the end or one of the knives that shock you when contact is made. If he's a drunk he might try to plow you over with wild haymakers.

Which one of the above scenarios were you engaged in when your student tried to side snap kick you and you raised your leg up to block? I ask because the situation you described with the side kick block sure sounded like a "sport" tournament type situation to me. Also, if you only have eight hours to twenty four hours in which to train a student in self defense to the point where he/she will retain that ability for 18 months, I would think you wouldn't be doing this type of "sport" light sparring. I remember conversing with Peyton Quinn and I don't remember if his course incorporated "light sparring" or not. I think not because he was into his bulletman gear, which would allow full contact, not light contact.

 

[mastercole]

We may have a slightly different perspective or picture when saying freestyle sparring. To some, that would be two people facing each other at perhaps arms length distance and waiting for a signal to begin. Then they try to punch or kick each other. Or something along those lines. That is one perspective.

We are different in some regards. I'm not sure freestyle sparring is an apt description, but it is fine for the example. We might begin a scenario walking into a room and the lights are dimmed and then the person is attacked from the side. Or, we might start to good guy already on the ground wedged into a corner with the bad guy standing over him/her. We might start it sitting in a car or sitting in a chair or standing at an ATM or a counter. Each scenario is different. In one, it may be a carjacking at knife point. In another a couple of 'drunks' that have walked into the store and start hassling you. The bad guy is going to try to do whatever the bad guy is going to do in real life (within reason for safety considerations). If he's using a 'knife' it might be a magic marker or one of the knifes with the white chalk at the end or one of the knives that shock you when contact is made. If he's a drunk he might try to plow you over with wild haymakers.

Sometimes we'll film it for later review which is a good training tool. Learn from mistakes in training instead of in real life. So far, bumps and bruises and the occasional getting 'racked' but nothing major.

In such a scenario training, I would have no concern for my safety at all because I know, like you stated, the scenarios are (within reason for safety considerations) and no one is really trying to knock me out.

Let me better explain and give an example of true adrenal stress where the OODA thing comes in to play, in a big way.

Adult black belts from various locations get together most every weekend for training, which usually includes full contact sparing with absolutely unpredictable full force blows. Knockout is allowed and encouraged, just like in a match.

Some coaches make standing offers to their fighters, like, $100 if you can get a knockout today, and everyone in the room knows it.

 

[mastercole]

There are may advantages to sport martial arts. They promote physical health, in many cases respect for other people, give an outlet for competition, promote confidence, share an interest with others, promote internal drive, and develop an eye for range and speed. Other than these things, sport martial art are usually also just plain fun. The only issue I have with sport arts is when they are promoted to students as something they are not. For example, when Olympic type TKD is promoted as an effecient, safe, and effective self defense art. Its a great sport, but does not qualify as effecient or safe as a self-defense platform. Though the physical skills learned would be helpful.

What is your personal experience in Olympic Taekwondo?

 

[WC_lun]

What is your personal experience in Olympic Taekwondo?

I trained in it when I was a teenager and have trained some of the bad habits learned in it out of quite a few students as an adult. I am not bashing Olympic style TKD. I think it takes skill and is great for what it is. However, I am also a big believer in you will fight how you train. If you are figting on the street and your hands are down at your waist because that is the way you have trained for years, you are going to have issues defending yourself. Also. while higher kicks can make a great impact, they are not effecient, no matter how you cut it.

I would never go into a match with an experienced Olymic style TKDist and expect to do well under that rule set. I don't train that way and they are very good at what they do. Why do some sport martial artist think they can just go into other sports or the street and be successful, when they will run into the same issues. They don't train the same way and in many cases the opponent they would face is actually good at what they do. That doesn't mean that some of the training would not be helpul, but again, you will fight how you train.

 

[ETinCYQX]

You're forgetting that "how we train" includes another black belt level opponent and the threat of getting knocked out. While for the most part I agree with you, sport TaeKwonDo is not exactly a game of soccer. It's still a combat sport.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

In such a scenario training, I would have no concern for my safety at all because I know, like you stated, the scenarios are (within reason for safety considerations) and no one is really trying to knock me out.

I think I understand what you're saying here. As a clarification, not all of the scenarios are known ahead of time. For example, it may or may not be an edged weapon scenario. It may or may not be a multiple attacker scenario (even if multiple 'possible' assailants are present).

