Best style of martial arts for self-defense?

  • Thread starter Thread starter annoyinggirl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Martial arts
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the effectiveness of various martial arts styles for self-defense, highlighting Tae Kwon Do and Jujitsu as primary contenders. Tae Kwon Do is praised for its powerful kicks that allow for distance attacks, while Jujitsu is favored for its practical, no-frills approach tailored for self-defense. Participants emphasize the importance of practical training and sparring over flashy techniques, noting that real-life confrontations are chaotic and require adaptability. Brazilian Jujitsu is recognized for its effectiveness against larger opponents, but concerns are raised about its sport-oriented rules limiting its applicability in street fights. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards focusing on self-defense training rather than traditional martial arts, with an emphasis on finding a style that suits individual needs and preferences.
  • #61
HAYAO said:
My definition stays.
Then a push or a grab is also the start of a fight since either can cause harm. Bringing in legal issues is irrelevant since the definition says nothing about legal issues. Pushes and grabs can cause harm so they apply according to your definition.

I do agree with your point about the importance of sparring. It is also important to spar against multiple opponents and to spar to escape.

HAYAO said:
Everything you learn in boxing is practical in self-defense
Not everything you learn in boxing is practical in self defense. You learn to not protect your lower body, to not seek escape, to not deal with multiple attackers, etc. Boxing is primarily a sport.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Dale said:
It is also important to spar against multiple opponents
Also, variety of opponents. Most places you can practice has this kind of shortcoming: you get opponents only with a specific style. In self defense no such thing can be expected. Style can be anything from a traditional school down to the most unreasonable barrage of kicks, punches and bashes; nail and teeth.
Once I've seen an instructor taking the floor from a stealthy shopping bag o0)
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #63
annoyinggirl said:
So which style of martial arts is best for self-defense?
It's an old thread but since I see it's been bumped I'll throw my 2 cents in, hopefully it will useful to someone.

Getting away from the situation - and staying away from stupid situations - is the best but if you're cornered one of the things you have to have in your arsenal is the willingness to react viciously, and having some training. There's a story going around recently about a Brazilian female MMA fighter named Polyana Viana who beat the stew out of a guy who tried to mug her. A quick web search on her name will bring up endless stories about it - she really messed this guy up. But she also has a lot of practice and conditioning.

Depending on the laws where you are firearms are one option, but you need to become facile with them and also be aware of the legal ramifications. I have a CCW, I also carry insurance, lots and lots of stories of lowlifes who are shot in the commission of a crime who themselves or their families come back and sue the person who shot them - doesn't matter if they were in your house attacking you, which happened to one of the instructors of my CCW class. There's a saying - better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Are you prepared to hurt someone badly, even kill them? Are you prepared to shoot someone? Do you know *when* you're justified in shooting someone? Are you familiar with the laws related to firearms where you are, where you can and can't have one?

Are you prepared to gouge out their eyes, bite out their windpipe or carotid artery? Are you going to fold the first time you get hit? A lot of women have a passive mentality which doesn't serve them well in such a situation. Also being aware that street fighting isn't like the movies - it's fast, chaotic and messy. What I'd look at are methods that have their roots in the realities of real-world fighting.

I like the philosophy behind this woman's method that's tailored for women. She has a number of videos on Youtube.

http://www.dr-ruthless.com/
 
  • #64
Rive said:
One of that is it won't defend really well against kicks...But boxing is what makes one novice when it is about kicks. And actually, useless or not nine from ten will try kicking. Movies and such just carved it into everybody (and takes effort to remove the urge). The more experienced ones will keep it short and fast, but even so. There will be kicks. Kicks should be expected.

Yes of course, I am in no way denying that there will be any kicks.

I have seen well over 30 fights in real life and I remember that around 90% start out with a punch. I only remember about 2 or 3 fights that started out with leg kicks. Maybe about 20 to 30% of the fights do include kicks in the entire fight. Kicks to the head tend to happen when the opponent is in a stance where intelligent defense is less likely (e.g. floored opponents trying to get up, which requires you to place at least one hand on the ground). Otherwise, most tend to go for leg kicks. There are more specific breakdowns of these fights like when and how a kick is delivered in a fight, but I think I'll stop here about specific details.

