Is MMA Useless for Street Self Defense?

July 20th, 2009 · Comments · Street Self Defense

Welcome back!

Since MMA first got a grip on the world’s imagination as “the best fighting system there is” there has been a lot of talk and discussion about its usefulness outside the cage and its relative merits as a street self defense system. The superiority complex held by many MMA proponents is often carried over into this realm, with fighters claiming that MMA is as effective outside the cage as it is in it. After all, if you can subdue a 200 pound gorilla who is trying to take your head of in the cage, surely doing the same thing to someone less trained out on the street is going to be a walk in the park?

pete sell mma,mma cage,ultimate mma,mma show

Situational Differences

On the surface this may appear to be true. With the all the skills an MMA fighter has to hand, defending themselves against a less experienced opponent shouldn’t pose much of a problem. Many would say there is no contest at all in such a situation.

The problem with that assumption is the fact that opponents on the street are much less predictable than an opponent in the cage. MMA fighters generally know what to expect from an opponent before they even step into the cage. They will most likely have seen their opponent fight before, so they will know how that opponent is going to fight, how that opponent is going to react to certain things.

Even if that opponent hasn’t been observed fighting before, you will still know what’s coming as an MMA fighter because you will have both trained in almost exactly the same way. The two of you will step into the cage and you will likely feel each other out for a moment, punches will be thrown, kicks will be thrown, you will take each other down and you will both work to submit each other. It’s all very comfortable really, very controlled, and with MMA being basically a sport, this is what you would expect. There is no room for gritty reality in sport, unless your sport is underground and anything goes.

In a street situation, when you face of against an opponent, you really have no idea what that person is going to do. All sorts of questions will rush through your endorphin- soaked brain at the speed of light. Is he trained? Can he fight? Is he going to try and punch me out or is he going kick me first? Is he going to try and grapple me to the ground? Does he have a weapon? Why is he reaching into his jacket? Are those guys over there his mates? Are they going to get involved here?

There are so many more variables to be aware of when you find yourself in a street self defense scenario, certainly many more than you would have to be aware of in a sport fighting situation.

Don’t get me wrong. A trained fighter, even a pure sport fighter, will stand a much better chance of surviving a street attack than someone who has no training at all. MMA training does have its merits. Those guys do take a lot of punishment so they’re used to getting hit and performing under at least one kind of pressure. Most of them can also hit as well, so they can do damage if they have to (though as I’ll soon explain, this can work against them).

So MMA fighters have some technique they can use in a self defense situation. They can probably handle themselves pretty well. The problem is there is more to self defense training than just being able to handle yourself. Even the average person on the street can handle themselves to some extent.

The Wrong Mindset for Street Self Defense

There are so many more variables to be aware of when you find yourself in a street self defense scenario, certainly many more than you would have to be aware of in a sport fighting situation.

My real problem with MMA as a means of self defense is its very thuggish nature, and by that I mean it’s all out, pummel-the-life-out-of–your-opponent- until-they-give –up-or-stop–moving attitude. Most MMA fighters seem to have this attitude were they think it is their job to just destroy all in their path. MMA’s does not teach constraint, and this is a definite problem when it comes to self defense, or specifically, self defense and the law.

MMA fighters have only one mode of action and that is attack mode. They step into the cage with the crowd cheering behind them and they only have one thing on their minds, which is to destroy their opponent, and this they will do, like wind up robots, going all out until their opponent gives up or the referee pulls them apart.

Such a strategy is fine in the cage under controlled conditions, but on the street, were the consequences of such actions can be far reaching, this is not a good attitude to have. Like it or not, you have to show some constraint in a self defense situation, otherwise you could end in jail, and constraint is something that doesn’t really sit well with most MMA fighters. Even if they had the chance to show constraint, I don’t think their egos would allow them to do so. Building an effective cage fighter means in part building their ego as well and this is something which is definitely works against them when it comes to properly evaluating a street confrontation. As I mentioned in a previous article staying and fighting because you think you have something to prove is not a good idea and could very well get you in more trouble than if you just turned and ran or tried to calm the situation some other way.

