New Fight Question

[Zire]

because its to worlds most elite navy seal im sure he would win. the boxer and the streetfighter would die first :P

[Hume]

[ QUOTE ]
because its to worlds most elite navy seal im sure he would win. the boxer and the streetfighter would die first :P

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm the worlds best fighter with the nickname Hume on twoplustwo. Therefore I'm sure I would win. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[sandycove]

From the perspective of a former Marine and Army infantry officer, with some familiarity with boxing and martial arts:

1. Boxer. Hardest hitters, wonderful stamina, take a punch, emotional control, experience, traditionally undersold. Will not be intimidated by street punks, regardless of reputation. Will match the balance and spacial awareness of the martial artist and prevail with the accumulated power of multiple blows.

2. Martial artist. Traditionally oversold, particularly the kicking aspect, except for the "soft" arts, like tai chi. A great master would be nearly impossible to kill. But he would find it nearly impossible to be a killer. I have seen Sifu John Ding in action and I simply can't imagine him failing to anticipate any move that might place him at a disadvantage. Many alleged experts have tried.

3. Ultimate fighting champion. Most fights end up on the ground, which is familiar territory to these guys. Knowledge and willingness to attack vulnerable areas a big plus.

4. Seal. Inexperienced and not particularly well-schooled at fighting without any weapon at all. Slight nod over streetfighter on the basis of character, neutral site, loss of surprise. No mission context a big minus. Moves up if allowed to improvise tools.

5. Streetfighter. Lost out of his natural habitat. But psychopathic personality and lack of empathy a big plus.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]

So, all in all, the street fighter and the military man probably have a more appropriate psychological background for killing. Make of it what you will.

Mickey Brausch

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that to be true and a good point that's been overlooked.

What I find most disturbing about this entire thread is that’s is so focused on school or system rather than the internal person. “Best Boxer”, “Best UFC” and the arguments for these camps. First UFC has rules it’s not a wide open free for all and they do not have a “huge” advantage over any other school of martial arts. UFC typically = marital arts background so to dismiss marital artist is absurd. The UFC will never have a contestant that holds a belief system that treats martial arts as a religion. So by it’s structure you are excluding many of the best martial artist and instead getting a subset of the total pie. I’ve met first hand some of these religion focused folks and I’m sure some of them would mop the floor with these UFC folks if you could get them to fight, they most likely would just walk way from a situation.

And so much of this is dependant on the person's pure animal instincts and what makes them tick as a person. It’s not just about a title or level they have obtained. Both may have been a heavy weight champion, but who would stand better in this challenge an ear biting Mike Tyson or a Lennox Lewis.

[JasonK]

The question has already been answered, by the UFC. It was originally created to pit different fighting arts against one another to see which is the best. Countless numbers of pro boxers, experts in many martial arts, SEALs and other commando types, and all sorts of street fighters have entered The Octagon only to get beat down by somebody who's well versed in multiple disciplines.

[mjkidd]

[ QUOTE ]
For some reason, tempers are flaring over this "problem". It's getting rather personal. There must be at least a dozen ex-SEALS in the thread, and twice that number of UFC active pros. Amazing. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
The stupidity in this thread is astounding.
It makes more sense for [the SEALS) to ... use their rifle if they are out of bullets.

[/ QUOTE ]A rifle?? The SEALS are supposed to charge with a rifle??

They gotta fix bayonets first, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

The current model of both the M16 rifle and M4 carbine has a bayonet lug, so it's a good bet they would.

[DeadMoney_J]

[ QUOTE ]
The question has already been answered, by the UFC. It was originally created to pit different fighting arts against one another to see which is the best. Countless numbers of pro boxers, experts in many martial arts, SEALs and other commando types, and all sorts of street fighters have entered The Octagon only to get beat down by somebody who's well versed in multiple disciplines.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although, I'm completely agreeing that the SEAL is not the favorite in the competition, this statement seems very wrong to me.

For one, I am not aware of any Special Operations Operators that have participated (not that they'd fair well in this format). In addition, the competition is far from real world combat. I'm not knocking UFC style competition by any means (I have trained with MMA forms and have a high regard for the individuals that do this) but it is different in several important aspects.

For instance, I have found that even when simulating "real-world" situations in MMA training that often, even against a superior opponent, they leave vital areas open due to considerations that they don't usually have to deal with (i.e. them being on top mount and allowing me to pull their neck close enough to my mouth where I could bite out their Jugular or bite other areas that could instantly neutralize their agression). There are a plethora of other examples but that gives you the general idea of why I feel there is such a disconnect between the Octagon and H2H combat.

[dknightx]

the misinformation about SEALs is baffling ... for those who place the SEALs towards the top must have some misconstrued image of what SEALs really are. It would benefit you to do some (serious) research before making any claims.

That said, SEALs are probably one of the top 5 military SF groups in the entire world (israeli's SF is probably #1, and australian and UK SAS #2/#3), and they are AWESOME at what they do. But here's the thing, what they do IS NOT hand to hand combat. H2H combat is such a MINOR part of their training, that even the SEAL with the best H2H skills would either be that way because of previous experience, or time spent OUTSIDE of training learning these skills (which many do, btw).

True, SEALs do have the mental fortitude to put up a good fight, and they are not to be underestimated, but from a purely "skills" point of view, the SEAL is severely lacking in H2H combat (even if they ARE trained to kill). Out of all the things a SEAL excels in, H2H combat is probably towards the lower half ...

Finally, completing BUD/S (Hell week is only in the 3-4th week of BUD/S) does not make you a SEAL ... During the next phase of training, there is very little time spent on H2H combat, as its not really that important to being a successful SEAL ... i can think of 50 things that are more important.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]
The question has already been answered, by the UFC. It was originally created to pit different fighting arts against one another to see which is the best. Countless numbers of pro boxers, experts in many martial arts, SEALs and other commando types, and all sorts of street fighters have entered The Octagon only to get beat down by somebody who's well versed in multiple disciplines.

[/ QUOTE ]

You miss the entire point, those with the real goods would never disgrace their belief systems by entering such a side show. Well versed in street fighting tactics is more like it.....
It's actually pretty embrassing that folks think this is the best there is to offer....

[DeadMoney_J]

[ QUOTE ]

That said, SEALs are probably one of the top 5 military SF groups in the entire world (israeli's SF is probably #1, and australian and UK SAS #2/#3)

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your entire post minus this part (your views on training emphasis are very corret). But, out of curiosity, why this ranking? With very few exceptions, there aren't hardly any SO units that I'd put over another one (referring to the accepted major professional forces of the world).