Let me talk about a story. So I first started boxing when I entered college, and later joined a MMA club few months year later. There were two other new guys, one with some kickboxing background, and one with black belt in kata-centered karate. The trainer told us that we should "mass-spar" boxing (don't know the English translation) to see how well we can perform. Because in a "mass-spar" you usually pull the punches and strikes before it lands so that you will not damage the opponent, we only wore gloves. Given that I had no kickboxing experience, it was supposed to be a boxing match. I was first paired with the kickboxer and that went out okay. But when I was paired with the karate guy, he didn't quite understand the instructions and what "mass-spar" meant and went full out on his punches and kicks. At that moment, I thought I was the one who misunderstood the instructions. I am a pretty small guy 5'4" and 115 pounds and this guy was 60 pounds heavier and around 5 inches taller. This guy tried kicking my legs, body, and head without shin protectors. But guess what, none (literally) of those kicks were effective on me. As a matter of fact, after three or four of the kicks I received, I was able to counter his leg kicks with my cross. At the time, trainer was called and distracted and was not watching. So the fight went on for about 1 or 2 minutes, and when the trainer realized that we were having a kickboxing match, he stopped us.

So what is the lesson here? An effective kicks are those that land perfectly. That guy is a karate blackbelt, physically much larger, no protections on the legs, and I was a complete novice in kickboxing at the time and wasn't even expecting a kickboxing all-out spar. You actually need to experience sparring a lot in order to perfect kicking techniques to make it effective.

Now, provided that most street fights do not include kicks, and much more punching and maybe grappling, what is the point of training for defending kicks? If you are a boxer who had enough time sparring, you are calm enough to expect any attacks and you automatically keep enough distance. Most street fights don't last more than 2 minutes unless it goes to the ground. Leg kicks are not going to be any effective at all in such short amount of time, especially if one is not well trained.

Since I have never taken videos of street fighting, I can only find youtube videos. I chose this video in particular NOT to show how boxers in street fight will perform, but to show you how kicks from untrained individuals in most street fights look like:


Does the kicks look, in anyway, effective or worth defending? Do you think the boxer is truly hurt because of that kick he just took? Let me break it down for you.

First, the kicker's clothing is far from suitable to throw a kick, which is true in many situation. Second, the opposite leg is not torqued to give enough room for the technique, reducing power. Third, the body remains straight against the opponent, further reducing the power. Fourth, the kicker is not defending his head with the opposite hand. Fifth, the boxer's punch land almost simultaneously as the kick lands, and the difference in the speed is apparent.

This is exactly what I have observed from the fights that I have seen in my life. The precision of kicks are significantly lower than the precision of punches. Defending against kicks can come later as a option, but you should knock on boxing gym's door first and train and spar well, and then go to a kickboxing gym.
Dale said:
Then a push or a grab is also the start of a fight since either can cause harm. Bringing in legal issues is irrelevant since the definition says nothing about legal issues. Pushes and grabs can cause harm so they apply according to your definition.
Well, the entire back-and-forth conversation between you and me about this point is more like you just trying to nit-pick a loophole in a definition. I would like to hear your definition so that I can nit-pick that for you and tell me if you would like it. I can do it, but it's not constructive. At this point, it would be obvious that any definition I give is going to be nit-picked and blown out of proportion because you cannot actually get to the point.

As an analogy, this is what you are doing:
Me "Don't say anything that can hurt other people's feeling"
You "So you are saying that I should never talk to you?"
Me "Why would you say that?"
You "Because any word 'can' hurt other people, inadvertently or not. Even the words I have just said. Maybe some of the words I have said might trigger your traumatic past if you have one."
Me "That's not what I meant. And the likelihood that I do have that trauma is low."
You "Then your first statement is poorly stated."

