What is the difference btw a Martial Artist and a Fighter??

Question

I've heard people saying they're not neccessarily the same thing...
what's the difference ??

please explain more on that.

Answer 1

I think I understand the context of your question. Perhaps in the Bruce Lee thread?

So I will go by that sort of definition. Some people I feel are way off base.

Yes a fighter trains for competetion, he trains to fight under adrenaline based situations. A fighter (such as MMA) are most definately Martial Artists, in the sense that they have practiced a martial art and have honed it to effeciency and tested it's abilities.

A martial artist trains for the art. Not for a fight or a competetion but for an appreciation of the art itself. While it does make them better as a fighter, they may never have a chance (hopefully) to utilize their skill against an unknown opponent. They train for love of the art, for self betterment through the art.

A fighter trains to win fights, that is his own self fulfillment. To learn techniques to help him be a better fighter, to try those techniques and hone them in a combat adrenaline based situation.

I disagree with the above poster saying that Martial Artists "can" kill, while a fighter thinks he can. A fighter knows the limits and abilities of his style and what the average reaction is. A strict martial artist rarely ever has used his skill in an adrenaline based situation.

There is a mystique about the martial arts, sometimes perpetuated by it's practitioners or fans. They see it as some sort of mystical superman, who can kill or maim in 2 or 3 moves.

This is not the case and is not practical. The only way you get better at combat is by doing combat. No amount of forms, board breaking, stance holding, or meditation changes that. While most Martial Artists can do very impressive physical feats, that doesn't mean that it applies practically against a fully resisting and pissed off opponent who legitimately wants to hurt you.

Mind you even the average Martial artists is going to be more effective against an unskilled opponent. However he will undoubtedly learn some lessons about what worked and what didn't.

I think whether you are a Martial Artist or a Fighter, as long as you enjoy what you do, and it helps you in your life than pursue it to it's fullest. But always be aware of your own limitations, and when you are practicing something, or someone is practicing something on you, be of the mindset of "If I didn't want this guy to do this, would he still be able to do it?"

So there are Martial Artists who are fighters, and most fighters (competetive sport fighters) are also Martial Artist.

The difference mentioned in other answers is that, a fighter is always testing his abilites and techniques against fully resisting opponents in an adrenaline based situation. (Namely in a match or a tournament, where you go against a stranger who wants to take your head off)

Where a Martial Artist doesn't feel the need to test himself, his test is mastering his art. He studies for the art, the fighter studies for the fight.

Could you be an effective football player if you never played another team? Could you be an effective boxer if you only shadow boxed?

An accomplished Martial Artist isn't necessarily an accomplished fighter. Look at the Shaolin Monk troupe, that goes around performing amazing feats of Martial Arts. They have never been in a fight, they don't go around testing their fighting skills. Aside from the tour they have been in a monestary from the age of 5 or 6. They are amazing and accomplished martial artists, but not accomplished fighters.

Tony Jaa, Jackie Chan, Samo Heung, Robin Shou, Jet Li, all great Martial artists. Accomplished in forms, and ability to use weapons and their bodies, heightened reflexes and the beauty and understanding of multiple Martial arts. However these are not accomplished fighters, they don't have records against opponents who wish to fight them.

You put any of them in a ring they aren't going to win. You put them in a streetfight against a fighter and they will definately not win. However you put them in a street fight with someone with no fighting background and they will more than likely tear that person apart.

Just a different emphasis, one on the art, one on combat. Either case both are great depending on what an individual wants.

You won't ever hear me say someone is wrong for doing any Martial Art. I do question certain arts more importantly their training techniques as far as it pertains to being "combat or street effective".

Simply because you will never learn how to fight unless you actually fight. Meaning forms, katas, cooperative partners, unrealistic stances, will do very little if never given the chance to test which techniques work for you, against different body styles and fighting styles.

Just my two cents, sorry about the novel.

Answer 2

"Martial art, like any art, is an expression of the human being" -Bruce Lee I believe the answer lies in the phrase "martial artist." A martial artist is a practitioner of the martial arts. Like any artist, a martial artist pays special attention to his technique and the details of his art. A martial artist would then probably be characterized by a greater discipline, and a greater technique. A fighter, by definition, is a person who fights. This could range from someone who randomly picks a fight in a bar when he's drunk to a man he spent his life practicing to be a championship kickboxer. A fighter and a martial artist are not necessarily two different things. A fighter can be a martial artist, and a martial artist can be a fighter. Again, the main difference is that a martial artist practices an art, and a fighter just needs to fight. A fighter is not inherently worse than a martial artist.

Answer 3

A martial artist is someone who has trained in one of the systems
defined as the martial arts. Depending upon the system, he or she
may actually be taught to avoid fighting if at all possible, and
follow the basic advice of :1) Walk Away; 2) Run Away: or,
if all else fails,3) Keep things simple ( use your best technique!)
A fighter's options are limited, to say the least, which is why
wiser fighters study the martial arts.

