How can you tell . . . ?

[t_niehoff]

. . . when someone isn't using WCK principles or concepts?

And, can you determine if someone is using only some WCK principles or concepts? For example, could you say he is onlu sing 45% of WCK principles and concepts?

[SAAMAG]

. . . when someone isn't using WCK principles or concepts?

And, can you determine if someone is using only some WCK principles or concepts? For example, could you say he is onlu sing 45% of WCK principles and concepts?

You can tell if someone is using the guiding principles of a style generally by how they're using it. Even boxing and muay thai and sanshou and judo and BJJ have concepts they use.

[HumbleWCGuy]

This is a tough question. I got tired of typing to I just put down a few basic things. Some people are of the mindset that if you won that it was good Wing Chun and if you lost then it was bad Wing Chun. My problem with that sort of mentality is that winning does not qualify something as Wing Chun.


In street fights, I like to see the notion of the "stop hit" taken to a high level. I like to see a general attempt to arrest the opponents movement. My belief is that a solid Wing Chun man should be able to deal with a street fighter in a manner that makes people wonder if a fight really occurred.

As far as general technique, you would expect to see:

A preference for the vertical fist.

Straights that are straight and down the centerline. I see some people/ styles that tend to throw their straights off kilter?

I expect to see attempts at trapping and/or standing grappling. In that vein, I like to see a parrying at range.

I expect to see an understanding of how to shift weight in a stance.

I like to see effective use of the wu sao working with the man sao.

I like to see the centerline defended by movement banging back and forth is not preferable.

Volume punching

I don't necessarily favor attacking over counter punching per say. Although, I want to see aggressiveness when putting together strikes.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Also, I don't really weight one thing over another. It is important that everything on that list and not be up to an acceptable level.

[t_niehoff]

You can tell if someone is using the guiding principles of a style generally by how they're using it. Even boxing and muay thai and sanshou and judo and BJJ have concepts they use.

You can tell if someone is using boxing or MT or judo or BJJ or whatever when they are using continually the tools of that particular art.

My question is how do you know what when someone is using the guiding principles of the art and not just the tools?

[t_niehoff]

This is a tough question. I got tired of typing to I just put down a few basic things. Some people are of the mindset that if you won that it was good Wing Chun and if you lost then it was bad Wing Chun. My problem with that sort of mentality is that winning does not qualify something as Wing Chun.


In street fights, I like to see the notion of the "stop hit" taken to a high level. I like to see a general attempt to arrest the opponents movement. My belief is that a solid Wing Chun man should be able to deal with a street fighter in a manner that makes people wonder if a fight really occurred.

As far as general technique, you would expect to see:

A preference for the vertical fist.

Straights that are straight and down the centerline. I see some people/ styles that tend to throw their straights off kilter?

I expect to see attempts at trapping and/or standing grappling. In that vein, I like to see a parrying at range.

I expect to see an understanding of how to shift weight in a stance.

I like to see effective use of the wu sao working with the man sao.

I like to see the centerline defended by movement banging back and forth is not preferable.

Volume punching

I don't necessarily favor attacking over counter punching per say. Although, I want to see aggressiveness when putting together strikes.

I think it worth commenting on that you repeatedly say "I like to see . . . ". You are not seeing concepts, you are seeing actions. These are actions that you characterize as good WCK. Couldn't you just say that you would like to see a person successfully using nothing but WCK movements/actions, the movements/actions we learn in the forms, dummy, and drills?

[HumbleWCGuy]

I think it worth commenting on that you repeatedly say "I like to see . . . ". You are not seeing concepts, you are seeing actions. These are actions that you characterize as good WCK. Couldn't you just say that you would like to see a person successfully using nothing but WCK movements/actions, the movements/actions we learn in the forms, dummy, and drills?

That's probably accurate. I really didn't want to just put it that simply because people get too much into "style points." I think that this is especially the case if they aren't used to looking at real-time fighting.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . when someone isn't using WCK principles or concepts?