Do you often do this kind of conversation? I think not because I think you are a fair and understanding person elsewhere. So that means for now you are just trying to nit-pick what other people say to your favor.
I do agree with your point about the importance of sparring. It is also important to spar against multiple opponents
I agree with this. I would add that you should master 1 vs 1 sparring before you try anything else, though. I'll show you why.

1 vs many fights can be approached in two different ways:
A) Make it a 1vs1 then 1vs1 then 1vs1 then..., or B) Deal with multiple at the same time.

Needless to say, A) is the smarter approach than B). If you have extensively sparred 1 vs 1 and mastered it to a certain degree, then what you learned here can almost directly be applied in 1 vs many. Even in Krav Maga, many of the techniques of 1 vs many is essentially two step technique of breaking free and dealing them one by one, ideally. This is A).

The question then becomes, whether you can deal 1vs1 effectively in a short amount of time. So it is better learning 1 vs 1 and mastering it first than trying anything else.

But in any case, dealing with multiple opponents is extremely difficult no matter what you practice. The degrees of freedom in such case is completely chaotic and unpredictable that what you learn and "spar" against multiple opponents probably takes literally years to be effective.

Here's a video of how chaotic 2 vs 6 street fight is. I am not using this video to show that this is how boxer vs random people will play out. I am using this video because it best explains the chaos of dealing of group fights. In particular, you should see how much movements of each of these guys makes throughout the video.


There are some throwing around and kneeing in several parts of this video, and you can ask yourself how effective it looks. The guy being attacked isn't even looking that way and yet they are still ineffective. It is that difficult to land knees and difficult to get a hold on someone that is moving. This is how chaotic a street fight is.

Now, tell me if you think you can perform well in this chaotic situation. The answer is almost no, and if you think sparring against multiple opponents for a year can help you, then you have not experienced sparring neither. Spar would take you much more than an year before you are ready for multiple opponents. Instead, use that time to focus and master 1 vs 1 first.
and to spar to escape
I would like you to elaborate on this. Do you mean escape as in running away?

If you had to fight in the first place, then the chance is you didn't have the option of running away, anyway. If you can run away during a fight, then the you probably had the chance to do so in the first place. So sparring to escape effectively means that certain threats have been neutralized to give you enough time and space to escape.

Not everything you learn in boxing is practical in self defense. You learn to not protect your lower body, to not seek escape, to not deal with multiple attackers, etc. Boxing is primarily a sport.
There are a lot of false premises you have not mentioned here to make this moot argument. As for protecting your lower body aggravated people tend to target upper body more than lower body, particularly the head (see my reply to Rive about this). Everything you have just mentioned here applies to any other martial arts and self-defense academy, and not just boxing. Just because one practice a rule based sport does not mean they will follow the rules in self-defense scenario. Once you even start talking about "spar", more or less, it is a sport. Some self-defense academy teaches you eye gouge and how to execute it, but do you think you can perform that in spar? No, they won't let you. There is a rule here already.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Tom.G
  • #65
HAYAO said:
what is the point of training for defending kicks?
The very basic of 'defending against kicks' is about the appropriate stance and balance. But with this you not only has reduced risk to get grounded, it has a general effect. Boxing, as a sport has this kind of blind spot and without learning some basics in this regard just with sparring (against opponents of the same style, mostly) this is hard to fix.

HAYAO said:
Maybe about 20 to 30% of the fights do include kicks in the entire fight... most tend to go for leg kicks
With this you just said that one out of three fight will come with a risk for the balance of an unprepared boxer.
Honestly, I think this ratio would be more close to 50%, but anyway.

So while I do respect most you have said here since it is quite collected and useful, for those who wants to start with boxing I would just suggest some basic lessons about kicks.
Also, I'm a bit suspicious if boxing has anything worthy to say about falling down.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes HAYAO
  • #66
Rive said:
The very basic of 'defending against kicks' is about the appropriate stance and balance. But with this you not only has reduced risk to get grounded, it has a general effect. Boxing, as a sport has this kind of blind spot and without learning some basics in this regard just with sparring (against opponents of the same style, mostly) this is hard to fix.