Answer 4

They are different but the same. A martial artist can be a fighter, and a fighter can be a martial artist. It really boils down to how they apply what they learn.

It can be applied almost anywhere. For example, in my opinion, Shaquile O'Neal is not a great basketball player. He is a dominant player at his position because of his size and strength, but he doesn't have good fundamental basketball skills. It doesn't take any training to be a fighter. It doesn't even take any training to be a good fighter. Some people just have natural abilities. Of course, if you want to be a fighter and you decide to train in the martial arts, it will only improve your skills.

I'm not sure I explained that very clearly, but I hope it helps.

Answer 5

you aren't going to gain any real consensus on this issue and I think most people will separate the two with some metaphysical or spiritual bullcrap as bieng "important" or "key" to martial arts.

While that kind of bunk is often taught as part of a school's curriculum in many cases, it is not the determining factor.

Realistically since the term "martial arts" really means those who practice the arts of mars (translated). Mars is the god of war, thus those who train for war would be the only real martial artists.
Literally I would only attribute this term to a soldier or person actively serving in the military or who has served.

However popular culture and society dictates that we must assign nonsensical terms and meanings to words because someone who didn't know what the word really meant coined it as a new way to use it.

Like when a cop screams on the streets of england to "put that f ag out" I would likely be arrested because I thought they meant I should kill the nearest homosexual.

Seriously,

today we attribute a martial artist to the person who studies the martial arts for the purpose of studying them AND more importantly with the intention of developing them and maybe making subtle differences or changes to try to improve them (even if they fail).

A fighter on the other hand I would imagne trains to fight. We are all fighters in the beginning (excluding my usual rant about Live Action Role Players), and are not competant to be martial artists as we are not able to develop or modify anything yet.

By modification I don't mean to change an art per-se, it could be as simple as bieng able to combine two different styles in a way that works for you- that is creating. Existing styles are like types of building blocks made of different material that you combine with the same or similar type, or different types to make a building.

When we have learned, or become competant in a style, then we can make modifications or additions or combine it with another style.

I think another difference is intent and goals. If I want to learn how to fight because I want to be a good fighter, then the martial arts is just the means to an ends, If however I wanted to fight, and test my martial arts that I've combined/developed for the purpose of developing those arts then I'm a martial artist.

A martial artist I think has to be a fighter first, then a martial artist. I think a lot of it also has to do with natural ageing as when you are younger people tend to be more concerned with bieng able to fight well because they have delusions of entering the UFC (ok, they are not all delusions, but I'm right with 99% of the people that want to as not everyone makes it) or pride or bieng a champ in boxing. I think when you get older, you have a desire to experiment more about not just "what works for me" but what works for the little guy (if you are big) or what works for the big guy (if you are little) and you start looking at the training more as something to develop rather than a means to an end. That "end" also includes making money, thus excluding the mcdojo people who push off faulty training on unsuspecting students for money.

I think a person does have to in fact first be a fighter (as they need to actually fight to be able to understand how to) on some level (you don't have to be in the UFC or even train MMA to train hard), because until you understand realistic conditions you can't adequately mix it up, change or improve your system. Just doing kata and point sparring doesn't make you a fighter it makes you a "tag" champion as the rules aren't realistic and are closer to a game than a fight. And you certainly can't be a martial artist if you don't first know how to fight.

Thats just my philosophy.

Answer 6

I am martial art black belt.
And i know what martial art is.
A martial artist has a sense , he has descipline while fighting.
Fight just does not means giving a punch or a kick any where and to kill the person, as like the film stars do in films.
A fighter has his own technique of having fight & martial artist has its own hence martial artist & fighter are different from each other

Answer 7

I guess an easy way to tell the difference would be this. Do you work where you do for money or because you like it?

If you work there for the money, you would be considered a fighter.

If you work there because you like what you do, you would be a martial artist.

A martial artist trains for more than just connecting a foot to someone's head or putting a fist on someone's nose. They learn a set of values that they use in everyday life.

That is probably the easiest way to tell the difference.

Answer 8

I'm just beginning my first martial arts course, and its shokotan karate. My sensei told us the differences. A martial artist is like any other artist, they just use movement to create their artwork. A fighter is a fighter, they train for competition.

Answer 9

Great question.

1) A fighter fights when he wants to. A Martial Artist only fights when he has to.

2) A fighter knows how to fight. A martial Artist not only knows how to fight but also knows when & when not to fight.

Answer 10

A fighter wants an award for winning,a martial artist just wants to win with no stress.A fighter stops when the referee says or the bell rings, a martial artist stops when the situations over.a fighter thinks he can kill,a martial artist can.Do I need to go on?fighters are thugs and dont care if they hurt themselves in the process,a martial artist,minimum impact maximum damage.