are these martial arts effective at all in a street fight?

Question

taekwondo - i really dont see how kicking someone will win you a fight never mind an experienced fighter but even against a bumb on the street. but if you can elaborate please tell me how it is effective. same goes for kenpo karate, kung fu and boxing.
for me i belive if you fight more than two attackers you wont possibly win. this is why i think brazilian jujitsu will serve as self defense as will judo, sambo, amateur wrestling and a few other styles but they are not practiced often. more often than not its the least effective arts that are taught that you cannot you in a defensive situation.
why is this?

ok people misunderstood what i said. right for starters i come from a country where guns arent findable aand crime is low but assaults are still common and defence is necessary. obviously you dont take an out out onto the street and just use it. i know that ive been training since i was 13. but from a self defense point of view can you defend yourself with any of these arts. i know which ones you can and cant i want to hear your opinion!

for anybody who is going to answer please asnwer how they think these arts will help you defend yourself from an attacker

oh and as for they kittie guy who said staying there and mixing it up with a violent person is stupid i fight in a cage for a living(part time) if im attacked i dont back down unless it means my life. i dont call for help! a man should not have to live in fear of others thats why people take self defense classes. if your attacked run if its dangerous but if you can kick his *** then beat him to a pulp cause thats the only way to teach them

i never said i could grapple with multiple attackers but striking just doesnt work in self defense. so if you have one attacker your only chance is to grapple and then either run or finish him

ha shootersway you misunderstand me again. when i say beat them to a pulp i mean snap a leg bone so that they need serious rehab and will probably think twice before they do such a thing. social conscience goes out the window if you are attacked. best way of edfinding yourself is avoiding situations but you cannot allow yourself to be bullied or attacked by a drunken idiot or a fool high on some drugs or something. armbar him and at least he wont be attacking anybody for about 8-10 weeks

nope my judo man i have boxed 16-2-4 and also muay thai two years but like you pointed out yuo only need so much striking to defend yourself and then its grappling that you realy need! a tkd fighter has no grappling experience so if he gets grabbed by a stronger attacker he is toast because he cant grapple. a boxer is grand until somebody shoots on him he hasnt been taught how to defend takedowns and he cant punch when you have passed his gaurd. you see what im saying of coarse you need striking for the cage. i still take classes in muay thai but i only spar i dont fight. but muay thai is all good until you get grabbed and if he is bigger and you vant clinch or elbow he has you. you can be world champion at taekwondo but if you get grabbed by a strong oponents chances are he has you. unless he has a grappling defence.

also mofo wrestling is only common in certain countries. in britain and ireland good arts are very hard to find. boxing is still the norm and we never encorporated wrestling. there is a small amount of judo but jujitsu is not common at all. and sambo doesnt exist here. you know it just depends on where you go. but taekwondo is the most common art here after boxing. than you have kenpo. and other forms of karate are very popular too. but i dont think they are effective enough. they will help to a degree but a black belt in taekwondo doesnt mean as much as some people think it does

Answer 1

I don't believe in ineffective styles.

I believe in ineffective training methods.

Any style, technique is simply a tool in your tool belt, you have to learn of it's effectiveness for you, or ineffectiveness. By large and large Judo is considered an "effective" art by most standards. However that doesn't mean every single throw is combat effective, or even effective for a person. A great Judoka has maybe 2 or 3 throws that he can do at any angle, without fail.

A world champion boxer has maybe one or two good punches that he can hit accurately with knock out power with regularity.

The same with all fighters, they have an arsenal of a bunch of moves, but perfect a few, they have a style based on that.

But the only way you learn those things is through combat, sparring, hard resistent alive training against opponents who are attempting to do the same to you. That is where you develop what works for you and what doesn't.

I don't believe in writing a whole style off, there are proven techniques in nearly all the styles, but I will quickly write off any training approach that does not train with resistance and alive hard sparring. Until you can perform a technique on an individual repeatedly who is trying to prevent you from doing so, you don't truly have grasp of that technique.