And, can you determine if someone is using only some WCK principles or concepts? For example, could you say he is onlu sing 45% of WCK principles and concepts?
My WC is using what works to efficiently get the job done as quickly and simply regardless of what Terence thinks. I PM'd you some more. Get back to me.

[SAAMAG]

You can tell if someone is using boxing or MT or judo or BJJ or whatever when they are using continually the tools of that particular art.

My question is how do you know what when someone is using the guiding principles of the art and not just the tools?

Really its quite simple. To make things less convoluted...lets say that Wing Chun's ONLY guiding principle/concept/strategy is to always press the opponent and keep contact of the bridge or closer.

If you see the wing chun fighter doing that...then they are using the said guiding principle. If you do not...then they are not. You're never going to have an exact percentage because there's no way to quantify it unless you film the fight and then count the minutes of that person using the said principle and dividing it by the total minutes of the fight.

What was the point of your question?

[YungChun]

You could say occupying/using the line, economy of motion/energy, use of position and structure in WCK tools, actions... Employing an unbroken line of force..

[t_niehoff]

Really its quite simple. To make things less convoluted...lets say that Wing Chun's ONLY guiding principle/concept/strategy is to always press the opponent and keep contact of the bridge or closer.


As I see it, that's not a principle but rather WCK's approach to fighting -- to control while striking (which requires contact). Sort of like saying BJJ's approach is to control the opponent on the ground while looking for submissions, that's not a principle but a strategic approach.



If you see the wing chun fighter doing that...then they are using the said guiding principle. If you do not...then they are not. You're never going to have an exact percentage because there's no way to quantify it unless you film the fight and then count the minutes of that person using the said principle and dividing it by the total minutes of the fight.

What was the point of your question?


Well, what I'm getting at is that many people talk about all kinds of WCK principles and concepts, and my question is how can we know when people are using WCK's concepts or not?

As I see it, to see WCK princples and concepts in action, you need to see a person actually using WCK -- and that means using the movements/actions of WCK -- the tools of WCK -- in fighting as they are the physical embodiment of the WCK concepts and principles. You don't express WCK principles and concepts by doing something other than WCK.

Or, to put it another way, the principles and concepts of WCK are heuritics for successfully applying (fighting with) the WCK skills/tools.

So how can you tell if someone is using WCK principles and concepts? The answer is that they are fighting and using continual WCK movement. When they stop using wCK movement, they stop using WCK, and they stop using the principles and concepts of WCK.

[SAAMAG]

As I see it, that's not a principle but rather WCK's approach to fighting -- to control while striking (which requires contact). Sort of like saying BJJ's approach is to control the opponent on the ground while looking for submissions, that's not a principle but a strategic approach.



Well, what I'm getting at is that many people talk about all kinds of WCK principles and concepts, and my question is how can we know when people are using WCK's concepts or not?

As I see it, to see WCK princples and concepts in action, you need to see a person actually using WCK -- and that means using the movements/actions of WCK -- the tools of WCK -- in fighting as they are the physical embodiment of the WCK concepts and principles. You don't express WCK principles and concepts by doing something other than WCK.

Or, to put it another way, the principles and concepts of WCK are heuritics for successfully applying (fighting with) the WCK skills/tools.

So how can you tell if someone is using WCK principles and concepts? The answer is that they are fighting and using continual WCK movement. When they stop using wCK movement, they stop using WCK, and they stop using the principles and concepts of WCK.

I see. Well that's pretty much what the intent of most of the replies were imo. It's assumed that the wing chun person would be using wing chun tools, since after all they are a wing chun person. In addition to the said strategy of course

But to me a rule of thumb / hueristic / concept / principle / strategy is generally the same thing in fighting. No matter which word you use...they all guide the person in the chosen actions to be taken based on the end goal.

[Roy D. Anthony]

When a good wing chun artist fights, you won't be able to tell if he is using wc concepts or principles and not even techniques, you should not be able to recognize wing chun.

[HumbleWCGuy]

When a good wing chun artist fights, you won't be able to tell if he is using wc concepts or principles and not even techniques, you should not be able to recognize wing chun.