Just to illustrate the gung ho attitude that underscores MMA’s, let me show you this video of Bas Rutten demonstrating how MMA can be used for street self defense. I came across it the other day while I was compiling my new video resource. Watch the video and then get back to me.

You watch it? Did you see Bas bang that guys head of a table “about ten times or something” for daring to take a swing at him? And that was after Bas had punched and kneed him a few times. More telling than the over the top responses was the rampant ego on display there. Basically Bas was saying, “You chose the wrong guy to mess with and I’m going to make you pay, I’m going to make you bleed…” like he was in the cage and he had something to prove.

I dare say the law would have something to say about those responses. Bas was not doing just enough to curtail the attack, he was doing just enough to put the guy in hospital and have a GBH charge slapped on him. That’s not self defense, that’s thug behaviour masquerading as self defense. I got the impression Bas was just waiting for the referee to step in and pull him of the guy, but in the meantime he would just pound away at him because that’s what he does, being an MMA fighter.

You can take things too far, even in the street. Anyone who thinks they can get away with just beating some guy half to death because they took a wild swing at them are sadly mistaken. I’ve seen enough guys get screwed by the law for doing exactly that. Is jail worth the satisfaction you get from jumping all over a guys head or banging it repeatedly of a table? You decide.

The bottom line is there is a lot more to street self defense than just fighting, something many MMA guys fail to appreciate when they go on about how superior their skills are. All those other aspects of self defense that really matter –prevention tactics, how to calm down a situation etc.- are conveniently forgotten or just not known by MMA enthusiasts. And why would they know these things? They are practicing a sport after all, they don’t train for the street.

adult-mma,mma wrestling,mma photos,mma pictures
Great martial arts equipment at low prices.

MMA fighters are taught only to think about winning and this is fine within the context of what they do, but they shouldn’t pretend to know about things like self defense when such things do not even enter their training. To connect sport fighting with self defense is just ignorant and another example of MMA’s ego running wild.

So to answer the question, is MMA useless for self defense? Not totally, but it has a lot of learning to do if it is to be considered effective in the right way, and given what cage fighting actually is at the end of the day, I doubt the day will ever come when its practitioners are able to fill in the gaping holes in their knowledge. Being cage fighters however, such details don’t really matter, do they?

Share on Facebook

If you like this post, be sure to subscribe to my RSS feed and claim your free e-book.

Technorati Tags: Fighting, Law, Martial Culture, MMA, Street Defense

wimde

Hey Neil,

I just posted something on my blog you might enjoy... :-) I was discussing this topic on an email list when I read your and Nathan's post. everything put together made me write that long post.

Cheers,

Wim

Neal Martin

Cheers Wim. I'll check it out.

martialuniversity

I don't have anything against MMA or Traditional Martial Arts, on account of my involvement with Jeet Kune Do I've trained in everything from Brazilian Jujutsu to Wing Chun and Aikido. The way I see it, it's a matter of degrees with each art having its own strengths and weaknesses in 'street' combat.

The thing is, most of those arts are either designed for a different purpose, or were designed in a different time period. Brazilian Jujutsu, for instance, is geared towards sport and therefore has some rules against things like eye gouging, biting, ripping off ears crushing windpipes, etc. Kendo, on the other hand, or even open hand traditional martial arts like Wing Chun, tend to be designed around principles that are no longer around, i.e., most people have a sword, strikes are targeted to certain areas because on the battlefield folk have armor on, etc.

I think that both an MMA fighter and a traditional martial artist though would have a distinct upper hand in a 'street' confrontation over someone who has never done any training, but if the overall question is which is better for self-defense, I'd say neither. In those cases, (actually in every 'this art vs. that art' occasions in my opinion) it really comes down to which person is more skilled, not the art they chose. I don't think MMA should be advertised as the ultimate self-defense system any more than boxing or taekwondo should. Not because they can't be effective in a self-defense situation, but because they are traditionally not suited to that particular purpose.

