Are UFC/Pride/K-1 type events the only benchmark for determining M.A. effectiveness?

The goal of Pride/UFC/K-1 type fighting events are to win by knockouts (KO%26#039;s or TKO%26#039;s), submissions, or scoring decision. Fights occur in a controlled environment (ie - the ring) with one-on-one adversaries. Training is specifically focused on acheiving these goals. I am going to make an assumption that fighters go into every match with the personal goal to knockout their opponent, or force a submission because it is a more definitive victory. With all of this in mind, the fighting they do is extremely effective for the goals they are striving to achieve, and I have a lot of respect for their skills.





However, TKO, KO, and submissions are not the only possible goals, or outcomes to a fight. Also more variables exist in the proverbial %26quot;real world%26quot;, such as, terrain, space, multiple combatants, etc. So are these types of events really the only gauge of %26quot;effectiveness%26quot; for all styles of Martial Arts? If it%26#039;s not %26quot;ring worthy%26quot;, is it automatically worthless?

Are UFC/Pride/K-1 type events the only benchmark for determining M.A. effectiveness?
the opposite of the last sentence is true. the ring is made as safe as it can be with rules. a kick to the back of the head is awesome, yet not allowed.pulling the ballbags away from the body are not allowed, but they are not worthless.





the ring is ruled by rules. the world outside has no rules. this is more dangerous. MMA, K-1 etc are only gauges of those fighters abilities within the rules that determine the sport. that guy %26#039;cabbage%26#039; got knocked teh hell out and mugged by 2 guys. what went wrong? he is a vicious fighter, yet he trains for his sport under those conditions.





the guys who took him out fought their way. multiple attackers, knock out hits. the no rules won again.





I love MMA, K-1 etc, but nothing beats watching these guys get wasted. as a doorman, I have seen local guys fight well, and also seen them get wasted by unorthodox dirty sh!t. but all is fair in violence.





so these sports only gauge the persons level of skill within the sport, not at how they are outside. it is easier to fight in a ring than down an alley. the rings danger is finite, the streets danger is infinite.





I dont damn them, but am aware of limitation. if they trained for the sport and did crazy street essentials, then awesome. but money to be made means training only for the money winner.





though more options in MMA make it closer to the real, as opposed to TKD tournaments. head kick point sparring at its worst in respect to the street.
Reply:Yeah I see what you mean. I suppose %26quot;actual fighting%26quot; where there are no rules at all would be the best in a street fight, but then most people would probably just do the things that are banned in the ring (eg groin attacks, eye gouging, biting etc) and it would be very hard to have more than 1 fight if this was a martial art as most people would end up dead or completely bashed to ****!





Nevertheless, I love watching fights, whether at MMA comp or in the street
Reply:ring fighting has or never will have any influence on the effectivness of martial arts.it%26#039;s a popular misconception by people who think they are martial artists that these types of events are a benchmark as to whats good and whats not.i have seen many martial artists that have rooms full of trophys, awards and, ribbons as well as championship belts get absolutely flogged in a real situation.and thats 1 on 1.how would they go against multiple opponents.
Reply:Yes it is the benchmark of MA That%26#039;s why they are held. As to say eye gouging, groin kicks etc.. are not allowed they are not allowed in the disciplinary teaching/training of martial arts any way. As for multiple attacks well the people in the ufc,pride,k1 would be more prepared than you or I(i) Because they are smashing machines. This is why it is (MIXED MARTIAL ARTS so you are prepared for the best of most situations. NOT 1 fighter fights under one technique or method because it has been shown that it does not work. Do Not make the assumption that there are alternative people and or ways that could work better on the street. The only thing the ref is there for is so no one gets killed and they live to fight another day.
Reply:SO many people argue this point... It%26#039;s ridiculous.





%26quot;You shouldn%26#039;t gauge martial arts in a competition with minimal rules only in place for the fighter%26#039;s safety. Instead you shouldn%26#039;t test your skills at all.%26quot;





You clearly don%26#039;t understand what you can gain from fighting a live resisting opponent, determined to win, who is able to do all but permantly disable you (would you fight with eye gouging?). There are many things you learn that have NOTHING to do with the ring, the rules, the canvas, such as the mental game.





I would favor a top rated MMA fighter over a theoretical MA black belt ANY DAY in a NO RULES FIGHT. You think that Kung Fu practitioners are the only ones who know how to kick someone in the nuts or poke them in the eye? Those moves can be incorporated in a fight by a MMA easily.





Someone that makes the argument you are making only sees the violence in the ring, not the mind games and the chess match. If you wanna work in the theoretical field of MA GO RIGHT AHEAD, just don%26#039;t get upset that some operate in the practical, painful side.





People who train for MMA, train HARD. They fight ALL THE TIME. How can you say that gettign your *** kicked and kicking *** are not the best ways to train. I suppose the best way to train to kick *** is to hit dummies, meditate and practice matrix style.








PS Also, show me evidence of someone winning a fight 1 vs %26gt;1...