That is my standard against the street fighter, but I don't think that can be a realistic standard against a strong opponent.

[Roy D. Anthony]

Enlightenment is not achieved , it is realized!!!

[Phil Redmond]

That is my standard against the street fighter, but I don't think that can be a realistic standard against a strong opponent.
Can a street fighter be a strong opponent?

[HumbleWCGuy]

Can a street fighter be a strong opponent?
Certainly, a street fighter can be a strong opponent. There are the Mike Tysons of the world who are as much a street fighter as anything. However, more typically, in my experience ",strong" street fighters are guys with inconsistent martial arts training and/or good fitness, but that's not going to cut it against a a strong Wing Chun man who has come into his own.

[k gledhill]

My old Sifu Victor Kan once said to me "...a good martial artist will make a good street-fighter, but a good street-fighter wont necessarily make a good martial artist."

iow the discipline required to be a good ma , balance training, yada , yada, the street-fighter he /she.. may not have, but a ma with all the attribute training will have better capabilities...

I did mostly street fighting in my lifetime :rolleyes:, just the strong trained punch alone to a head accounted for more 'results' than anything ....one punch is all it took most times. Not a 'flailing' worthless strike you see many guys doing when 'whirl winding' at each other off balance,etc... with 'peasant' kicks, as my old sifu would say :D love that, a peasant kick is like a person kicks a soccer ball or punts a football downfield... I remember..[oh oh] being called to a fight at a nightclub in London, some guys where at it, local hoodlums :D I was aksed to stay at the entrance and not let them back in...one guy a local scottish maniac :eek: comes up to me and without a word just does a spectacular 'peasant' kick at my general direction, so I simply cupped his ankle without moving a inch ...and kept it up in the air , his facial expression stays with me to this day :D:D

[t_niehoff]

The "street fighter" is mainly MYTH, a boogeyman. He's Bigfoot. Some people will tell you stories about their encounters with them but we just can't find them when we look for them.

Concern over streetfighters is like concern over what to do if you encounter Bigfoot while camping.

[CFT]

It would be helpful to define the term "street fighter". I think I know what you're trying to say Terence but it can easily be misread.

[t_niehoff]

It would be helpful to define the term "street fighter". I think I know what you're trying to say Terence but it can easily be misread.

How can I define something that doesn't exist?

[HumbleWCGuy]

How can I define something that doesn't exist?

You have implied a definition with your previous off-hand remark. If you say that a street-fighter doesn't exist then explain to us why and what you would call the people who the typical street-encounter occurs with. Would a person arrested multiple times for street fights be considered a street fighter?

[t_niehoff]

You have implied a definition with your previous off-hand remark. If you say that a street-fighter doesn't exist then explain to us why and what you would call the people who the typical street-encounter occurs with. Would a person arrested multiple times for street fights be considered a street fighter?

The whole idea of a "streetfighter" is fantasy. It's one of those red flags -- as soon as people start talking about "streefighters" or "streetfighting", you are about to get a whole mess of fantasy.

WTF is a "typical street-encounter"? There is no such thing. More fantasy.

A person arrested numerous times for fighting -- not street fighting but fighting -- would be considered a repeat offender.

[CFT]

What you are saying is that there is no such animal as a skilled career "streetfghter" who is on the lookout for fights to prove himself?

Mostly people will encounter drunken/semi-drunken louts or a mugger looking to ambush you (or a lap goch-er if you will).

[t_niehoff]

What you are saying is that there is no such animal as a skilled career "streetfghter" who is on the lookout for fights to prove himself?

Mostly people will encounter drunken/semi-drunken louts or a mugger looking to ambush you (or a lap goch-er if you will).

I'm saying the whole concept of a streetfighter or streetfighting -- like "real fighting" -- is meaningless and misleading, fed mostly with fantasy. We would do much better to not think in those terms.

There is a three stripe white belt that trains where I do who regularly goes out to the bars on weekends, gets drunk, and ends up in fights. Is he one of those legendary streetfighters?

