I'd categorize that fight as "typical." More specifically, the subcategory would be "typical/Non-Boring." Most folks go down after a few punches. What is much more impressive is a good boxing match. In those, guys get hit many dozens of times. It is impressive how long they can remain standing under those conditions.

It's kind of dumb to be fighting over a discussion about fighting, with hypothetical situations and anecdotal stories galore. We've all seen what we've seen, (or not), and no one's mind is being changed over the effectiveness of one type or another.

I was once having an herbal tea at Urth Cafe with Mike Tyson, (true story), and I told him about the best street fighter I've ever seen back in Minneapolis. I'll keep the guy's name out of this but he was about 5'10" tall with long blond hair in a pony tail, average/athletic build and no one had ever seen him lose a fight. He did not cherry pick his opponents, some were almost twice his size and solid muscle. He had a mouth on him and loved to fight, all punching and his record in South Mpls. was something like 43-0 with 35 KOs. Ok, I made up the statistic but you get the idea. He could put together punches.

I told Mike that the guy I'm talking about once told me, "the guy who wins is the guy who wants to win." Mike started nodding and told me that was completely true. :)

On the street or in the bar, it's extremely rare to see anyone who really knows how to fight. Most are either a sucker-punch followed by beat down or nothing connecting, etc. I once saw two young Latino guys fighting on the sidewalk in LA and I almost could not believe it...they were boxing like pros and punches were connecting, head ducks were effective, no one losing their balance...like I said, extremely rare.

^^^Facts^^^. I was once jumped by 6 skinheads outside a Bar in San Diego back in the day. (A place called Scooners for those that remember) Don't think any fighting style would help with that one. :) but yeah its usually a sucker punch followed by a group beat down.

I should know it used to be a hobby of mine (still is LOL)

What I usually or try to do is when the other guy starts throwing punches. Block dodge, stay loose and don't get hit. After about 15 seconds he will slow right down. Probably got a big dumb grin on his face because he thinks he's winning. Fake a couple of lefts at him which he will try to block. Then clean him up with a massive right to the jaw. This flips his head in such a way that the brain switches off and he should hit the deck unconscious. If he doesn't drop he will be staggering around holding his face, then give him a huge kick in the middle of the chest. Nothing arty like you see in MMA, but rather like you would do when trying to kick a barn door open.

Two things "Never show mercy to your enemies, and have fun out there."

That’s not a fight that is a gang attack.

Regarding MMA guys, Fighting is what these they do. The only difference between these guys in the ring vs them on the street is that they would splatter your head on the pavement where no rules exist. These guys are no joke.

Good point. Most trained fighters come from the streets. (think Nick and Nate Diaz, Tyson, ect...) these guys are incredibly violent with testosterone through the roof. The difference is that they trained professionally to learn actual technique. Being able to become violent is a prerequisite for any MMA fighter.

People make the mistake of assuming that just because a person is trained they have to play by the rules and that dirty fighting is only applicable to one side. The eye gouges, ball kicks, all that stuff, the trained fighter is more than capable and willing to do the same thing. We actually teach a class called "mean" street Jiu Jitsu where we drill moves to break someone's neck, fishhooks, all that good stuff.

I grew up in Southern California around tons of gangs of all races and IMO the motorcycle guys don't start problems. Yes they will finish them and if you end up fighting one you best believe they may have weapons, but they don't go around starting crap with people.

Most street fights are usually reserved to a younger demographic, typically in a group late in the evening near bars and alcohol. These are the guys that end up sucker punching and jumping you.

I guess I still don't understand how this turned into a "fight about fighting". Like you say, we have all "seen what we've seen". We are all trying to add our perspectives.

The perspective I have been trying to add is, admittedly, from the very extremes, from the nastiest, dirtiest end of the spectrum. A spectrum that ranges from some belligerent drunk in a bar to the most incredibly deranged, evil, fked up psychopaths the streets have to offer.

While those of us who have some level of training (regardless of which particular martial art it may be, from boxing to JJ), would likely have no trouble with the former, the latter is a whole different ballgame, a level of insanity most of us (thank God) have never, and will never find ourselves facing. I thought it might be valuable to share a perspective on that. No more, no less.

Why this "Rodsrsr" character took such an affront to that, why he felt the need to elevate this to "a fight about fighting" escapes me. There were no misrepresentations about what others had said, no false assumptions about others' experiences, no insults - none of that. It was a great discussion wherein we shared our experiences and perspectives. And then, God knows why, he started in with that nonsense. Just totally inexplicable to me.

So, yeah, I'll insult him again - he was acting like a real dick. For no apparent reason.

