I often hear this question referring to many of the martial arts with sports variations (Judo, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, Taekwondo, Karate, etc.). I think many who ask such often have very little frame of reference for the art in question, or the streets for that matter. However, I recently heard an even better question:
“What can you produce cold? Forty below and drinking a Slurpee-level cold, in a self-defense situation?”
My friend Scott asked this in class the other morning. It made me reflect on why I train. Perhaps it can for you too.
When I see some of the techniques in modern sport Jiu-Jitsu competitions or demonstrated on Instagram, I am left asking, “What of this is useful in self-defense?” I know this question gets asked quite often by the old, fuddy-duddies and purists.
I don’t see myself as either of those descriptions. However, I still ask the question because the answer bears on how I view my job as a coach and teacher of the art we call Jiu-Jitsu (and all of its derivatives: BJJ, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, American Jiu-Jitsu, etc.).
Some people train for the sport, the camaraderie, the workout, and various reasons. For many folks, training means all of these reasons simultaneously. They are each valid in their own way. But…
The art we call Jiu-Jitsu is rooted in self-defense, and the Brazilian version has historically been intertwined with the freeform fighting called vale tudo. In either case, rulesets, gameplans, and points were never on the table. Similarly, uniforms, protective equipment, and referees weren’t always present either.
Given the age and size range of average practitioners (not the hyper-athletic, young studs), we might also ask, “What of this can I pull off when I get older?” or “What can I do when I’m injured?” Many techniques in Jiu-Jitsu don’t require athleticism, speed, strength, youth, or any other attribute that might give you an advantage in a sport setting. I am reminded at this point of one of Miyamoto Musashi’s tenets in his Dokkodo (The Way of Walking Alone): to “not seek especially either to collect or to practice arms beyond what is useful” (#16, at least one interpretation of it anyway).
In my opinion, it might be wise to occasionally evaluate the techniques we prioritize or spend much of our time training. Are they a fad (buggy chokes come to mind) or a flashy, multi-step move (berimbolos, anyone?)? Or are they the “boring” basics that work in sport and self-defense (body-fold takedowns and top positions, for example)?
I’m not saying that the modern sport Jiu-Jitsu is bad or somehow not “authentic” (whatever that might mean). I am, however, suggesting that we should be able to protect ourselves and loved ones, and be able to do so under the worst conditions. Amid our accumulation of techniques and applications, remembering the reality that people suck sometimes should help us at least learn the basics of self-defense. It should also help us ask and answer, “What can I pull off cold/old/injured, etc.?”
Photo by Marcel Strauß on Unsplash.
If you are interested in supporting the ongoing content here at The Philosophical Fighter, you can check out my shop or simply buy me a coffee. I appreciate any and all support, and thank you for reading.
The Philosophical Fighter 
My answer to this is that it is irrelevant. Self-defence, which is what people mean when they say “Will it work on the streets”, and martial arts are not the same. Self-defence is about escaping from a dangerous situation not restraining or harming an attacker. Martial arts is about learning a fighting skill and looking good doing it. You can use martial arts techniques for self-defence, but the majority of martial arts techniques should not be used on the streets because they are developed in a sanitised environment requiring a compliant opponent, are overly complicated or puts you on the floor which leaves you vulnerable to your opponent’s friends, never go to the ground in a street fight. No one technique works on everybody. There will always be one person it doesn’t work on.
Martial arts can also give a practitioner false confidence of their ability. The vast majority of martial arts practitioners would lose a fight to an experienced street fighter. There then is the legal grey area which self-defence is because it involves so many varying factors like size difference, gender, weapons, number of people, proof of being attacked etc.
Hope you never need it for real nor have put it to the test. The best reasons for learning martial arts are fitness, camaraderie, friendship, and, if you like competitions, competing. Never learn it for the streets.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with many of your points to an extent, such as how martial arts training is not explicitly about self-defense, but also includes many other things that you listed (fitness, camaraderie, friendship, etc.). However, the title of this essay is merely a play on the commonly used phrase. The essence of the post was more about certain realities we face (or possible delusions) when we think what we train is going to save us in a self-defense situation.
There is a certain level of egotism and self-deception that comes with training. Many people believe, no matter their reasons for training, that their respective art and its methods provide them with an inherent ability or skill to protect themselves. I merely wanted to point out that these skills have contexts (as you noted by a sanitized environment) that we often forget, as shown in the questions, “can I do this injured/when I’m old/when I’m cold/etc.?” While this may render the question in the title irrelevant, the point of the post was a different set of questions. Perhaps I could have made that more clear in the post, or I could have used a different title. Although, the title was also a bit of clickbait to spark interest in reading, which I appreciate you doing so. And thank you for commenting as well.
LikeLike
Pingback: Heraclitus on Ever Being a Student | The Philosophical Fighter