[SAAMAG]

I'm saying the whole concept of a streetfighter or streetfighting -- like "real fighting" -- is meaningless and misleading, fed mostly with fantasy. We would do much better to not think in those terms.

There is a three stripe white belt that trains where I do who regularly goes out to the bars on weekends, gets drunk, and ends up in fights. Is he one of those legendary streetfighters?

Wasn't Kimbo Slice pretty much just that? Not saying he's the pinnacle of fighting of course...but he made a "career" out of bare knuckle street brawling.

[HumbleWCGuy]

I'm saying the whole concept of a streetfighter or streetfighting -- like "real fighting" -- is meaningless and misleading, fed mostly with fantasy. We would do much better to not think in those terms.

There is a three stripe white belt that trains where I do who regularly goes out to the bars on weekends, gets drunk, and ends up in fights. Is he one of those legendary streetfighters?

Yes, by my reckoning that is exactly what a would call a top-notch street fighter. Somebody with inconsistent/limited MA training who gets into fights regularly.

[t_niehoff]

Wasn't Kimbo Slice pretty much just that? Not saying he's the pinnacle of fighting of course...but he made a "career" out of bare knuckle street brawling.

It's my understanding that Kimbo mainly did arranged, challenge backyard-type fights. Is that your definition of a "streetfighter"?

[t_niehoff]

Yes, by my reckoning that is exactly what a would call a top-notch street fighter. Somebody with inconsistent/limited MA training who gets into fights regularly.

You see, the problem is there is no such thing as a "street fighter" -- there are people who for various reasons get into fights. The reasons, the people, etc. can't be generalized into what is some proto-typical "street fighter".

[HumbleWCGuy]

You see, the problem is there is no such thing as a "street fighter" -- there are people who for various reasons get into fights. The reasons, the people, etc. can't be generalized into what is some proto-typical "street fighter".

I don't agree. Somebody said that you are a lawyer. If that's true can you access some statistics? I am sure that people report that fights start for about all the same 4 or 5 reasons and that the people who fight the most have some similarities.

[Lucas]

ive only known a couple guys i would call 'street fighters' and they looked for fights. they would fight for pretty much any reason, any time, like a drug. often times alcohol was involved.

[sihing]

ive only known a couple guys i would call 'street fighters' and they looked for fights. they would fight for pretty much any reason, any time, like a drug. often times alcohol was involved.

My older late Brother was like this, quiet and shy when sober, but after a few drinks he changed, had lots of fights in the bars (his son is turning out to be the same, even wanted to spar with me after a few drinks, trying out MT clinch and knee attacks by surprise, lol..), then he met a karate guy and got beat good, missing a punch and hitting a brick wall, breaking his hand and knuckles. Luckily had settled down after he had kids and matured up, but he was the worry of the family for awhile there...

James

[SAAMAG]

It's my understanding that Kimbo mainly did arranged, challenge backyard-type fights. Is that your definition of a "streetfighter"?

It can be. Has there ever been a common definition for streetfighter? Aside from it being a video game?

I'd think that in its most intuitive form a street fighter is someone who consistently goes around looking to test themselves or prove themselves or whatever the motivation might be by fighting other people in "the street". The main idea behind the quintessential ideal is that there are no pads, no rules, and it isn't part of any sanctioned organization or sport.

Since that's probably not all that common, I understand what you're getting at in that there are no nomadic guys walking the city streets looking for one-on-one fights to prove their man-worth. As you said...people may find themselves in fights while in public, but generally there's some single catalyst for it.

Though I'd say that Kimbo does classify as a streetfighter in a loose sense, because according to him he'd get into street fights consistently with his friends...and that's how he realized he was "good" at fighting. Next was youtube stardom, and then his "mma career" for whatever that's worth.

[Lee Chiang Po]

The "street fighter" is mainly MYTH, a boogeyman. He's Bigfoot. Some people will tell you stories about their encounters with them but we just can't find them when we look for them.

Concern over streetfighters is like concern over what to do if you encounter Bigfoot while camping.