Additionally until you have done so under adrenaline, you truly aren't effective either. I have seen guys who are dojo bad@sses, that can wipe the floor with everyone they face, but the second they get in a ring, cage, or tournament suddenly they just suck. Similarly I have seen guys do horrible in the dojo or gym, and see them just destroy guys in tournaments, cages, and rings.

I think a lot of people discount actual instincts, and think for some reason that because a person does this or this, that they some how won't have basic human instinct.

News Flash: Wrestlers, Judokas, BJJer, Samboist, all can punch as well. They can all throw fists, and do what comes natural to humans for combat. They are just more skilled once it comes to a grappling or in close portion.

I think that anything in which you can actively spar heavy and hard with, and get a chance to compete in against a stranger gives you a distinct advantage in adrenaline based situations.

The truth is the best techniques are simple, and they are in every art in some form. Every art has a punches, kicks, etc.

They may vary how they do it, but they all have it.

There are techniques from any art you can incorporate into your repetoire and make effective. But only is made effective by actually doing it at full speed, at full intensity, with regularity.

Simple fact is I HIGHLY doubt you "fight in a cage" because your ideas are flawed towards ONLY grappling. A boxer would DESTROY a bum on the street.

I am not sure where you get BJJ, Judo, and Amateur wrestling aren't practiced often. Practically every High School in the US, England, and the civilized world has a Wrestling team. Judo is EVERYWHERE. BJJ might be harder to find, but not so much. I can see how Sambo might be thought of as less practiced.

Also if you don't see how leg kicks, body kicks, liver kicks, knees, elbows, and fists won't help you in a fight, on the street. Well then you are a lost cause.

Grappling is just one range of fighting, and mind you can close the distance and get to it quickly. However that doesn't discount the need to know effective striking.

Again, this comes from actually striking, not from forms, not from bags, not from point sparring, and tippy tap sparring. But from hard sparring, and practicing those skills as close to a fully adrenalized situation as possible.

Grappling gives you the bonus of being able to train at full speed, full intensity, and having lesser chance for injury. It's VERY effective training, but there is also very effective striking.

More importantly, there is striking defense that has to be learned, if you grapple only and rarely have shots thrown at you, you have no idea how much you can actually get hurt, how an open guard is punishment, and how being turtled is one of the worst positions you can be in.

Again, I think you need to know all phases of unnarmed combat, and know them effectively, by effectively training. I don't think this is an art specific problem, I think this is a training problem. I think most arts specialize in one area, and rightly so. You should learn from those specialist, then cross train with other specialist, and become a well rounded fighter.

I don't think one art can show you everything, because there are nuances to each phase that you can only get from specializing in it. Additionally techniques that could be effective for your body style, or traits are left out.

For example:

Take Judo: There are 67 some odd official throws, hundreds of variations. In general Osoto Gari, Seionage, Uechi Mata, are some of the more used throws.

However there are literally hundreds of ways to throw these throws. An art that combines striking, throws, ground work, might show you one or two ways to throw these throws, and none of them could be the most effective for you. But also, they leave out literally hundreds of other throws aside from these that could be a better suit for you.

The only way to really know what throws work for you, and the various ways of throwing them is to go to a Judo place and work.

Everyone has their own style, their own techniques that work better for their build and their abilities. With effective alive training they can find them, they can develop timing, they can see the reactions, know openings, know how and when to use a technique and how when to NOT use a particular technique.

I believe in training methods, not specific arts. I won't write off an entire art, because it could have stuff I can use. I will write off a place that doesn't train effectively or realistically, and attempts to disguise this by saying it is too dangerous or secretive.

Well that is my take, to be effective you need to be well rounded. You don't have to be the best at any one thing, but you should be able to defend yourself in any range of combat.

If you neglect one area, then you are weak in that area, and in turn weak to defend against it.

You don't have to be the best boxer in the world, but you better know how to defend against good boxing. The same with grappling. YOu don't have to be a submission expert, but you damn sure better be competent with defending them, and the requires a high level of familiarity of them. Familiarity you get from sparring at that range against skilled opponents and recognizing the common set ups, and feeling when they are going for it.

