Martial Artists VS Street Fighters

I don't know whether you can really pin this down - some people "suit" matial arts training more, some people "suit" street fighting more.
I can't really pin it down between the two in my own mind. If you look at boxing between brawlers and boxers, sometimes the boxer wins, sometimes the brawler wins. Unless you are Ray Robinson or Ali of course...... but I've a feeling they were more "street" than first met the eye......

Sorry about the fence sitting reply.

And yes the shoulder popping thing - it always rings alarm bells when people go on about "what youwant to do is this and that" - a proper marital artist IMHO will not pre copnceive what is going to happen in a fight and will (hopefully) be prepared for a wide variety of situations. The shoulder popping thing I agree is a bit ambitous.

 

The best street fighters I know all do boxing. Thoes that dont do any ma, have a fighting style that looks alot like boxing.

 

When we say street fighters, we're talking actual scrappers and not just drunk idiots right? Because it's been said already about "haymakers" which has connotations of them being untrained.

I know quite a few street fighters, mostly from having come from an army area. I know 2 ex-street fighters who are currently high Dan grades within Taekwon-Do. [Not the bouncy sport style] - They've both developed an attitude different from what they had in their fighting days. They're far more dangerous now after decades studying fighting techniques and the endless hours of training. MA can make even the most experienced fighters better.

Another interesting point raised, was that people who don't train naturally pick up good boxing habits anyway from experience. One of the above mentioned people, is an excellent Escrima stick user. He's never done Escrima, he just used to carry around two sticks in his boots and learned to use them through experience!

In my own opinion, both are necessary. Unless the MAist is 20 years in the training, my money's on the street fighter.

 

20 years?. Why so long?.

 

Out of interest, how long have those guys you know been fighting?

 

If it's anything like the people I know/have known all their lives.

 

I wouldn't know exactly. But their later teen years and into their adulthood. So I'm gonna guess between 5-10 years.
They still fight, when the need arises, but they don't go around in gangs looking for fights anymore. I know one of them used to batter in people just for talking bad about him.

 

You ever seen a boxer of 2 years fighting a street fighter?

 

No, I've never seen it. But I know a boxer of 2 years who's fought some pretty rough lads. He came out better. He said it was down to the fact that as a boxer he's very much used to being hit full-contact and at a high level of aggression and competition. Which he said was close to how fights are.

He assured me that I wouldn't have been able to handle it.

 

I've seen one with about 4 years experience get knocked out with one shot in a local pub, it's not the art but the guy behind it (corny but true)

 

Not that I'm being an ****, but that doesn't prove anything. Anybody has a puncher's chance and no MA makes you invincible.

'Street fighters' have the upper hand on most MA because of the one crucial thing: experience.

Martial arts used to be about learning how to fight well to stay alive. Things were pressure-tested, and rubbish that didn't work was quickly uncovered, because people got killed.

Now, 'martial artists' are generally hobbyists who want to LARP and don't want to get hurt, or just want their kids to learn discipline or something. That's why people like Fred Ettish got pasted in the early UFC's - they'd only ever tested themselves against people within their (very, very narrow) ruleset.

If somebody trains as realistically as possible with as few rules as possible, then you can get as close as possible to 'real' fighting without the risk of death. Anything that pressure-tests it's theories fares well, too. See boxing, judo, Muay Thai, wrestling and others. Tippy-tap point sparring will not do a lot for your fighting ability.

If you want to see how a street fighter fares against a decent martial artist, look for the video of the street fighter vs MMA guy on YouTube. I can't seem to find it - does anyone know the link?

 

wasn't trying to make a point, someone asked a question, I answered. If you'd read the thread I'd go with the streetfighter most of the time.

 

Ok lets get one thing straight, the rising block is not actually a block. Its an arm trap which is used for setting up arm bars and such.

And I'm not talking about some drunk chump off the street. I'm talking a one on one unarmed fight against a guy who hasnt had any training, but has had a fair share of fights in his life.

Now lets say the martial artist is also an experienced fighter. And he goes up against a street fighter with roughly the same amount of experience. My bet is that the martial artist would win. Judging by some the responses I've read, I dont think some of you would agree with me.

peace

 

with all the ma you know
i personally beleive a skilled streetfighter..(one whos been to allot of fights)
will always win..
MA's are used to each other, no matter how many tournaments and **** theyve been to.. with the step moves and blocks, and therrofre most think they are very strong and would win if they got in a fight.
but they dont really realize that when it comes to a streetfight.. all the tricks you learned are useless,.. it all comes down to experience actually fighting, not training
and most ma'ists think they can but really cant.

 

If you do a lame M/A it isn't going to help, if you've done F/C or cross trained a bit then you stand a good chance, a very good chance. But it depends on cicumstances, if someone wants to take you out there's not going to be much squaring up, the 1st thing you know about the fight is your nose has just been busted by some guys forehead.

If you want to go abit deeper, so you get a streetfighter to have a 'fair' fight and you beat him, you won't next time. Street aways wins THERE ARE NO RULES.

 

I would put money on anyone with a 30+% win ratio from the UFC or Pride over random "STREETFIGHTER". Even if it was Guile.

I'd put money on random collegiate wrestler over random untrained "STREETFIGHTER", even.

You mean, Matt Hughes? Yeah, I agree.

 

In the TKD application of rising block with reaction hand, yes. But the rising block is seen in other arts as a block or cover with a simultaneous counter-punch. A friend of mine picked up the move from Lau-Gar Kung Fu, I couldn't confirm any other arts that use this technique.

 

i just realized i probably wasn't so clear on my position here. i think a martial artist who trains hard will win over a streetfighter (i feel dumb typing that) with equal experience. reason being that martial artists who train hard are going to be doing a lot of conditioning and sparring, while streetfighters are just going to be (i'm assuming) fighting occasionally. granted, a real fight is generally worth more than a sparring match, but the fact that sparring matches happen much more frequently tips the scales in the martial artist's favor. couple that with conditioning and drills to work on specific situations/weaknesses, and i think the martial artist has a clear advantage.

 

I dont think theres as many actual "Street Fighters" as there are random people who just dont like the look of you or are wasted completely. As the saying goes "A man who can fight will only fight when the situation has no alternative, a man who can not will fight blindy" basically people who cant fight will usually pick fights as a way to seem "hard" and like you dont want to "mess" with them...

 

Skrom, TKD has really changed you.