True. The so called street fighters are usually nothing more than street bullies. They pick and choose their victims usually, and seldom assault someone that they think might be able to fight them. Most are large men with few real fighting skills. Their size usually carries them in a fight since they are usually selective to begin with. There are the occasional individuals that might fight someone that they think might give them a fight, but this is usually under some sort of influence, either by peers or beers.
Now, in the past, like in the 60's I did know a few people that you could classify as street fighters. They are now deceased, but at the time were extremely dangerous people. They would have fights almost every day, and even though now and then one might get whipped, no one ever wanted to do it the second time. People don't fight like that any more. Everyone wants to let their gun do there fighting.

[punchdrunk]

I don't think "street fighters" are rare at all. Nor are they necessarily skilled at all either. Fighting in urban centers outside of the ring automatically makes you one. Most are just bullies, picking on the weak for their amusement or benefit. Others are members of gangs, some are just fools living on the street that need to go to re-hab. If you ever work as a bouncer in a rough, slum area you'll deal with them constantly. Kimbo's you tube fights were not street fights, just crappy challenge bouts. Both parties agreed to rules and could leave unharmed at any time... sound like a street fight? Actually the Emin B. vs W. Cheung sh1t was closer to a street fight, from the ambush to ending on the ground and the BS that followed in rumors sound exactly like a cr@ppy street fight to me.

[t_niehoff]

There is no typical street fight or street fighter -- there are people who for various reasons fight, and the fights range from shoving matches to cold-blooded assualts. The only factor in common is that they involve fighting.

Here's a "real" streetfight -- the fight occurs actually on a street!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZA6Qm40KF8

Except, it seems to show many of the street fighter myths. Here they go to the ground on asphalt (something you don't want to do, right?), yet no one is getting stomped or rolling on broken glass or discarded herion needles. Nor do we see anyone's friends getting involved. No multiple oponents.

It just looks like MMA -- really poor MMA. But that is what fighting is.

[HumbleWCGuy]

There is no typical street fight or street fighter -- there are people who for various reasons fight, and the fights range from shoving matches to cold-blooded assualts. The only factor in common is that they involve fighting.

Here's a "real" streetfight -- the fight occurs actually on a street!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZA6Qm40KF8

Except, it seems to show many of the street fighter myths. Here they go to the ground on asphalt (something you don't want to do, right?), yet no one is getting stomped or rolling on broken glass or discarded herion needles. Nor do we see anyone's friends getting involved. No multiple oponents.

It just looks like MMA -- really poor MMA. But that is what fighting is.

Go to the projects and pick a fight and take your assailant to the ground and see what happens. There was a situation where both men were obviously alone. There was no penalty for taking an opponent to the ground. You can take opponents to the ground but you have to be sensible about it.

[t_niehoff]

Go to the projects and pick a fight and take your assailant to the ground and see what happens.

ROFLOL! Pure fantasy.

[HumbleWCGuy]

ROFLOL! Pure fantasy.

Only to people who live in the suburbs.

[Phil Redmond]

Go to the projects and pick a fight and take your assailant to the ground and see what happens. There was a situation where both men were obviously alone. There was no penalty for taking an opponent to the ground. You can take opponents to the ground but you have to be sensible about it.
Not only in the projects but any "hood" regardless of the ethnicity of the hood.


ROFLOL! Pure fantasy.
You prove more and more how you make blanket statements with little knowledge


Only to people who live in the suburbs.
Priceless comeback. :D

[YungChun]

ROFLOL! Pure fantasy.

Interesting knee jerk there... Hmmm...;)
Okay let's hear the theory.....

[t_niehoff]

OK. I previously said there is no such thing as a "streetfighter" or even "streetfighting" -- these things are myths, much like Bigfoot. Remember?

So I put up a clip of a real "street fight" -- one that actually takes place ON a street. And as you can see for yourself, much of the "conventional wisdom" (fantasy) that theoretical nonfighters project about "streetfights" and "streetfighters" you simply don't see. In other words, you don't see Bigfoot. What you do see is fighting -- which is what you will see when any two people fight. And guess what fighting looks like? It looks like MMA. Bad MMA in this case because the fighters aren't trained and have little skill.

