Can some one who is an expert in "self-defense" be a good fighter?

I would think that the would depend on the one qualifying the person as "expert", or the one agreeing that the person was "expert".

Then again, from a philosophical standpoint, I don't think this is possible.

Then again, verb tense may be very important, too. One who is "expert" may once have been a good fighter.

Then again, the answer may lie in one's definition of "expert", "self-defense", and "good fighter".

I'm reminded of some of my computer teachers: very intelligent, but I wouldn't hire the to be a programmer.

So in my opinion, the answer is "no, good fighters don't necessarily mean experts in self-defense; and expert in self-defense doesn't imply a good fighter".

Yes you can be both. But just because you are a good fighter doesn't mean you will be good at self defense.

A self defense expert and and fighter are two separate things as you already know. However, they can be the same.

In self defense the intent is different. You are thinking of self preservation. Your intent is to survive. Usually, but not necessarily at any cost. Personally I will do whatever I deem necessary to survive include using lethal force.

A fighter intent is to win the fight at hand. Their life is not on the line. A fighter may be governed by the rules of the contest if there are rules. The rules limit what actions a fighter can use legally in accordance of the rules.

A person that is an "expert" in self defense should posses enough skill that he or she can use a variety of tools from their arsenal and win a fight, especially if they train for competition.

The biggest problem I see is qualifies one as an expert?

I have trained for many years. I do not consider myself as an expert. I competed when I was young. I was successful in competing. Now that I have mature I do not value competition. I have learned that competing is nothing like defending myself. I have had the unfortunate circumstance of defending myself of defending others. I was adequate in self defense with a gun, knife, chairs, and multiple attackers. I don't say successful. Yes I survived and was uninjured, but it would have been better if I could have avoided them or talk my way out of them. I regret that those instances happened. As I look back I wish I had done more to avoid them. However, I'm grateful that I'm alive to tell the story.

Of course but there is a difference in the approach that you take with fighting and that of self-defense though is what I have found. Even within different types of fighting there are differences that a fighter should take if they want to win. There is a hugh difference in something like a street situation where you might have to protect or defend yourself and a fight and what usually transpires in something like that.

Besides techniques and such that might be on the table or not you also have other aspects like what is the desired outcome or the intended purpose and I address this with my students. While some of the things a fighter or a martial arts student learn can be substituted for other things in these different situations not all things carry over as well. Knowing which ones do or don't as well as which ones are best to employ together with the approach that you take and the desired outcome should dictate this along with the situation.

So besides the knowledge, skills and ability you also need, I think, an approach and way of thinking that goes with each to best be able to utilize that knowledge, those skills and ability.

I think you are are extemely articulate and much more knowledgable than I am.

My two cents on this issue: self-defense and being a fighter are two different things.

Most people can learn to defend themselves. Fighting trained and conditioned fighters- muay thai,

PKA, K-1, western boxing, UFC, whatever, is very hard. A real pro fighter has reactions, skills, and

conditioning that is far beyond a normal dojo rat or even a normal street fighter.

And I think in most one-on-one confrontations, the guy in the better condition will win, regardless of arts. On the other hand, street fighting can involve weapons and mass attacks, so it should be avoided if possible.

Self defense has limits. It purposefully limits what options you have available. Sometimes this means you need to finish the encounter in less than 5 seconds. This can make a person "more efficient".

But self defense is inherently self-limiting in both definition and practice.

Now if you are just talking about killing people, then obviously there is no limit on that matter, other than physical/capability limits.

Someone who is an expert on killing, will inherently lose some of their abilities in self defense, due to the fact that there is a point which you must stop otherwise it is called manslaughter, not justified homicide.

Someone who is an expert on self defense, doesn't need to learn beyond self defense. So it really depends on how comprehensive their education and training has been. Self defense has limiters, artificial limiters, just like sports and training does. If a person gets stuck in a self defense mind set, and he is forced to use self defense in an environment hostile to SD, then there can be an issue.