With this you just said that one out of three fight will come with a risk for the balance of an unprepared boxer.
Honestly, I think this ratio would be more close to 50%, but anyway.
I won't try to argue with your statistics because I do not know how many real fights you have observed.

Are you experienced in boxing? Have you ever fought a boxer? Did you see the video? Was the boxer off balance after receiving the kick? A trained boxers have tremendous balance. Sure, maybe not as much as kickboxing and wrestling, but boxing is just about balance as much as anything else. Without good balance you can't even throw a cross properly.

If you are not convinced, look at this video from 2:50

Tell me, do you think the boxer expected the leg kicks? Was the boxer ever off balance from the leg kicks? No. Not at any point.
Basically, this is what happens when untrained individual tries to kick with a boxer. It's completely ineffective. It is actually the guy that kicked that is off balance!
So while I do respect most you have said here since it is quite collected and useful, for those who wants to start with boxing I would just suggest some basic lessons about kicks.
Also, I'm a bit suspicious if boxing has anything worthy to say about falling down.
I respect your concern too, and it's valid.

The point here, like I said in this post (which you might have missed because it was long), is to practice boxing first and get good at it. Then you can start adding other things. Don't try to be jack of all trades. Be specialized at one thing, and then move on to another. It's about the priorities.
 
  • Like
Likes Rive
  • #67
HAYAO said:
If you are not convinced, look at this video
HAYAO said:
Be specialized at one thing, and then move on to another.
These videos are about professionals, and I'm quire sure that they already has experience about fighting against various styles. The topic is supposed to give useful advice to beginners and individuals who aim only for not being completely helpless and nothing further: with only a limited amount of investment.
 
  • Like
Likes HAYAO
  • #68
Rive said:
These videos are about professionals, and I'm quire sure that they already has experience about fighting against various styles. The topic is supposed to give useful advice to beginners and individuals who aim only for not being completely helpless and nothing further: with only a limited amount of investment.
Various styles as in boxer fighting a kickboxer? I highly doubt that. Most probably don't.

Yes, with limited amount of investment (and time), boxing is the first priority. It provides you good balance, good coordination, sparring(!), stronger strikes, footworks, FITNESS(!), and therefore true defense and offense. Kicking and BJJ and others can come later. Boxing provides you most of what you need in the least amount of time with the least amount of investment. If an enthusiastic beginners can train intensively and properly for three months in a boxing gym, one probably have enough skill set and experience to turn pro (in Japan you need to go to a boxing pro-test in order to become a pro). The test consists of two 2 minute rounds of sparring against another applicant to see your skills and whether you are eligible to turn pro. One would be scared of the term "intensively" as they may think they need to practice all day. Not really. 2.5 to 3 hours of practice everyday and a jog/running in the morning for 4 - 6 miles is adequate.

(EDIT: No, I am not saying you should intensively train like this. I'm just trying to convey the idea of how long and how intense of a training leads to how much ability in return. Also, you are right. Boxing gyms are not always that inexpensive. I don't know how much it cost you over there in the US, but it costs somewhere around $100 / month in Japan. If you don't want to pay that much...well good luck.)

There are some police department providing free self-defense courses like once a month or something. Unfortunately, I don't like the way people go there and think that they are now ready to defend themselves for several reasons. They are rarely told to be physically fit. This is also a big problem. They mostly advertise that you can learn to defend yourself without having to have to go through intense training. Wrong, unfortunately. Being fit is extremely important part of being able to defend yourself, and the false advertisements sometimes prevent that. You would be wasting time and also get a false sense of security.But you are right. Let's not talk about professionals. I want to know what you think about the effectiveness of the kicks in this video, though.

It doesn't seem effective at all. Granted, we don't know if the boxer here is an amateur or pro. But even I, being trained in boxing club for just half an year was fully balanced against a karate blackbelt's kick who was 60 pounds heavier and 5 inches taller in my first ever (accidental) kickboxing spar. And I didn't even know how to check kicks back then.