So what is the response? Go to the "projects" (or in Phil's case, "the hood") and you will really see Bigfoot. Oh, yeah, and Bigfoot doesn't go to the the 'burbs.

Fantasy.

There aren't any mythical streetfighters (living in the projects or hood) or any "thing" called streetfighting -- there is just fighting. And people fight the same way where ever you go. And, it looks like MMA because that's what fighting is.

[SAAMAG]

OK. I previously said there is no such thing as a "streetfighter" or even "streetfighting" -- these things are myths, much like Bigfoot. Remember?

So I put up a clip of a real "street fight" -- one that actually takes place ON a street. And as you can see for yourself, much of the "conventional wisdom" (fantasy) that theoretical nonfighters project about "streetfights" and "streetfighters" you simply don't see. In other words, you don't see Bigfoot. What you do see is fighting -- which is what you will see when any two people fight. And guess what fighting looks like? It looks like MMA. Bad MMA in this case because the fighters aren't trained and have little skill.

So what is the response? Go to the "projects" (or in Phil's case, "the hood") and you will really see Bigfoot. Oh, yeah, and Bigfoot doesn't go to the the 'burbs.

Fantasy.

There aren't any mythical streetfighters (living in the projects or hood) or any "thing" called streetfighting -- there is just fighting. And people fight the same way where ever you go. And, it looks like MMA because that's what fighting is.

Terence, they're talking about going to the projects and attacking someone will end with you getting the crap kicked out of you by a number of people...not that you see Ryu and Ken testing themselves.

[t_niehoff]

Terence, they're talking about going to the projects and attacking someone will end with you getting the crap kicked out of you by a number of people...not that you see Ryu and Ken testing themselves.

If they go ANYWHERE and attack someone, they will in all liklihood get the crap kicked out of them.

Do you think there are no fights in "the projects" between only two persons? That every single time a fist fight breaks out in "the projects", that they turn into multiple opponent affairs? Fantasy.

[HumbleWCGuy]

If they go ANYWHERE and attack someone, they will in all liklihood get the crap kicked out of them.

Do you think there are no fights in "the projects" between only two persons? That every single time a fist fight breaks out in "the projects", that they turn into multiple opponent affairs? Fantasy.

The point isn't whether the fight will involve multiple assailants every time. Even if it only happened 1-10, if you are in the mindset that you will always take an opponent to the ground that one time could be your last.

I am not against going to the ground by the way, but you have to be aware of your surroundings.

[SAAMAG]

If they go ANYWHERE and attack someone, they will in all liklihood get the crap kicked out of them.

Do you think there are no fights in "the projects" between only two persons? That every single time a fist fight breaks out in "the projects", that they turn into multiple opponent affairs? Fantasy.

Of course there are...but if you think that a bunch of guys will stand around watching their buddy fight (especially in areas where that lifestyle is the norm) and not jump in than THAT'S fantasy.

I've personally seen it happen on a number of occasions and even had to break up a group fight that spilled over into the non-fighting public.

[t_niehoff]

Of course there are...but if you think that a bunch of guys will stand around watching their buddy fight (especially in areas where that lifestyle is the norm) and not jump in than THAT'S fantasy.


So you believe that in "the projects" people are just standing around waiting to jump into fights? Or that their "lifestyle" is watching their buddy fight?

Fantasy.

Fighting is fighting and people are people.



I've personally seen it happen on a number of occasions and even had to break up a group fight that spilled over into the non-fighting public.

Oh, Lord.

[SAAMAG]

So you believe that in "the projects" people are just standing around waiting to jump into fights? Or that their "lifestyle" is watching their buddy fight?

Fantasy.

Fighting is fighting and people are people.



Oh, Lord.