And there is another consideration I should have mentioned earlier; a scenario that doesn't involve going hands-on at all. A scenario that tests avoidance and/or escape and/or evasion and/or de-esculation skills. We shouldn't always train the situation is hands-on but cover as many possible outcomes as is practical.

Adult black belts from various locations get together most every weekend for training, which usually includes full contact sparing with absolutely unpredictable full force blows. Knockout is allowed and encouraged, just like in a match.

I like this, particularly if the BB's are from different systems. Good training can come from cross-training. For a twist, when your students are sparring...give one a knife (safety of course) and have them work it into the attack. Or allow one or both to go for an improvised weapon. Or, just as I posted above, start the sparring where one can simply walk away, close a door or whatever to stop the situation from even happening rather than just going to blows.

Start one of them down on the ground, wedged against the wall. Put them outside on the grass. Or on the asphalt. In a small room (to simulate an elevator for example).

 

[mastercole]

I think I understand what you're saying here. As a clarification, not all of the scenarios are known ahead of time. For example, it may or may not be an edged weapon scenario. It may or may not be a multiple attacker scenario (even if multiple 'possible' assailants are present).

And there is another consideration I should have mentioned earlier; a scenario that doesn't involve going hands-on at all. A scenario that tests avoidance and/or escape and/or evasion and/or de-esculation skills. We shouldn't always train the situation is hands-on but cover as many possible outcomes as is practical.



I like this, particularly if the BB's are from different systems. Good training can come from cross-training. For a twist, when your students are sparring...give one a knife (safety of course) and have them work it into the attack. Or allow one or both to go for an improvised weapon. Or, just as I posted above, start the sparring where one can simply walk away, close a door or whatever to stop the situation from even happening rather than just going to blows.

Start one of them down on the ground, wedged against the wall. Put them outside on the grass. Or on the asphalt. In a small room (to simulate an elevator for example).

OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.

So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.

So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.

Since when did being SD oriented require that one be under threat of serious physical harm during class time?

SD oriented should mean that the students train to deal with a variety of situations that are analogous to what they may encounter in an actual violent attack outside of a sporting context. Many of those skills will overlap with what one would see in sport, with both sport and SD each containing elements that the other will not.

Both types of training are highly beneficial. One is not better than the other. They are simply different schools of thought regarding teaching.

Daniel

 

[Kong Soo Do]

OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.

So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.

I'm not sure how you've managed to make the leap to this conclusion? My students do what is necessary to end the threat in a training environment while an atmosphere of safety is maintained. Going for the 'knock-out' or for points is a sports thing because....what else are they going to do? In SD, the situation is evaluated and the appropriate course of action determined. That may entail retreat (though in many states, such as my own it is not a legal requirement. That doesn't mean that it still isn't a tactically wise course of action). For example, when your training your students is a typical 'free sparring' session;

• Do they always 'go for the knock-out'? Is so, they've limited there response options.
• Do they have the option and/or opportunity to retreat?
• Do they have the option of using an improvised weapon?
• Does there opponent have the option of pulling a weapon (planned or improvised)?
• Does there opponent have the option of having his buddies jump in to help?
• Are your students required to observe certain rules?
• Do your students always train inside the Dojang?
• Do your students always were their uniform?
• Do you take your students outside at all? In normal street clothing? On grass, asphalt, sidewalk, slippery surfaces, in the woods, a hallway, an elevator, a set of stairs etc?

If you aren't taking full advantage of all of the above then you might be preparing the student for a great sporting match, but not realistic SD. Although any physical activity brings about a physical risk, there is more to SD than going for a 'knock-out'.

My students may very well try a stun and run, attempt a knock-out blow, a joint lock, a throw, a choke or whatever may be appropriate to the situation. Using a BOB we can go for the eyes, throat or groin. Or train for hard brachial plexus strikes etc.

Another very important consideration that you aren't taking into account: While it is entirely possible to knock someone out with a well placed kick, it is one thing to be warmed up and stretched out and wearing loose clothing in the Dojang. It is quite another to try it in a dress in high heels, a pair of tight jeans, with a handful of groceries, a duty belt etc when you're not warmed up and stretched out.

