please tell me why no other fighting style has the abilit yto switch and adapt to their opponent? also your editing sems to have failed.
I agree with everything else you said though, but pretty common sense
Here, take this .................................................. .. and a couple of those ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and even a few
Originally Posted by rileystar
just so that you're prepared and equipped for your next post.
The whole humility thing seems kind of out of place in this thread and I don't see how training muay thai would specifically help you adapt to fighters of a different style.
I didnt say it helps you adapt to different fighters i meant they are trained to adapt to different fighters
No, a Muay Thai fighter is not trained to fight a judoka or Bjj practicioner a Muay Thai fighter has a good striking base that allows him to fight other styles of striking. The Muay Thai stance is even quite vulnerable to throws and takedowns. If you train in a MMA gym youre not even learning "pure Muay Thai" you are learning a Muay Thai adapted for the MMA rules with probably some boxing in it and a little from other striking styles. The different stance for MMA the training in ground and clinch from the MMA gym is what makes a fighter trained for fighting almost any other fighter because all the thre ranges of fighting are covered, yet that does not make him invicible just makes him more prepared and more versatile but he can still lose to a superior striker, or superior grappler.
Originally Posted by rileystar
Some MT stances are vulnerable to other striking styles too.
Meh, MT translates well to MMA because the Dutch influenced style has a very squared up stance that is easy to sprawl from. That's pretty much it.
I always found it weird that Japanese Kickboxing almost died out, except in The netherlands, while nowadays all the Kickboxing styles practised on mainland Europe have been extensively influenced by it.
Sanda, Savate, Muay thai, Full-Contact, American kickboxing, European/International Kickboxing, Shoot Boxing (offshoot of JK) and K-1 Kickboxing (also an offshoot of JK).
Yes, using the very squared up stance as your core stance gives you immediatly access to a lot of different techniques: easy to sprawl from, maximum usige of boxing, fast transition to other stances for executing attacks or blocks.
The Dutch gave the world, besides cheese and windmills, the standard to measure all Kickboxing styles with/against.
Who would have known?
edit: I can only see one "except" in write/edit window, yet there are two in post? Glitch?
Originally Posted by Jiujitsu77
Originally Posted by Humanzee
Originally Posted by jk55299 on Keysi Fighting Method
The real deadly:
IMO Sanshou is the better striking style for making the transition from stand up to ground fighting. I fought plenty of sanshou and le' tai matches and not once have knees not been allowed so people should throw that misconception out.in relation to MMA it makes for a much more effective clinch allowing dirty boxing, greco and judo throws as well as knees and even elbows if possible. I love muay-thai and though I agree it may be the toughest/ most destructive striking art, it is not the end all be all because there are still plenty of holes. as for the effectiveness of the throws and slams used in sanshou or sanda, I'm not sure why that is being questioned. I can knock someone out with a belly to back suplex with a lot less effort than it would take to clinch war with someone in order to get proper position for a knee to the face.
I'm just sayin.......
Except belly to back suplexes have ended dramatically less MMA bouts than knees and elbows to the face.
very true but you have to agree that the variables a sanshou clinch offers heavily outnumbers the variables offered in a thai chlinch. Double underhooks, head arm triangle, collar tie, over under, etc., these are the positions that sanshou guys drill from and are taught to effectively use. Or at least, that's how I train and what I teach my guys to do.