If you're praying that you will be able to figure out some way of coming out on top of this argument that's about the only option you have at this point. But you can't end the day without feeling like you have to be right about everything? Especially in this case where it can easily be proven otherwise by personal experiences, social norms, and even the almighty youtube. Also your tactic of "misinterpreting" what someone else has said then trying to capitalize on it is also getting old. You know what is meant by lifestyle...that being they live in a part of town where fighting and gangbanging and other low-life type activities are the norm. Places where proving manhood is typically done physically or with guns. That's what is meant by lifestyle.

Look, whether you feel its fantasy or not (because I'm about to place you in the same "delusions of granduer" catagory as HW108) people will and do get into multiple opponent fights. They don't stand around and wait as you put it, though there is probably an exception to that as well with some of the social delinquents out and about; but it does happen.

While there are not many "streetfighters" that walk around like Ryu and Ken just looking for fights...yet according to others here and even with a guy I know personally, there are the occasional exceptions to that rule as well. Is it stupid? You bet. But to these individuals...going around looking for fights in bars and such is just a social defect they have.

Because the general idea of something being fantasy means that it doesn't exist in reality... if there is JUST ONE exception to your definite conclusion that either notion is fantasy...than you're wrong. Plain and simple. Now go and have beer and get the fugg over it already.

[HumbleWCGuy]

If you're praying that you will be able to figure out some way of coming out on top of this argument that's about the only option you have at this point. But you can't end the day without feeling like you have to be right about everything? Especially in this case where it can easily be proven otherwise by personal experiences, social norms, and even the almighty youtube. Also your tactic of "misinterpreting" what someone else has said then trying to capitalize on it is also getting old. You know what is meant by lifestyle...that being they live in a part of town where fighting and gangbanging and other low-life type activities are the norm. Places where proving manhood is typically done physically or with guns. That's what is meant by lifestyle.

Look, whether you feel its fantasy or not (because I'm about to place you in the same "delusions of granduer" catagory as HW108) people will and do get into multiple opponent fights. They don't stand around and wait as you put it, though there is probably an exception to that as well with some of the social delinquents out and about; but it does happen.

While there are not many "streetfighters" that walk around like Ryu and Ken just looking for fights...yet according to others here and even with a guy I know personally, there are the occasional exceptions to that rule as well. Is it stupid? You bet. But to these individuals...going around looking for fights in bars and such is just a social defect they have.

Because the general idea of something being fantasy means that it doesn't exist in reality... if there is JUST ONE exception to your definite conclusion that either notion is fantasy...than you're wrong. Plain and simple. Now go and have beer and get the fugg over it already.

Niehoff has basically no street fighting experience while others on this forum grew up in rough neighborhoods, worked law enforcement, gone to war, fought in the streets, and bounced. Niehoff has watched youtube and talked to others people with no street experience.

[SAAMAG]

Niehoff has basically no street fighting experience while others on this forum grew up in rough neighborhoods, worked law enforcement, gone to war, fought in the streets, and bounced. Niehoff has watched youtube and talked to others people with no street experience.

I'm thinking that maybe he's saying that when people fight in public or in the streets as it were, that it is just because they're normal people who've found themselves in a fight. There's a catalyst for it and there's nothing more to it.

This is in contrast to the idea that there are individuals who are skilled in fighting because they have learned soley through experience by fighting people outside the confines of a formal organization.

I can concede to it being relatively a low probability, but that's far being pure fantasy.

[sanjuro_ronin]

One thing,
If a person is training with realisim as their goal then they MUST take into account the possibility of multiple attackers.
Yes, many times people just like to watch, even if it's their own friend that is losing (people are ****ed up), but there is also the chance of people stepping in and it must be accounted for.
There is a reason that even trained grapplers DON'T want to take it to the ground if it can be avoided, because of the dangers there.
Of course IF it goes to the ground, a person that has trained there and knows how to fight from there is certainly better off.

When a fellow bouncer ended up on the ground during a group altercation years ago, he did the smart thing and used the guy that he was fighting as a "shield" between the people that were kicking at THEM and when we got there ( very quickly sense we were right there) he was able to get back up and had only a few marks to show for it.
His comfort on the ground and smarts about being on the bottom ( something that seems to be the wrong thing to do) was what kept him from getting to hurt.