New Fight Question

[jaydub]

[ QUOTE ]
I gotta get off this thread, lol.

One myth I think that deserves examining, also, is the "Martial Arts Master". Not unlike the boxer who can lay you out with one punch, the Martial Arts Master goes one better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZuJBsIWl_k


[/ QUOTE ]

That was funny as hell. The whole time I was just picturing what would happen if I time warped a Lewis, Fedor, or hell for giggles an Ortiz into that ring (talk about styles making fights with the last one).

People are talking past each other too much here. The two of possible contention are boxer and mma but the only argument for boxer is that they self select for more money. But that ignores the fact that they have inevitably trained for a very limited form of combat. We are not starting from a blank slate here. Anyone who makes such a claim for the boxer would inevitably have to support the laughable Urlacher takes Bas in a street fight argument.

MMA unless the SEAL has a gun or a radio.

J

[happyhappyhappy]

[ QUOTE ]
Victor Kramnik knows how to play chess. I know how to play chess, and I know how to play bridge and dominoes. I also once played go. Let's say Victor has never played go (or bridge or dominoes!), but he has heard of it, and is somewhat familiar with the rules. Who would you bet on in a heads-up winner-take-all go match?

[/ QUOTE ]
?lol? absolute worst example ive read yet...

[happyhappyhappy]

[ QUOTE ]
I compared best against best

[/ QUOTE ]it is amazing how almost every answer up until this point I am at disregarded this. until Sklanskly had to come to come back and state it again.

[Zim]

I've posted a few clips of "real" fights between traditional martial artists, some of which were considered the fiercest in the world (Bruce Lee called William Cheung the most "deadly man in the world").... they are, without exception, exceptionally poor.

Don't believe the hype. I think my Derren Brown clip also demonstrated that.

However, for those who doggedly wish to have faith in Traditional Martial Arts, ignore my thoughts on this ... and listen to Miyamoto Mushashi, considered by many to be the greatest swordsman who ever lived:

The attendants of the Kashima Kantori shrines of the province Hitachi received instruction from the gods, and made schools based on this teaching, travelling from country to country instructing men. This is the recent meaning of strategy.

Of course, men who study in this way think they are training the body and spirit, but it is an obstacle to the true Way, and its bad influence remains for ever. Thus the true Way of strategy is becoming decadent and dying out.

As a form, strategy was said to be one of "Ten Abilities and Seven Arts" that a Warrior should have, but Musashi disagrees that one person can gain Strategy by being confined to one particular style, which seems particularly fitting as he admits " I practice many arts and abilities - all things with no teacher" - this perhaps being one of the reasons he was so highly regarded a swordsman.

If we look at the world we see arts for sale. Men use equipment to sell their own selves. As if with the nut and the flower, the nut has become less than the flower. In this kind of Way of strategy, both those teaching and those learning the way are concerned with coloring and showing off their technique, trying to hasten the bloom of the flower. They speak of "This Dojo" and "That Dojo". They are looking for profit. Someone once said, "Immature strategy is the cause of grief". That was a true saying.

Actually, when you start to examine the past warriors that legend and myth revolve around, they were rather pragmatic and progressive. Their followers weren't, but they were.

Best,
Z.

[happyhappyhappy]

after reading the thread this far, i have been convinced that the MMA fighter kills all others. i'll be there in a few hours.

[GiantBuddha]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, when you start to examine the past warriors that legend and myth revolve around, they were rather pragmatic and progressive. Their followers weren't, but they were.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for illustrating my point more eloquently than I have. If you wish to use Musashi as an example of the supremacy of UFC fighters, I really don't know how to argue with that, except that he was a legendary Asian martial artist. If your point is that rigidly adhering to one set of ideas is foolish and leaves you thinking the earth is flat, I couldn't agree with you more. But you've just proven that not all asian martial artists follow such dogma. Again, this shows that there is no critical difference between the mixed martial artist and the asian martial artist except for the images they conjure up in our heads.

