is important to view any given martial art in this light. For example, a striking art that does not allow any form of grappling or punches to the head in its competitions has obvious weak areas when outside these artificial constraints. It is optimized for a particular style of combat and is strong there. For example, ju-jitsu and judo contain many of the same throws and takedowns, but a ju-jitsu practitioner is expected to also learn striking and many submissions that are not contained in the judo body of technique. Which is better? That depends entirely on what you want to do with it. If your aim is to do well in judo competition, then you would be well advised to train in judo. For more general applications, ju-jitsu is more flexible.
A given martial art is not “bad” or “useless” if it does not cover one or another aspect of personal combat, but it may not be a good choice if all-round capability is your goal. Many highly focused arts contain excellent techniques within their own arena but are weak elsewhere. The only time this is a problem is when an instructor of one of those arts discounts a threat his students are ill-equipped to deal with effectively.
There is little point in training to fight from the clinch in a sport where the fighters are quickly separated, such as boxing. Clinch work is vital for more general applications, not least as a transition stage between “standup” and your “ground game.”
So it is perfectly fine to say something like, “we’re teaching non-contact karate. It’s excellent for fitness, self-discipline and we clean up in non-contact point fighting competitions” if that’s true. The same instructor claiming “We’re teaching non-contact karate, the ultimate fighting system ever. Grapplers? Pah, you just kick them right off the planet before they can grab you!” may actually not realize that what he is saying is untrue, but nevertheless it is a misleading claim.
It is necessary to be realistic about martial arts when seeking somewhere to train. A “good” art does what it is supposed to, whatever that may be. Good does not always equate to ideal for personal combat though. It is worth looking at a few different classes before committing to something. However, just because an art is not the ultimate all-round fighting system does not mean you should pass it up. If you enjoy it and get something out of it, then it’s a good place to train. There is nothing to stop you going to a class for fun and working on fight-winning skills elsewhere.
Self-defense vs. Sport
The “Street vs. Sport” debate has probably raged for as long as there have been streets and combat sports. The crux of the argument is that the sporting environment is different to that encountered outside a pizza shop at 2 a.m., and the real or imagined differences between the two are used as ammunition by those who claim that various martial arts techniques will or will not work “on the street.”
The truth is that there are indeed differences between a sporting environment and “real” personal combat. There are also a number of close similarities. Assuming that you are not expecting to wrestle crocodiles or something, your likely opponent will be built like most other human beings. Maybe a bit bigger or smaller, but in possession of the same number of arms, legs, and heads, equipped with the same weapons and vulnerable in the same places.
“Sport” groundfighting is subject to artificial rules about what you can and can’t do. The fighter who makes best use of position and leverage will be able to apply a submission technique and win….
… which really isn’t any different to “Street” groundfighting. You just have a few more tools at your disposal and some nasty dirty tricks to watch out for. Position and leverage are still the keys to success, whatever sort of ground you’re fighting on.
The fact that humans are all put together in much the same way means that they tend to do much the same things in a fight. There are cultural and environmental differences of course, but as a rule the instincts to grab and strike are the same the world over. Thus the things that work in a cage match are surprisingly similar to those that work when rolling around in the street outside a nightclub.
Generally speaking, the victor in a fight will be the fighter who:
• Makes best use of his own physical capabilities
• Prevents the opponent from utilizing his own advantages
• Takes into account any environmental factors
The first two are self-explanatory—fight better than the other guy and don’t let him do what he wants to if you can avoid it. The third is a little more subtle. Environmental factors can include things like showing the judges what they need to see in order to award you victory, making use of the limited space in a ring or fighting area as well as various “street” factors. These include the presence of your friends, the opponent’s friends and any bystanders who might become involved plus traffic, curbs, broken glass, and anything else that might influence the course of a fight.
Dojo, cage, ring, or street; the same basic principles apply to effective fighting. If you can break the opponent’s posture and/or control his head, his options are severely limited.
Any grappling situation will be chracterized by move and counter-move, with the position of the fighters dictating what options are available. Pulling the head down will get someone under control, the response is grabbing the leg and trying to overbalance the opponent.
The primary difference between “street” and “sport” are that in a sporting event there are rules, (usually) weight categories and other factors intended to create a reasonably fair fight, and relatively minor consequences in the case of defeat. An opponent who throws in the towel or taps out in a sporting event is likely to be safe, and on the opposite side of that coin, an opponent who gives up is no longer a threat. He is not likely to start throwing punches as soon as you let go of him.
Conversely, there is no guarantee that a “street” opponent will not beg for mercy then attack you after you have released him. His friends or random passers-by may decide to join in, or there may be weapons involved. You cannot guarantee good footing and a suitable fight environment. There is also likely to be some doubt and confusion about whether or not a fight is about to start, whereas in a sporting event you will know what you are expected to do, and when.
However, fighting skills are fighting skills. It has been suggested that a “street” opponent can bite and gouge eyes, making conventional grappling skills invalid. The first half of that sentence is true; the second does not necessarily follow. After all, biting and eye-gouging are just tools, just like an armbar or a choke. Fighting skills are about using the tools you have at your disposal and stopping the opponent from using his. Whether the tool is an armlock or a bite, the positional skills you learn in training will help you use your tools and defend against those of the opponent.
It is necessary to tailor your tactics to the situation. Striking is not allowed in a judo match so you can expect your opponent not to punch you in the face. Instead, you must watch for attempts to throw you or take you down. In a street fight, with a risk that someone might run up and kick you while you work your opponent, trying to set up an armbar on the ground might not be an ideal tactic. You can usually afford to take your time in a sporting match, which may not be an option under “street” circumstances.
One