Maybe we can get back on track?

This has been my problem with your position (bolded above) you've been arguing extremes and I argue from generalities. You cant have a rational argument with extremes because as I mentioned before I can just go to the next extreme and say "the other has a gun" for example. Its silly to try and out-extreme each other.

I deal in most general situations. Is is possible I can run into the deadliest psychopath guy with weapons the streets have to offer? Absolutely, but its just not very likely. Its similar to when women use rape & incest as an excuse to support abortions, but the reality is that only 1% account for this. This is what I call the extreme argument, and its usually when someone has difficulty supporting their position in a general sense.

However I do understand how you may dismissive of BJJ because it sounds like you did some boxing back in the day when you were 18. During that time BJJ wasn't even around in the states so its likely you've never encountered a grappler so see first hand how defenseless you'd be once taken to the ground. Not meant to be an insult its just facts. Most of the guys here who get MMA understand the effectiveness of ground fighting.

Fun Fact: Jiu Jitsu actually means "Gentle art" It means that the grappler has a level of control which will allow him subdue/submit his opponent without having to cause major harm like an eye gouge would for example. Those moves are done out of desperation and it wouldn't necessarily be something a good grappler would need to do as a go to...

My intention in pointing out the extremes is to emphasize that they do exist. And, in a street fight, we never know when we have stumbled into that extreme. Even the slightest risk of meeting one of these characters should be enough for each and every one of us to take pause and realize it is never worth it. There is nothing "irrational" about introducing a "worst case scenario" into any truly informed discussion. Doing so is an integral part of any sort of risk analysis.

And therein lies a problem I've pointed out several times already. I'm having a "discussion", and adding relevant information from a perspective most here have been fortunate enough to have never seen. You, however, believe you are engaged in an "argument", one which you feel you must "win". I'm not arguing anything, I'm merely adding information which I noticed others were not considering.

In sharp contrast to my approach, you evidently feel some burning need to "prove" the "superiority" of your chosen skill. All I have been saying is that yes, that skill (and others) might serve you well against the "average" belligerent drunk. I've never denied that. I've agreed with that premise across this entire thread, and I fully understand that one skill set may be "better" than another when practitioners of each meet one another. I get it. But I wanted to add a dimension that had not yet been introduced, that I feel is worthy of consideration, regardless of how remote the possibility of encountering such a situation. Like I said, "worst case" is an integral part of any risk assessment.

So, yeah, in that spirit, I have endeavored to point out that there is always the chance of meeting "that" guy, the guy I have been trying to describe to you, and warn you against. It would be a disservice, and "irrational", to not include my observations concerning this as a part of this discussion.

What position am I having "difficulty supporting in a general sense"?

The only "position" (and it really isn't one by definition) I have stated is that "that guy" is out there. I have acknowledged that our chances of running into him are slim to none, virtually non-existent. But that doesn't mean he is not out there (in, unfortunately, greater numbers than we would like). It would be irrational to completely dismiss the possibility of being unfortunate enough to "meet" him.

And, again, another very poor analogy. They are using misrepresented statistics to support their desire to change law, to persuade others to allow them to utilize abortion as a birth control option.

In contrast, I'm not trying to persuade anyone into doing anything. I'm merely pointing out that this element of society exists, while suggesting any budding "street fighters" be aware of them and proceed accordingly. Big, big difference.

With this very statement you have demonstrated you understand nothing about my contributions to this discussion. You have, once again, built your own little straw man - I have never said anything that could even be remotely construed as "dismissive of BJJ". As a matter of fact, I have a great deal of respect for it.

And, well, once again you demonstrate what has been a rather myopic view through this entire thread - you demonstrate the need, once again, to state BJJ's "superiority" over boxing. You simply cannot let go of that. Yet, with regards to this aspect of our discussion (and your argument), it's beyond irrelevant. That's the only thing you appear capable of taking away from this discussion - "my martial art is better than your martial art". We covered that earlier, in a different part of this discussion. It's not relevant to this part.

The only thing I have had to say about any martial arts skill set is that they will do you no good if you are ever unfortunate enough to have to defend yourself against the type I have endeavored to describe.

Of course. And boxing is "the sweet science". All well and good, in the ring, with rules and a referee. Amongst gentlemen. That's not what we are discussing at this point, and we've been over the differences many times.

Take some accountability for your comments Jeff. This was your first contribution to the thread.

Juxtapose with my first comment, which was not disparaging. in fact I was actually defending the out of shape looking fighter and acknowledging that you should never make assumptions and take anyone for granted.

You are not looking objectively at the way you communicate.