[happyhappyhappy]

Miyamoto Mushashi fought about 60 duels to the death with a sword. You can guess how many he lost. To say he may be the greatest swordsman ever is a gross understatement. Something to think about when people dismiss the WORLDS BEST martial artists. Yes his was with a sword, but there is substance there that none of us Americans (for the most part) can even begin to fathom. Something to think about. Has Fedor put his life on the line 60 times, for KEEPS? I think not. But this does not discount him, surely.

But I digress. Let me back up.

I just read the whole thread, and all of the arguments and reasoning, and what I came up with is basically that everyone owns Smasharoo. Seriously, has this dude ever been laid or left the house? Take the worst NL donk in the world, throw him in a cage with Smash, and I bet the donk goes all in and owns. Everytime.

But I digress again.

Seriously, it seems with the evolvement of MMA, that they are a clear cut favorite in a fight to the death. I think that what was grossly underestimated throughout the whole thread though, is the 'ABSOLUTE BEST' in each respective fields, and the fact that this is a 'FIGHT TO THE DEATH', which brings up many wild card factors. Eyes ripped out, tracheas broken, biting flesh, your life on the line...thinking about this goes a ways beyond grappling. Someone out there is proficient in such things, and we don't know who that person is, or what 'fighting style' he comes from. I do doubt now that it is a SEAL, but you never know. And I for one will never discount the monk up in the mountains who would kill you with one dodge and a couple of strikes. You just can't count out a Pai Mei.

Another thing that I think was overlooked when the thread handed this over to the MMA's was, are there not some people out there that will get a bone broken, and still try to bite the flesh off your throat? Maybe they got some of your flesh, and then you got a hold and broke their arm off, and they didn't care? Surely there is somebody crazy enough out there that won't. And doesn't. And would continue coming after those delicate gateways to your vital organs.

So really the answer to who would win is whomever could get in close and [censored] some [censored] up for real. And black out everything else. And just not quit. To the death. So what does my list look like? Easy....


Brandi > UFC > Martial Artist > SEAL/OPS > Boxer > Streetfighter > Newhizzle

AINEC.

[jackaaron]

Maybe a better way to look at this is this: Assume you know what skills are possessed by the best in each class of fighter. Then, suppose you are in a cage, and someone's about to kill you. Next, pick the skill set you wish to save your life with, and attempt to describe how you do that. I seriously doubt any of us would pick, "Skill set of best boxer ever," even though that would be one heck of a skill set.

(I wish I knew more about the best street fighter ever because he would probably be the "nastiest" MF around. Probably almost sub-human. Obviously nastiness doesn't necessarily win fights though.)

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
I've posted a few clips of "real" fights between traditional martial artists, some of which were considered the fiercest in the world (Bruce Lee called William Cheung the most "deadly man in the world").... they are, without exception, exceptionally poor.


[/ QUOTE ]

Youtube clips are not exactly dispositive.

Cheung was quite good when he was young, but the clip showed him in what, his 50s? And he was by the way jumped. Lee's admiration and lasting friendship went to the guy who gave him most of his training, and it wasn't Cheung.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe a better way to look at this is this: Assume you know what skills are possessed by the best in each class of fighter. Then, suppose you are in a cage, and someone's about to kill you. Next, pick the skill set you wish to save your life with, and attempt to describe how you do that. I seriously doubt any of us would pick, "Skill set of best boxer ever," even though that would be one heck of a skill set.

(I wish I knew more about the best street fighter ever because he would probably be the "nastiest" MF around. Probably almost sub-human. Obviously nastiness doesn't necessarily win fights though.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I've looked at it as, what kind of skills you need is not a set and determined thing. It depends what you're facing. If you are at war, or are facing multiple assailants or someone with certain kinds of weapons, you cannot afford to go to the ground. That's when standing skills are indispensable. If you have the luxury of fighting one on one, unarmed, especially in the ring, you can do lots of things, including rendering yourself very vulnerable to certain kinds of attacks.

All these kinds of answers depend on context. Most of the ones in this thread pay too little attention to it, and many pay none at all.