EDIT: A self defense mindset is a state where a person only thinks about defending himself from attacks. Rather than thinking about how to end the source of the threat or about how to attack effectively. The skills used in self defense aren't limited to just SD. But SD is a sort of self-defined limiter.

EDIT: Updated Reply

I would say that violence is a tool used to solve problems. And by violence I mean all types of violence, including verbal violence. If you have acquired skills to the point where you no longer have to fight to attempt to solve your problems, yet they are solved nonetheless without the use of energy in conflict, ISDS, then you don't need to choose a Less Efficient solution for it any more.

A problem solved is a problem solved. There's no point in going back to it to go again.

On the other hand, the fighting skills you acquired in those experiences are still with you. You just don't apply them in the same "inefficient" way you did before. You're using much more strategy and much less tactics. But good strategy also requires good tactics. Good strategy means not even getting into a situation where you are required to be excellent at tactics. You can still win even if you are mediocre or even unlucky.

A fighter can have many goals. But if your goal is to protect yourself and others, this requires a different set of toolbox than a fighter normally uses. What this means is that lower efficient "fighting" is excluded in favor of using violence only when necessary. But if necessary, it means the strategic situation has become so dire that you need to use everything in the toolbox to full effect.

Thus people are often more dangerous when they have something important they wish to protect, than if it was simply them alone, with nothing tying them down. If something prevents you from acting as freely as you did in your youth, that is a form of self-limiting mobility. But there are correspondent advantages, as well as disadvantages on the Way.

Sure. It is kind of like the old insect and bug thing. All insects are bugs but not all bugs are insects.

All good fighters can spar,yet not all good sparrer can fight. Someone who becomes very skilled at self defense should become at some point in training become good enough at self control to control their response so as to confine to certain rules.

What does it take to be good at self defense? Speed, precision and the will to use what you have learned. These are traits that a good fighter needs also. There are many examples if you care to look around.

People nowadays confuse self defense and MAs with "fighting". All MAs were created for self defense. When u are defending ursekf the main objective is to neutralize ur attacker as quickly and efficiently as possible. In competition fighting u are taught to follow their rules which restrict the use of many effective techniques to end an attack quickly.

I dont see why a self defense expert couldnt be a fighter. He or she would have to retrain themselves to not use "illegal" techniques which might affect their effectiveness in a real life situation.

I can't consider anyone an expert if we speak about Martial Arts; maybe the right term I can use is "Skillful in self defense."

If you are referring in any tournament that covered with rules, I doubt that certain person that is skillful in self defense can handle things because his applications is limited due to some rules and regulations covering any competition.

Person that having good skills in self defense, earn an advantage compare to others due to some tactics and methods that rely on some necessary and important strategy, this is about quick ways of defending yourself.

So, if you are considering things in street self survival scenario, then there is no reason he won't be a good fighter, because knowledge on the things he is doing, covers the most important and vital part on every practitioner ability.

Good luck

..............

I would disagree with that statement.

Typically the two are mutually exclusive. If your focus is on sport fighting your techniques will be geared to the rules of the sport you participate in. That does not mean that the techniques will be useless for self defense, just not as effective.

On the other side of that if your focus is on self defense you will have to constently "hold back" during a sporting event. This constent mental battle with yourself would reduce your effectiveness in the sport.

The mental aspects are completely different in the two approaches. I will give you, it would be much easier for the self defense "expert" to "turn it down" to compete, than it would be for the sport practitioner to "turn it up" in a self defense situation.

There is a saying floating around Y!A that I love. " In a self defense situation you will sink to the level of your training, NOT rise to the challenge"

Define fighter....you mean a fighter in a ring, octagon or street?

I think the answer is no. I am sure the best Krav Maga instructor or Wing Chun Sifu could be beaten in those places I mentioned.

Now...in self defence they would be expert in defending themselves after all self defence should only last 5-10 seconds. A street fight is different and a smart person which a self defence expert would be would simply avoid it.