I'm pretty sure that contribution was a strategic chain-yank directed at me, in fun (based on an exchange between Jeff and myself, going back a couple of years ago, where I surprisingly did not get the humor/joke at first).

Absolutely. I'll take full responsibility for that exchange. You see, Rawknees'Turbo and I have had a long standing, very good natured back and forth exchange going regarding MMA vs boxing. He's an MMA fan, I'm a boxing fan. Here is our full exchange, in context. Including the parts you chose to omit:

I knew upon posting that, that it wouldn't take long for my old friend to fire back. Notice the big huge grins we both added to our posts:

And here is how our little exchange ended:

It's become obvious at this point that you have some serious problems. Over the course of this thread you have now flat out lied about what I have said, you have made erroneous assumptions about my training history (both of which I corrected, to no response from you), and now you've taken a completely innocent, fun little exchange in which two friends tease one another and have desperately tried to assign some gravity to it.

All for what? "Winning the internet" today? All I've done is introduce some considerations regarding the worst side of street fighting, and you've gone completely off the rails. This is really, really getting weird...

Edit: I see my old "sparring partner" chimed in while I was typing. MMA sux!!! ;)

Fair enough...waters can get a bit muddied when posting on a public forum with the intent to be directed at a specific person but not using the quote feature. :)
No harm no foul. Good discussion overall though. Now its time to go train, gotta make 6:00 class. SmileWavy

One thing I really enjoy is when an overly egoized, bigmouth gets put in his or her place (there are many examples but this Diaz vs McGregor fight is a prime one - you've likely seen it before, however). Even though I acknowledge that McGregor can fight, I have never been able to tolerate his jackass ways, so it gives me great pleasure when he is slapped around (more recently by Dustin Poirier, which was awesome :D).

Brother Bob K posted the Holm vs Rousey azz whoopin earlier in the thread, but while she had too much ego and too big of a mouth for me, I was a real fan of hers, so that fight result didn't delight me in that way. I have been a big fan of Holly since that point, however.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eGVxUHlsyWw" title="McGregor vs Diaz 1 | UFC 196 | Extended Highlights | • HD •" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qvkfHv60YOw" title="Conor McGregor vs Dustin Poirier 2 Fight Highlights" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

One of the pleasures of watching any kind of fighting, regardless of discipline, is watching the mouthy jack asses getting their just due. Seems like that whole aspect of it has gotten to be somewhat artificially elevated in my lifetime, however. I remember when Mohamed Ali was considered a "mouthy jack ass". My God, he was as polite as a choir boy compared to what we see today.

I bet if she screamed Russian death metal, you'd be hopelessly in luv... Maybe when she's too old to roll around on the floor sniffin' armpits... :D

Ohhhhhh YES! There are no limits for my luv of the female chainsaw!!! :D

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eQ1HQyj7_Wc" title="СЛОТ — Альфа Ромео + Бета Джульетта (Ин да хаос. Re-play)" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FQkMbgq91W0" title="СЛОТ — 2 войны (Ин да хаос. Re-play)" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The only thing better than seeing Ronda Rousey get a beating is seeing McGregor getting one. Actually, it's a toss-up. They are both so hideous and overrated at the time. McGregor makes me embarrassed because he's Irish but isn't McGregor a Scottish name? That's what I'm going with. :)

Diaz is the schit, I love that guy. He is a stand-up dude from Fresno or something.

As a fellow Irishman, Denis, I couldn't agree more. What an embarrassment. And yes, I believe McGregor is indeed a Scottish name, so at least there's that.

Still disappointing, though, in that there aren't many Irish sporting heroes to go around. As a child of the sixties, my favorite Irish fighter was one George Best. He made his fame and fortune, of course, as a striker for Manchester United, and even Pele himself called him "the best footballer the world has ever seen". But, well, he was an Irishman, from the "bad" part of town, and a renown bar fighter. Irish legend has it that he even kicked Bruce Lee's petulant ass in a bar fight one day. Who knows?...

At the end of the day, though, all of the posturing and posing is all just a part of "the show", and their dedicated fans love that schitt. Keeps 'em tuning in so they can yell at their TVs and join in on the trash talk from the safety of their couch. I just see it as a part of the "pre-mating ritual". Two strutting, decorated roosters on full display, "sizing each other up" before our tatted up lovers start rolling around on the floor tea bagging each other.

Most of these "fights" really aren't all that exciting to the average sports fan who divides his time between football, basketball, baseball, NASCAR, and others. So, in their quest to capture and hold the short attention span fans' interest, they have had to spice it up a bit with all of the nonsense we see today. Not all that far removed from WWF... Which is a shame, it does their real talent a disservice.