The question I have is, if your goal is self-defense and self-defense alone, why not choose a military art like Krav Maga or MCMAP? (Don't know if you can actually learn that without joining the Marines, but you get the idea.) I'm not saying those arts are inherently better than any other, but doesn't it make the most sense to pick something that reflects your goals?

Neal Martin

I have been saying along that what matters is not the art but the person doing it. It's how skilled you are and how confident you are and more importantly how well you react under pressure that matters at the end of the day. A good enough practitioner can make any style work.

I also agree that you should definitely pick a system that reflects your goals, though going by this logic I can't see why anyone would choose MMA for self defense. That just tells me your are goals centered around glory hunting, not learning to defend yourself. Either that or you are being duped by the mountains of advertising on MMA everywhere.

If you want to train for self defense then you train for self defense alone. I personally like the art aspects of martial arts as well so I train for both. I also think that you don't really have to know a whole lot of techniques to be good at defending yourself. The less the better actually. Simple is always best. The rest is just art.

greg

most of your arguments mistake the application of mixed martial arts in self defence to the attitude/knowledge of the fighters.
you are right in that there is a distinction between mma and street fighting but your argument is largely conjecture at the supposed attitude of people who study mma.
an mma artist is far more likely to have a selection of techniques truly appropriate for self defence in the street than a traditional martial artists.

whether they know the best way to apply those techniques in the street is the question. some do some dont. but then the martial arts that claim to be effective for street defence but continue using flawed techniques, meaningless katas and no realistic training are far worse offenders.
decent fitness and a good knowledge of boxing and thai boxing alongside a good head and the ability to make rational choices are probably the most useful things someone can have for self defence
a good article on this is http://www.rossboxing.com/thegym/thegym3.htm

what do you think of krav maga? it trains for realistic situations using only techniques that are proven to be effective (and while teaches it because you may get dragged down it recognizes going to the ground is an absolute no no in self defence) and teaches to reply with appropriate force and to ways in which to avoid violence.

Neal Martin

As far as I can see the attitude is ingrained into the training and it's been my experience that most MMA fighters have this arrogance and conceitedness, but that's my experience and is by the by.

I don't know what your experience of traditional martial arts are but they are not all the same. I practice Jujitsu, a traditional art, and it is far from useless when it comes to self defense. The majority of the locking and throwing techniques used in MMA are taken from Jujitsu so it can't be that useless. That's what I find ironic about the whole trad/modern argument. All of the techniques used in so-called modern martial arts are derived solely from the traditional arts. Modern MAs just apply them in a slightly different way. The whole cross-training thing is not new. Bruce Lee was cross-training before any one had ever coined the term. Likewise, my club has been applying the same cross-training principles for over twenty years now. MMA has just turned it into a sport

As for katas, they are far from being meaningless. They bring there own benefits to practitioners, benefits that go beyond self defense and pure combat. This is were the art comes into the equation, the thing that lifts trad martial arts above pure sport. And I'm not being elitist or pretentious by saying that. If people want to practice sport then go ahead, each to their own, but you can't criticize people for wanting to go deeper and probe other elements besides self defense or fighting. Art is art, combat is combat. As long as you make the distinction in your own head and don't confuse the two while training you'll be fine.

Krav Maga I have an interest in. It seems to provide a pretty effective form of self defense, but again those techniques are not new to me nor probably to anyone else who has practiced Jujitsu or any form of reality based self defense. They are just shuffled around and applied in a different way. But I do like it and out of all the other systems it would probably be the one I would most like to check out properly if I ever moved on from Jujitsu.