Secondly, and even more importantly, when your students are 'going for the knock-out', I'm fairly confident that head gear and gloves are worn. Feel free to correct me if your students don't wear safety gear. Now a blow to the head with a fist in a SD situation isn't the smartest tactic. The chance of injuring the hand on someones head is fairly substantial even with a well placed strike. That is why boxer as an example tape their hands and wear gloves. I'll say it again, the chance of injuring your hand on someone's head/face is fairly substantial. If this occurs, depending on the severity of the injury, it could very well limit your options for further SD. Anyone here ever try to manipulate a weapon with broken knuckles? Or a cell phone, or car keys? I've broken a knuckle before and my range of motion in that hand was limited for an extended period of time. Given that manual dexterity is already limited while under duress, you've just made it even harder by busting a knuckle or two, or spraining your wrist on someone's face. And there is no way to know ahead of time whether or not he'll actually be knocked out.

This also doesn't touch on the possibility of blood borne pathagens the bad guy may be carrying. And now you've put yourself in a position of cutting your knuckles on his teeth or 'bleeding' him from the mouth or nose.

All in all, teaching your students to 'go for the knock-out' by using there hands to the head is not wise for the variety of reasons I've listed. You are actually putting them at risk while at the same time limiting there overall SD options. This is the difference between someone that is sport oriented and someone that is SD oriented. No disrespect intended, but these are extremely real considerations that sport methodology does NOT take into account.

 

[mastercole]

I'm not sure how you've managed to make the leap to this conclusion? My students do what is necessary to end the threat in a training environment while an atmosphere of safety is maintained. Going for the 'knock-out' or for points is a sports thing because....what else are they going to do? In SD, the situation is evaluated and the appropriate course of action determined. That may entail retreat (though in many states, such as my own it is not a legal requirement. That doesn't mean that it still isn't a tactically wise course of action). For example, when your training your students is a typical 'free sparring' session;

• Do they always 'go for the knock-out'? Is so, they've limited there response options.
• Do they have the option and/or opportunity to retreat?
• Do they have the option of using an improvised weapon?
• Does there opponent have the option of pulling a weapon (planned or improvised)?
• Does there opponent have the option of having his buddies jump in to help?
• Are your students required to observe certain rules?
• Do your students always train inside the Dojang?
• Do your students always were their uniform?
• Do you take your students outside at all? In normal street clothing? On grass, asphalt, sidewalk, slippery surfaces, in the woods, a hallway, an elevator, a set of stairs etc?

If you aren't taking full advantage of all of the above then you might be preparing the student for a great sporting match, but not realistic SD. Although any physical activity brings about a physical risk, there is more to SD than going for a 'knock-out'.

My students may very well try a stun and run, attempt a knock-out blow, a joint lock, a throw, a choke or whatever may be appropriate to the situation. Using a BOB we can go for the eyes, throat or groin. Or train for hard brachial plexus strikes etc.

Another very important consideration that you aren't taking into account: While it is entirely possible to knock someone out with a well placed kick, it is one thing to be warmed up and stretched out and wearing loose clothing in the Dojang. It is quite another to try it in a dress in high heels, a pair of tight jeans, with a handful of groceries, a duty belt etc when you're not warmed up and stretched out.

Secondly, and even more importantly, when your students are 'going for the knock-out', I'm fairly confident that head gear and gloves are worn. Feel free to correct me if your students don't wear safety gear. Now a blow to the head with a fist in a SD situation isn't the smartest tactic. The chance of injuring the hand on someones head is fairly substantial even with a well placed strike. That is why boxer as an example tape their hands and wear gloves. I'll say it again, the chance of injuring your hand on someone's head/face is fairly substantial. If this occurs, depending on the severity of the injury, it could very well limit your options for further SD. Anyone here ever try to manipulate a weapon with broken knuckles? Or a cell phone, or car keys? I've broken a knuckle before and my range of motion in that hand was limited for an extended period of time. Given that manual dexterity is already limited while under duress, you've just made it even harder by busting a knuckle or two, or spraining your wrist on someone's face. And there is no way to know ahead of time whether or not he'll actually be knocked out.

This also doesn't touch on the possibility of blood borne pathagens the bad guy may be carrying. And now you've put yourself in a position of cutting your knuckles on his teeth or 'bleeding' him from the mouth or nose.

All in all, teaching your students to 'go for the knock-out' by using there hands to the head is not wise for the variety of reasons I've listed. You are actually putting them at risk while at the same time limiting there overall SD options. This is the difference between someone that is sport oriented and someone that is SD oriented. No disrespect intended, but these are extremely real considerations that sport methodology does NOT take into account.

I'm sure you have a great curriculum, it sounds that way, however, I am really trying to get to one point. If there is no real threat of being knocked out (head or body shots), there is no real training, period, it's all just fluff. If your students don't have someone really trying to take them out, which is what it sounds like to me, then it's unrealistic.

