jjchgo - i wrestled for a long time and never once did I consider myself in a "fight" when I stepped onto or off of the mat.
IMO...
did you ever stop someone and correct them if they complimented you on how well you fought for position?
absolutely not. for one they were paying me a compliment, two I was probably to tired to even think about it, and three the most important of all,imo...live and let live. if that's how they saw it, i'm fine with it. all that mattered to me at the time is what I did on the mat.
As someone who has and will continue to compete in BJJ until my limbs fall off, I make it a point to refer to all my matches, past and present as , matches. Nothing more. "Fight"= cringe worthy.
BadLuck13 - I'd love to see someone try to break this logic.
Ok so bjj isn't a fight you say, ok.... What if a guy goes into an mma fight, takes a guy down and taps him out without throwing a single punch? Is that a fight? Yes because it's an mma fight. So why then is bjj not a fight? If boxing is only punching and it's ok to call it a fight (I don't actually but 99% of people call boxers fighters and boxing matches fights) then it is certainly acceptable to call a bjj match a fight. You are fighting to win, regardless if you throw strikes.
If you don't call bjj matches or amateur wrestling matches fights you can't call k1 or boxing or even mma a fight IMHO.
Also what about when two guys with guns are trying to kill each other, often called a fire fight in law enforcement or military, last time I checked they weren't throwing strikes and its still a fight....
To fix the problem just call it a bjj fight an mma fight a a fire fight a fist fight etc etc
There are thousands of ways to fight. Ps /thread and you're welcome. I'm out.
Ok, lots of nuanced opinions here, and I feel like every time this thread is posted it gets less dooshy, so we're making troglodyte progress.
I think there's a distinction in the intent, and that makes all the difference.
In any "fight" you are trying to HURT your opponent. In a "match" you're trying to "best" them.
You and ur bananas gf are tryin to hurt each other. You cannot win a boxing "match" without hurting your opponent. You CAN win a bjj or wrestling match without hurting anyone -- see Brendan Shaub.
I could go further but I think this is enough to shif the conversation to INTENT -- if you can "WIN" without hurting someone it's not a fight. There are obvious exceptions but I think it brings a new aspect that hasn't been discussed.
if strikes are the qualification for a fight then I've been in many BJJ "fights" I've been kneed, elbowed, backfisted, headbutted, I have incurred more injuries 4 yrs of bjj than in 15 of street brawling. if intention is a factor,i have had more than one white/blue/new purple try to rip my head clean off to make a name for themselves. that being said,i do not consider what I do "fighting" nor do I consider myself a "fighter" I am a "practitioner of combat sports". but I think to not call a bjj match a fight kinda whitewashes the brutality that can be seen in competitive BJJ... but that's just me
BadLuck13 - I'd love to see someone try to break this logic.
Ok so bjj isn't a fight you say, ok.... What if a guy goes into an mma fight, takes a guy down and taps him out without throwing a single punch? Is that a fight? Yes because it's an mma fight. So why then is bjj not a fight? If boxing is only punching and it's ok to call it a fight (I don't actually but 99% of people call boxers fighters and boxing matches fights) then it is certainly acceptable to call a bjj match a fight. You are fighting to win, regardless if you throw strikes.
If you don't call bjj matches or amateur wrestling matches fights you can't call k1 or boxing or even mma a fight IMHO.
Also what about when two guys with guns are trying to kill each other, often called a fire fight in law enforcement or military, last time I checked they weren't throwing strikes and its still a fight....
To fix the problem just call it a bjj fight an mma fight a a fire fight a fist fight etc etc
There are thousands of ways to fight. Ps /thread and you're welcome. I'm out.
Break the logic? ok,
The mma fighter has chosen not to use strikes, the bjj'er is not allowed. the Comparison is flawed.
You are not allowed to kick in boxing and grapple in either boxing or kickboxing....
Try again big guy.
Which is why they are less of a true fight than mma....
I'd still consder boxing\kickboxing.more of a fight, as i've said.before i'm not.100 percent sure why i do, maybe more todo with thr level of.violence.in the average boxing.match vs the average grappling match. KO's vs submissions.
I'm probably in the minority though, been vtfd a ton in this thread.
depends on how you want to define it. According to wikipedia:
"Combat or fighting is a purposeful violent conflict meant to weaken, or establish dominance over the opposition, or to kill the opposition, or drive the opposition away from a location where it is not wanted or needed."
I think it'd qualify under that definition, but id put it on the lower end of the spectrum of violence when you're talking about matches which are about promoting safe competition for people to express their aggression
I'd consider anything with striking closer to a real fight than grappling. Any combat sport at the competition level is tough, but taking hard strikes while trying to give them back seems to make you question your will to win and dig deeper to find out who's tougher. In a ten minute grappling match, I could go out and run around and avoid grappling or turtle up and it would be very tough to sub me. I could just play defense and not engage at all and probably come out no worse than I started. Try doing the same thing in a ring with someone who's allowed to strike. You'd have to stand your ground and "fight" back or they'll tee off on you and you won't make it. And if you're throwing strikes it means you're able to be hit. It's a lot closer to what a street fight is than a BJJ match.