Thanks for your comments.

shane

MMA does leave one clueless on dealing with armed assailants as far as actual techniques. Being only a 4 month practioner of BJJ I notice there are alot of situations where even the "dominant" BJJ would be at a disadvantage when dealing with an attacker who will groin strike, bite, eyegouge, or break your fingers. In class I visuallize the differences between street and sport constantly while rolling asking myself "can he bite me here, if i rear naked choke-how vulnerable are my fingers, are his hands near enough to my face to eye gouge me, a triangle puts him close to family jewels" . Streetwise all those things could be a threat to the BJJ artist as he is working for position-submission. Regardless of level of skill it takes a way more intelligent level of thinking to avoid having the "beat them till they quit moving" mindset that MMA tends to teach. One hit too many or an ignored chance to evade the attacker can certainly make the law turn against the martial artist as siting "excess force"..........yet to be attacked on the street though tells you the thug is willing to use "excess force"--funny how legal system works huh?
I will say that MMA is the general best for all around selfdefense BUT "dirty fight" elements need to be considered when with "dirty fight" opponents (defensivly and offensively), weapons take a different training all together, and one should have the self discipline to not overuse their MMA in the sense the law will attack the victim of the situation. I like BJJ but in real life I would hope the situation didnt require any more than evasion or Mauy Thai tactics.

Neal Martin

It's interesting that you said you consider the self defense possibilities when you're training. I didn't think such considerations were foremost in the average MMA practitioner's mind. I'm glad to hear you are seeing beyond the sport elements. I just don't think MMA will measure up in self defense terms until it starts to address the issues involved. The basics are there though, which can only be good. Thanks for sharing.

kintanon

You don't think MMA will measure up in self defense terms as compared to what? Wing Chun? Taekwondo? Kenpo?
The bottom line is that the composite of arts that most MMA fighters practice, Muy Thai, Boxing, Wrestling, Judo, and BJJ are all better at dealing with any number of attackers, with or without weapons, than other arts.
As for "dirty" fighting, I will happily put my eyes and testicles on the line against anyone who wants to give a try at groin striking me or eyegouging me while I choke them out.
You guys all need to go watch this video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2068450760833041053

And internalize the concepts. MMA is about training methods, but thuggish behavior. Many many many MMA fighters hold Bachelors or Masters degrees, many are respected professionals in their field outside of the octagon. My instructor is a police detective as well as BJJ black belt who competes in MMA. Many of the students at our school are police officers, nurses, college students, etc... I am an IT Consultant.

Your wrongheaded views about both who competes in MMA and what is effective for self defense are decades out of date.

Neal Martin

You're exhibiting the superiority complex that I see running through MMA in general. Your style is not better than any other. No style is better than any other. A style is only as good as the person using it.

The techniques within MMA are fine for self defense, I never said they weren't. I just think practicioners are more inclined to go over the top given that they train offensively all the time. Not every situation is going to require a brute force response, which is what I see advocated within MMA, both in and out of the octagon. Where's the control? I'm not saying an individual won't have the sense to control themselves, but the training doesn't make it easy to do so, given that it's all about winning.

The video was very interesting. I totally agree with the concepts being across in it. I think this is were a lot styles-especially traditional ones-go wrong. The training needs to be more realistic if you're training for self defense. However, not everyone trains solely for self defense. Some people train purely for the art, and in that case, it doesn't really matter how you approach the training. Reality doesn't really come into it. It's just about mastering the technique.

I'm also sure that there are many fine people who train in MMA, but the fact of the matter is, the way MMA has promoted itself in the media over the years hasn't really done much to convince people that it is a thugs game. All you ever see is big guys pounding the life out of one another for the sake of money and glory. That image needs to change if people are to see a different side to MMA.

Thanks for your comments.

kintanon

I will address your points in reverse order.