You can not work on a bunch of soccer scenarios and drills, on sunny days, in the rain, on a rough field, it tight shorts, etc, and then think that person is ready to magically be able to jump in and play the game in real time, in a real situation. You have to play soccer, under the real stress of action to learn soccer. Self Defense is no different, you have to REALLY defend yourself in order to get any good at it.

 

[mastercole]

Since when did being SD oriented require that one be under threat of serious physical harm during class time?

SD oriented should mean that the students train to deal with a variety of situations that are analogous to what they may encounter in an actual violent attack outside of a sporting context. Many of those skills will overlap with what one would see in sport, with both sport and SD each containing elements that the other will not.

Both types of training are highly beneficial. One is not better than the other. They are simply different schools of thought regarding teaching.

Daniel

Since the beginning of time.

If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer.

And I'm not talking about class, I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I'm sure you have a great curriculum, it sounds that way, however, I am really trying to get to one point. If there is no real threat of being knocked out (head or body shots), there is no real training, period, it's all just fluff. If your students don't have someone really trying to take them out, which is what it sounds like to me, then it's unrealistic.

Centuries of training methodology say otherwise.

You can not work on a bunch of soccer scenarios and drills, on sunny days, in the rain, on a rough field, it tight shorts, etc, and then think that person is ready to magically be able to jump in and play the game in real time, in a real situation. You have to play soccer, under the real stress of action to learn soccer. Self Defense is no different, you have to REALLY defend yourself in order to get any good at it.

Except that this analogy presupposes that REALLY defending yourself requires that the person you are training with is REALLY trying to knock you out.

Violent criminals attacking you are not going for the knock out. They're going for the kill. This is why two man dueling does not equate to realistic self defense either, even if your partner is trying to knock you out.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Since the beginning of time.

If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer..

Two man dueling does not equal self defense. Not in the real world anyway. Sparring does not equal nor approximate actual self defense either.

Sparring allows you to practice techniques with a resisting partner in a free form setting.

Given the long term negative effects of repeated knock outs, any school that is actually encouraging training partners to KO one another in regular training is one that I would discourage anyone from attending.

Perhaps I'm reading you wrong, but what you seem to be saying is that threat of KO needs to be ever present or at least a regular part of training.

If that is not what you are saying, please clarify.

And I'm not talking about class,

I was. My initial statement was: Since when did being SD oriented require that one be under threat of serious physical harm during class time?

And I'm pretty sure Kong Soo Do is talking about class as well.

I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.

Then what are you talking about? The vast majority of students' martial arts experience is in class.

Your students who are "fighters who train during off hours"; what are they training for? MMA? WTF sport TKD? Underground street fighting?

If you're talking WTF sport, do these same students practice full contact striking while wearing zero protective gear?

Daniel

 

[dancingalone]

Since the beginning of time.

If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer.

And I'm not talking about class, I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.

Sorry, but the chances for 'REAL harm' do not occur in every drill, at every stage of training, even within organizations such as the military where presumably the need for training efficacy is at the highest.

There are other counter examples as well. Do people always train with live knifes for example and try to cut each other up? Do jujutsu people always 'spar' with an intent to break and damage each other?

Obviously not. The introduction of risk into a drill is an important part of intelligent, well-designed training, yet it would be incorrect to state that it is a component that should always be present.

 

[mastercole]

I trained in it when I was a teenager and have trained some of the bad habits learned in it out of quite a few students as an adult. I am not bashing Olympic style TKD. I think it takes skill and is great for what it is. However, I am also a big believer in you will fight how you train. If you are figting on the street and your hands are down at your waist because that is the way you have trained for years, you are going to have issues defending yourself. Also. while higher kicks can make a great impact, they are not effecient, no matter how you cut it.

I would never go into a match with an experienced Olymic style TKDist and expect to do well under that rule set. I don't train that way and they are very good at what they do. Why do some sport martial artist think they can just go into other sports or the street and be successful, when they will run into the same issues. They don't train the same way and in many cases the opponent they would face is actually good at what they do. That doesn't mean that some of the training would not be helpul, but again, you will fight how you train.

Training at the local level, is sort of like playing ball in the local Little League. I guess when I talk about WTF fighters, I think about international/world level fighters.

Elite WTF fighters have superior movement skills, there hands are exactly where they feel they need to be, good luck thinking you could run in and punch one of them. Unless you are training like they do (or like Mayweather), it won't happen.