It's not about arts, or even individuals (though athleticism and natural talent do have a say in matters) it is about effective training and developing your own style, knowing what works for you and what doesn't, and any possible thing that can be thrown at you, at least to the competency of how to defend against it.

That is just my opinion.

Answer 2

Street Fighting Martial Arts

Answer 3

Effective Martial Arts

Answer 4

1

Answer 5

the problem most people have is that they don't see the difference between by the book martial arts and straight fighting.
The original martial arts were taught as an instrument of self defense. They used all the tricks in the book (the dirty ones too) to defend themselves against agression. Of course as training became organised inevitably there had to be a system of rules and restrictions to keep students from beating each other to a bloody pulp every class. Problem with many modern MA is that these rules have been so embedded that people forget to look towards realism and sometimes are so stuck to their pure style that against some one who's "been taught from another book" they are useless. Wide knowledge , experience and a sence of realism are what makes for a good and useable form of martial art.

Answer 6

Wow...this is quite a chain of responses and counter-responses.

The art is only as good as the experience, ability, and knowledge of the practitioner. TaeKwon-Do is an extremely effective art as my own students have occassionally been unlucky enough to have to prove in real physical defense situations. I'm eqully convinced that Kenpo, Kung Fu, and boxing are equally applicable given an equally experienced, able, and knowledgable practitioner.

Your point about these arts being limited against a grappler is valid to a degree, but again it comes down entirely to the ability of each practitioner. None of the times I ever had to use defensive techniques ever ended up on the ground or grappling, and none of my TaeKwon-Do students who had to defend themselves ended up on the ground grappling with someone either. ALL systems of defense have strengths and weaknesses.

My associaiton has a freestyle sparring model which provides a similar experience to UFC/MMA without the full contact aspect. It allows all disciplines to compete together, utilizing all techniques avaialble, but uses the judges to determine advantage. We constatnly find that the more experienced player will have a significant advantage over a less experienced or skilled player - irrespective of the discipline either comes from. The inexperienced grappler often leaves themselves open to counter strikes before they get the kicker or puncher to the ground, or they leave vital areas open to attack once on the ground. Equally, the inexpereinced kicker or puncher often executes their technique too slowly or does not recover their leg or arm effectively, leaving an opening for grapplers or counter-fighters to take them down.

It's also a strange falacy to believe that TaeKwon-Do, or Kung Fu, or Karate practitioners never consider the possibility that physical defensive situations could end up in close or on the ground. I'm certainly well aware of it and my students train and prepare for it. I also know a number of fellow instructors who do the same.

So I think the premise of your question is somewhat flawed in it's broad generalization of all artists.


Ken C
9th Dan HapMoosaKi-Do
8th Dan TaeKwon-Do
7th Dan YongChul-Do

Answer 7

Yes martial arts could be used in a street fight i learned how to make someone "forget how to breath" and when i was being jumped at a party i used it on one of the guys and his friends took of But i also knew how to get him breathing again. And for TKD if u don't think that one swift kick to the head isn't going to take him down then u better start another style because ur obviosly not trained enough

Answer 8

Martial arts is a defensive protection and should only be used for protection, but it is based on your abilities and skills. Once you acquired the experience and skills doesn't mean you can whip any one. It means you'll be able to protect yourself.

Once heard (quote)"that with great power,comes great responsibility"(unquote) Martial art is a tool, just like a gun or knife. You use it irresponsible you'll hurt yourself or someone else. You need to investigate the art you wish to master and once you started some classes you'll gain the confidence to excel.

ie..........

Martial art whether gained from jujitsu or taekwondo was intended for self defense and not for running down the other guy and kicking his *ss, to do so has made you the attacker, and subject to the laws or civil actions that occur. One should not seek marital art to improve his performance in the "ring".