The way MMA was promoted IN THE PAST was as a brutal bloodsport. Now it's promoted in much the same way any other physical contest is.
If you aren't training to fight effectively then you are not training in a martial art and would be better off doing gymnastics or ballet. Martial Arts are MARTIAL first and foremost. At the VERY LEAST you must be learning to fight effectively or it is not a Martial Art.
As for control, go compare Wing Chun self defense videos to Gracie JiuJitsu self defense videos. One advocates a response all out of proportion to the attack, I'll let you guess which one it is. Grappling based arts have INHERENTLY more control over the level of force applied than striking based arts do. If I am choking someone I can choose to let up a little and keep them restrained while not killing them. It's hard to punch someone lightly enough to keep them unconcious without injuring them you know. And your comments about MMA training show just how little experience you actually have with any of it. Each class I walk into I put my LIFE in the hands of my training partners. I am getting int a situation where someone will be choking me half unconcious, they will be bending my limbs into positions where they COULD break them. I have to trust them to have the control not to do so. And after 3 years of jiujitsu I have yet to be injured in training. MMA training gives you MORE control over the level of force you use in a situation. The reason for this is....

TRAINING METHODS. Style matters, physical attributes matter, but TRAINING METHODS matter more. Yes, some styles are inherently more effective than others. All else being equal someone training in Wing Chun for a year will get destroyed by someone training in Muy Thai for a year. It's been proven over and over again. The top ranks of WC can't compete with the top ranks of BJJ. Judo and Wrestling dominated Japanese Jiujitsu. Not because the TECHNIQUES are inherently better, but because the training methods are superior. It's a fact of life.

Also, the "Traditional Martial Art" vs "Mixed Martial Art" comparision is false. MMA is just a name for the RULE SET under which those athletes are competing. The arts they practice are in most cases as old or older than any TMA. Taekwondo is only 80ish years old, and TSD which it has its roots in is only a couple of hundred because it was lost during japanese occupation. BJJ is older than TKD and has its roots in Judo which is older still. Muy Thai is a few hundred years old and has its roots in Muy Boran which is even older. Boxing and Wrestling are both EVEN OLDER dating easily back to the greeks. Wrestling is in fact the oldest documented martial art.

And telling someone who is wrong,that they are wrong does not mean one has a superiority complex.

Neal Martin

When I made the distinction between art and reality I wasn't saying the more arty techniques are useless. It just comes down to the person doing them. They can be effective but you need to be damn good and very confident to pull them of in a street situation, so for the most part (were I'm concerned anyway) you just stick to basic techniques that you can do without much thought. All the techniques in Jujitsu (at least in the style I practice) are self defense based anyway, it's just that some are more complicated than others and take years to master. So you're still training to fight effectively but appreciating the art at the same time.

I agree that many styles teach over the top responses and that strikes are hard to control. I'd be more inclined ti use chokes myself instead of strikes for that reason. BJJ does offer that level of control, but it also has it's fair share of overly technical, sport orientated techniques, so I guess the same applies- keep the simpler ones for the street and leave the rest for competition.

I also agree that training methods matter more than style. I don't think it matters which style you do at the end of the day, what matters is how you apply those techniques. I'll take your word for it that MMA guys have the ability to exhibit good control. I'm only going from my own experience so far. I'm not out to pointlessly criticize anyone else's training and if someone can prove me wrong or show me different, then fair enough. I'll stand corrected. It's just that the training sessions I've attended in MMA and the guys I know who do it, tend to back up what I've said. You put them in a self defense scenario and their first response is bang-bang-bang, regardless of the attack. But that's my experience. Your's is obviously different and I acknowledge that.

I'm also not advocating some kind of trad vs modern debate. That has nothing to do with it and as you pointed out is a bit ridiculous considering all the techniques come from the same place anyway (so to speak). My issues were simply with MMA and some of the attitudes and things that went along with it. I don't care how old it is or what perspective it's coming from. I evaluated it on it's own terms. Traditional is just a catch all term for most of the other styles.

