MMA fighter vs. kung fu fighter

[Hoya]

Just to clarify, are you saying that there are highly trained fighters that regularly engage in fights to the death?

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Just to clarify, are you saying that there are highly trained fighters that regularly engage in fights to the death?

[/ QUOTE ]

They fight to the death when necessary, which is rare. They certainly don't engage in it for sport, money, or fame.

Unfortunately, though, sometimes in this world, such a thing is a necessity, but you won't see it on PPV on Friday nights.

Left to their own devices in the abscence of weaponry, between a Ufc-type and a Shaolin, where only one man leaves the room, I'm picking the shaolin every time. He may not prevail every single time, but they would in the majority, and would be heavy favorites going in.

Obviously, such a theoretical is ridiculous, but given the previous posts definitively stating that UFC and PRIDE were the best hand to hand fighters in the world, I thought we may want to put it into the proper perspective that UFC fighters are the best fighters when fighting by UFC rules, which would be a natural assumption anyway, but not necessarily when it comes to real hand to hand combat, sans any man made rules or constraints.

[bdohaney]

So what you are saying is... It's all MMA til someone loses an eye?

[Patton4]

This thread has been a hoot to read. No one is going to win these arguments. We really should be discussing which style would have a better chance of defeating him...

This is the real question.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is... It's all MMA til someone loses an eye?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL...pretty much.

Given the constraints in place via the rules, MMA is obviously evolved to define the optimal style that is successful within those conditions, and to put it bluntly, when it comes to hand to hand combat you don't just reinvent the wheel. You can alter the constraints to influence the sucessful styles, but given the current constraints, it is what it is, and this is what you get.

Kung fu, Fung Shui, nor Emeril Lagasse is going to be anywhere near as successful as a whole within those constraints as the current styles that have "risen to the top".

My only point was that their are styles and tactics that exist outside of those constraints that are infinitely more effective and would be more successful were the constraints removed.

But, at least for civilities sake, we never see that come to fruition.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

I have no idea about any of this, just want to say that Enter The Dragon is a sick [censored] movie

[Hoya]

So how many still active Shaolin monks do you think have actually been in a fight to the death?

[eleventyone]

Redbean actually brings up a good, though extraneously worded, point. In a REAL LIFE NO RULES fight to the death the person trained to kill will win. In that fight a mixed martial artist would prevail. And when I say mixed martial artist I mean someone, most likely military, trained in something like Krav Maga that focuses on maximum efficiency in real-life conditions which includes killing techniques. Someone trained in such a type of fighting would learn a lot of techniques from martial arts such as boxing, savate, muay thai, ju-jitsu, judo, and wrestling as well as the life threatening techniques. So really what you'd have is an MMA fighter trained to kill.

edit: you can get the info on krav maga from wikipedia

[cbloom]

Kung Fu was designed and perfected over hundreds of years for real world fighting, not for show or movies. It was used in practice by unarmed fighters against soldiers who were usually armed with weapons.

Most MMA styles are designed for a specific set of rules. The grappling styles, for instance, rely heavily on a position known as the "guard" which would never exist for more than 1 second in a no-rules fight because you can easily strike the throat, groin & eyes from the guard, as well as being able to bite.

Obviously when it comes to a 1 on 1 fight there are a huge number of factors & fighting style is only a tiny portion of it. Strength, ability to take a punch, fearlessness, experience, composure, etc. etc. matter immensely. If I was a Kung Fu fighter I would not want to face a guy like Wanderlei or Fedor just because they're hugely gifted individual fighters, not because their style is so effective.

Also, to those who are so in love with grappling - if you look at almost any MMA fight won by submission you'll see that it could've have come to a much much faster & easier end by just crushing the windpipe, gouging eyes, etc.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
And when I say mixed martial artist I mean someone, most likely military, trained in something like Krav Maga that focuses on maximum efficiency in real-life conditions which includes killing techniques.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why in hell would someone in the military be better in total physical combat than a martial artist? They practice shooting, and squad tactics and other stuff in the military, not martial arts. The martial arts component in the military exists, but it's certainly not significant enough to make claims like this.

Also, LOL @ some of the Krav Maga videos I've seen. They usually feature disarming someone that has a [censored] pistol to your head. WTF? Why not just watch Fist of Legend a bunch of times, and practice with your brother in the garage? You'll have just as good of a chance with that method.

Their Knife disarms are also nonsense marketting garbage that will just get you killed in real life. Teaching this stuff is like teaching your students how to roundhouse kick a grizzly bear. You can certainly train to do it, and improve your skill, but in the end result is still the same: you end up dead.