Answer 9

In a street fight, is all out as everyone knows
-my friend's been in quite a lot
The best form of martial arts are Chinese Martial Arts, Tae Kwon Do is only to get the threat away from u
but chinese martial arts has many MANY forms. I'm currently learning the five ancient styles and it really works in a all out street fight. Chinese Martial arts is the most likely to success against more then 1 opponent
The styles u listed on ur question, they are just 1 form and not multiple forms. Good fighters hav more then 1 styles
I hav Tai Chi fists, Judo, and White Crane Fists

o
and my master foughts against 42 people at once haha
its possible if master multiple forms
good luck on the streets (just make sure there's witnesses)

Answer 10

Yeah. These are all effective in a street fight. To varying degrees. Each has strengths and weaknesses. If you're a master at any of those styles, and have enough understanding of specific attack methods of your opponent, (or plural) you can be amazingly effective. (i.e. how to avoid takedowns, or get out of an armbar, or dodge a quick jab)

Answer 11

Judomofo has the response I can agree with the most.

There's no such thing as an ineffective martial art: There's just ineffective training methods and concepts that many styles live by, which, unfortunately, causes a lot of experienced/inexperienced people trouble in competition and street situations. These are the things that sometimes weigh down people within styles. This is not a determination of effectiveness, but moreso application. There's some styles that are easier to learn than others to learn for any number of people.

You see styles such as BJJ, San Shou, Muay Thai, and Kyokushin (Or Seidokan) karate do well in things such as MMA and the street because they usually have intense training methods, and the men/women that show their talents are sometimes as tuff as nails (Or their counterparts in other styles ^_^ ). That training is what gives them the edge. Just think: If Muay Thai had traditonal one step sparring that is well-known in some forms of Karate, how effective would it be? :P

-Kicks are very effective in the right hands, however: High kicks tend to be risky. They make for great KOs, but they are integral to all around self defense. It's either that, or you at least have to have strong legs as to not have them to successfully weakened so easily.

Tae Kwon Do, contrary to popular belief, has kicks that go to all regions. Many styles and schools, however, adopt "Point-Sparring" (Which by itself is horrible, but as a part of an overall three level sparring [Point, light contact, and full contact] is ok), or they do not teach traditional things such as knees, elbows, and leg kicks. Originally, it was very good, and most of the kicks were to the body and below, which are still to this day effective. I've taken it before, and while head kicks do help in sparring: I usually go for the body. Cracking a rib with a side kick is easier than knocking someone out with a tornado inside crescent in most people.



There was a big movement away from the cheap moves, but those are the kind of things that one needs in the street. You should combine whatever "formed" moves you have with bites, eye gouges, groin strikes, et cetera... The Tao of Jeet Kune Do has a big basis around this: The ability to be unrestrained. You have every right to let your potential out should you be in a situation where you just have to fight in order to survive.

Most people just need to find one art (Or a set of arts) that teaches fighting on all ranges (Or learn 1-2 ranges and defense against attacks from other ranges such as Wing Chun close combat, with the "Counter-grappling" element heavily expressed), spar with people from other disciplines to get a feel for people that fight differently, and learn to apply the moves that work for them, and no one else (Another part of the Tao of JKD).

Any of the arts you've listed can be effective
TKD- Ease of high kicks (Unless you have mad skills, or that's practical for you), more intense training, and a combination sparring that includes full contact is all that's needed. That, and the one learning how to apply the techniques. The legs are bigger limbs, and it may just be ones gift: Especially if their build aligns to it.

Kenpo- Usually this has a higher ratio of hand striking than leg striking, and that's perfectly fine. The sparring concept is the same here: One has to get close to the traditional ring setting, which is one of the closest settting to a street fight.

Kung Fu- The same applies, depending on style. A lot of the styles mix concepts, and some also include weight training. One has to learn application, and they must stay intense with training.

These apply with Judo, Sambo, Wrestling, and BJJ: These grappling styles have intense sparring elements, and they are important for successful use. That resistance, and compeitition is what emulates a street situation.

The styles do vary on a plane of aggression also, however. Kung Fu, TKD, and Kenpo are more defensive in nature than something such as Muay Thai, but defense is important in Muay Thai, although the offense/offensive counter is usually what wins a good match.

It's not the style: It's the training methodology, application, length in style, and training intensity that matters. Skill is skill: That is not style depedent.