kieron

Your blog is interesting but wrong-headed every time you mention Mixed Martial Arts. According to you MMA's are seemingly simultaniously both ineffective and far too deadly. The idea that Traditional Martial Artists are able to deliver a precise and measured response to an attack that complies with the law is absurd. If attacked the vast majority of Martial Artists would need to give 100% just to have a chance! Also you make the common mistake of many Traditional Martial Artists who are happy to point out that the Sport of MMA has weaknesses in regard to facing weapons and multiple attackers when most Trad arts have gaping holes when it comes to facing a single, unarmed opponent (most boxers or wrestlers would easily overcome a Traditional Martial Artist of a similar strength and amount of training) yet cling to the delusion that they could defend themselves against multiple assailants of against a weapon. MMA's are effective for that same reason that kick-boxing or Judo are highly effective despite being mere 'sports' not arts. They teach less deadly techniques but in a much more realistic way (a controlled fight). Being ABLE to deliver a technique that WILL stop an assailant is always better than being UNABLE to deliver a technique that COULD kill/maim/cripple an opponent.

Neal Martin

To answer your first point, I do of course realise the difficulties involved in delivering a precise and measured response to an attack. I know how sloppy and out of control such situations can get, but you have to at least try and exert some control over yourself. To me, defending against an attacker is about ultimatedly controlling that attacker to the best of your ability by whatever means possible and this doesn't always mean pounding the life out of them till they don't get up again or breaking both their arms. I just think in today's over legislated society you have to be more careful than that. I guess it comes down to the person and what chances you're willing to take.

As for multiple opponents and weapons, both are notoriously difficult to defend against. In such cases you are entitled to up your game and do what you have to do. In the case of multiple opponents I think the pre-emptive strike is the only real option open to you. In the case of weapons you're putting your life on the line if you choose to face them. If I can't run then I'd expect to get cut or hurt in some way before I managed to subdue an opponent. I take this as a given in training and don't pretend that I'll be able to nicely lock someone up and disarm them. Like I said, street fighting is messy and nothing like the dojo training. I discovered this when I did bouncing for a couple of years. You really have to simplify your responses. The job also taught me the need for control.

I agree with you on your last point. In fact I said in the article that sport fighters have the experience of fighting in the ring in their favour. They are used to the contact. But it goes back to what I was saying about control. Sport fighters are more likely to cross the line. Again, you just take your chances.

My main gripe with sport fighting is the attitude that goes with it, the ego, the glory hunting etc. I like traditional martial arts for its values. And yes, many trad martial artists have the same bad attitudes and egos, but these are prized in sport fighting, which whether it is right or wrong it still doesn't appeal to me. I need more than just technique and trophies and MMA doesn't offer anything more, at least not to me and many other martial artists I know.

Thanks for your comments.

kieron

Hi, thanks for replying. I think that your main gripe with sports-fighting would apply just as well to most sportsmen, and I agree that the ego and attitude is not compatible with the proper study of a Martial Art. But I think that your disapproval of some MMA proponents has made you overly critical of the techniques within MMA and their effectiveness.

Neal Martin

I agree that I may judge MMA a little harshly at times but it doesn't really help its own cause by being so shallow. I have no problem with the techniques used in it. They are all from different arts anyway. It's just the attitude that goes along with them.

kieron

The very first couple of UFC's were real style v style matches which seemed to show the supremacy of grappling (but actually showed the need to learn to deal with attacks other than those in your own art). I think maybe the Grace v Kimo fight (more specifically Kimo's entrance to the Octagon) was the beginning of the change from a Martial Arts tournament to a WWF style 'smackdown'.

Neal Martin

I agree. I actually enjoyed the first couple of UFC's for a while. I train in Jujitsu so it was nice to see the art put on display and be some dominant along with it. Those fights really showed up the holes in the different fighting styles.

We have cross-trained for many years so it was nothing new. I think MMA has melded them altogether into a set style. The cross training philosophy has now gone from that because MMA is not as open to new techniques anymore. It has what it needs and it's sticking to them.

The WWF style had to happen when the money men got involved. All they care about is selling tickets and merchandise. The general public needs such a spectacle to entertain it. Hardcore martial arts will not interest the majority of people. It's the society we live in.

The Urban Samurai Blog

Kick-Ass Martial Arts Blogging