You should be fine. You can certainly learn kick defense or grappling. I am no way denying that. I am just saying that the priority is not necessarily high.
 
  • #69
HAYAO said:
I want to know what you think about the effectiveness of the kicks in this video, though.
Hopeless. Those guys are not even on guard as they walk forward, and their opponent is going for their chin without any hesitation or delay. That's what preparedness/sparring makes.
I don't think this kind of absolute disparity could make a good example.

Regarding this video what worth mentioning is that successful self-defense training results in breaking down that false confidence what the first two who got knocked out had and build up that kind of response (but without the aggressive intent to fight) what the 'winner' had.

HAYAO said:
I am just saying that the priority is not necessarily high.
Ps.: it is always said that shortcomings should be just patched, not turned around. That much effort is just not worth it.
 
  • Like
Likes HAYAO
  • #70
Rive said:
Hopeless. Those guys are not even on guard as they walk forward, and their opponent is going for their chin without any hesitation or delay. That's what preparedness/sparring makes.
I don't think this kind of absolute disparity could make a good example.

Regarding this video what worth mentioning is that successful self-defense training results in breaking down that false confidence what the first two who got knocked out had and build up that kind of response (but without the aggressive intent to fight) what the 'winner' had.
That is why I said on the post above that the videos were not selected to show you how a boxer would perform against opponents. The videos were provided to show you how ineffective kicks are in reality, especially when the opponent is not trained.

Look, for the third time, I was not trained that much in boxing (because I was not that serious back then) when a karate-blackbet made a surprise full-out attack with his kicks and punches, and it wasn't effective nor did I lose balance; he lost balance when I countered. And I am like a midget from his perspective, and I am not particularly athletic neither.
 
  • #71
HAYAO said:
I would like to hear your definition so that I can nit-pick that for you and tell me if you would like it.
I already gave it.
Dale said:
My definition would be that a fight starts at the first physical contact with malicious intent.
HAYAO said:
At this point, it would be obvious that any definition I give is going to be nit-picked and blown out of proportion because you cannot actually get to the point.
Here is the point, and I made this point after your first post. I disagree with your use of superlatives in your description. That “almost all” fights start with a punch and that boxing has an “obvious advantage”. If you had said “many” fights start with a punch then I would have no objection. If you had said boxing was “useful” then I would have no objection. But you way overstated your case.

You feel like you are being nit picked because you are sticking to an absurd position. In support of your absurd position on almost all fights starting with a punch you are attempting to define the start of a fight as the first punch. But you realize that simply defining it that way would be circular so you are trying to avoid the appearance of circularity by making a definition that you intend to be interpreted circularly but isn’t blatantly circular. You are getting frustrated because I am not cooperating with the ruse.

I agree that many fights start with a punch, especially between two males who have typical modern cultural upbringing in what constitutes manly conflict. I don’t think that most fights between two females nor between a male and a female begin that way. I am less clear on how fights between more than two combatants start. But I think that the categorical assertation that “almost all” start with a punch is wrong and I think that your attempt to make it a tautology is flawed.

But let’s accept your intended definition, so that only a punch is considered something that can cause harm. Now, consider this scenario: your personal favorite female (mother, wife, daughter, etc) is walking and is grabbed by an assailant who restrains her and takes her to a nearby secluded spot and proceeds to disrobe her. At this point everything has been done firmly but not in a way to cause any harm to her. Now, she gets an arm free and punches her assailant.

Are you comfortable telling your mother, wife, or daughter that she is the one who started the fight? I am not. A malicious grab or a push, to me, can be every bit as threatening and dangerous as a punch, perhaps more so. But by your definition she started the fight.

I think your definition is a bad one, and I think your “almost all” assertion that it was intended to support is also bad.
 
Last edited:
  • #72
This is nothing more than a personal argument, Hayao, if you wish to argue, take it to personal conversation, it is not a forum thread discussion. Closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K