Why is it that non-athletic recreational martial artist somehow feel their "experimental" training drills will somehow magically come through for them on the street, much more so than the martial arts athlete who trains 2 hours in the morning, 2 hours in the afternoon and 2 to 3 more hours in the evening 5 to 6 days a week, and competes under he threat of sever bodily injured (and even possible death). Like you said, you will fight how you train.

 

[tinker1]

The opponents you encounter in class or in tournament do not equate to any individual you may run into in a self defense situation.

In tournament people are grouped by gender and size / weight. In a SD situation (my opinion) fools that start something are usually bigger and stronger, and they believe that you are an easy target. Basically, they're cowards - many are at least. They will usually start something with someone smaller than they are whom they believe they can easily take advantage of. Also, they will likely have backup - unless they are unusually confident of their abilities to overcome you.

Big 250 pound men will attack 100 pound women. You can do that in sparring, but to drill that way in a class situation would be difficult.. unless you have a red man suit.

In a robbery situation an individual may brandish a gun and stand at a distance. Or they may flash a knife to intimidate you. OR there will be more than one of them.

Many years ago my Uncle was robbed at an ATM by a man with a gun. My Uncle tossed his wallet to the man and tried to run away, but the robber shot him in the head. Fortunately my Uncle survived and was (generally) fine afterward.

I'm not really clear on how you could have "no rules" in a class room situation. At tournament "no rules" would turn into a blood bath. But in a real SD situation "no rules" - rules. That's the way of it.

Also, there is the issue of experience level. In a class or a tournament, you are dealing with trained martial artists. On the street this may not be so. And while we all may believe that a martial artist has the advantage over someone not trained - and mostly I believe we do - there still is the risk of the unexpected.

Further, many times you don't see the first blow coming. Back when I was in High School I was leaving class one day, and as I walked out through the class room door into the main hall, someone hauled off and hit me. It was hard enough to drive me back into the class room. I quickly shook it off and launched myself through the door again.. but found just a jumble of people - so I had no idea who hit me.

A friend of mine was standing at a bar one night and got hit with a beer mug. No provocation, no warning. It dazed him, but he was able to move to avoid his attacker until his head cleared enough for him to put the other guy down and out.

So I really don't understand how you can really say that your training matches a real world street situation. Unless that is... you take your students to bars and get people to start fights with them.

 

[mastercole]

Centuries of training methodology say otherwise.

OK, how do you train your students for SD then?


[/QUOTE]Except that this analogy presupposes that REALLY defending yourself requires that the person you are training with is REALLY trying to knock you out.[/QUOTE]

Sure it does, if they are just tapping you, it's all fun and games, no threat.

[/QUOTE]Violent criminals attacking you are not going for the knock out. They're going for the kill.[/QUOTE]

You never know what a violent criminal is thinking. You can assume they will probably harm you, in some way or another, and that falls into the category of a REAL physical threat, unlike walking into a room or putting groceries in your trunk scenarios and having your non-threatening classmates grab your arm and keys on a snowy day.

[/QUOTE]This is why two man dueling does not equate to realistic self defense either, even if your partner is trying to knock you out. Daniel[/QUOTE]

Let's see, mugger attacks man in McDonald's parking lot. Man fights back. Well, here we have a two man duel don't we? I'd place my money on the martial arts athlete, who is use to real stress in the fight, over the scenario trained martial arts enthusiast in this one..........

 

[dancingalone]

Training at the local level, is sort of like playing ball in the local Little League. I guess when I talk about WTF fighters, I think about international/world level fighters.

Elite WTF fighters have superior movement skills, there hands are exactly where they feel they need to be, good luck thinking you could run in and punch one of them. Unless you are training like they do (or like Mayweather), it won't happen.

Why is it that non-athletic recreational martial artist somehow feel their "experimental" training drills will somehow magically come through for them on the street, much more so than the martial arts athlete who trains 2 hours in the morning, 2 hours in the afternoon and 2 to 3 more hours in the evening 5 to 6 days a week, and competes under he threat of sever bodily injured (and even possible death). Like you said, you will fight how you train.

It is a false comparison you are setting up. It is not a question of asking who is better to apply certain specific skills, the world class athlete or the average Joe? It is a question of setting up specific scenarios with desired outcomes and then training towards those goals.

Who is going to be more effect in avoiding a knife thrust or slash that starts within a range of 3 feet? Someone who trains daily for such an eventuality or a TKD player training to win matches under some rule set?

It is about the training rather than the fitness of the individuals involved.