Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. #1
    Emevas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Minot AFB, ND
    Posts
    6,788
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    Muay Thai vs. Western Boxing

    I know it's probably been done to death, but I'd still like to hear some interesting discussion regarding the topic. What're your thoughts in regards to the strengths/weakness of both styles, and which one produces the better striker? How does the conditioning of the two compare? Which would be the better choice of the aspiring striker? Which styles has a higher "Gym-in-the-box" (McDojo) percentage? Any other comments are more than welcome.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,334
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    An excellent thread. I think Muya Thai has more Mcdojo orientated places where people do it for fun and fitness. Although there are still quite alot of serious MT gyms around where training is harsh and strenuous.
    Boxing as a rule of thumb tends to be slightly cheaper than MT. ALot of people who teach it are not money driven,it teaches you how to fight aswell as getting you fit.Alot of boxing places are made up of serious dedicated fighters.

    Which one you prefer depends on the individual sometimes you just have to go with whats available.
    .
    To answer which one teaches better strilikg skills. The answer is obvious MT. It uses kicks,puching,elbows,knees. Western boxing only uses fists you cannot compare them. Boxers usually have a longer fight life than MT fighters though.
    Hannibal: The sworn enemy of dishonest politicians, source of entertainment on Bullshido and newly appointed Office Linebacker. Terry Tait ain't got **** on me !!!!

  3. #3
    Emevas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Minot AFB, ND
    Posts
    6,788
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    In regards to the hand strikes used in boxing and MT. Couldn't one argue that, though the MT fighter has more techniques available to him, the boxer would be more proficient at the 3-4 strikes, due to the fact that he drills them more constantly?

    Granted, the MT fighter would have more ranges of combat available to him, but would the boxer have better ability while within his preferred striking range? Or would the level of proficiency not really have a significant enough impact?
    "Emevas,
    You're a scrapper, I like that."-Ronin69

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    113
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Originally posted by Hannibal
    An excellent thread. I think Muya Thai has more Mcdojo orientated places where people do it for fun and fitness. Although there are still quite alot of serious MT gyms around where training is harsh and strenuous.
    Boxing as a rule of thumb tends to be slightly cheaper than MT. ALot of people who teach it are not money driven,it teaches you how to fight aswell as getting you fit.Alot of boxing places are made up of serious dedicated fighters.

    Which one you prefer depends on the individual sometimes you just have to go with whats available.
    .
    To answer which one teaches better strilikg skills. The answer is obvious MT. It uses kicks,puching,elbows,knees. Western boxing only uses fists you cannot compare them. Boxers usually have a longer fight life than MT fighters though.
    Don't confuse Muay Thai with Kardio Kickboxing. If a gym wanted to be more Mcdojo oriented in their business philosphy in the first place they would never advertise themselves as Muay Thai. Muay Thai's just some weird foreign word that McCustomers will get confused by.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Oahu, Hawaii
    Posts
    215
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    the key phrase there is "within his preferred striking range" . There is absolutely no doubt that a boxer is (at least usually is) a far superior puncher than a Muay Thai boxer. Face it, Thai Boxers usually prefer elbows and knees to punches. Where we get into the problem with simply boxing a Thai boxer lies in his ability to fight in close. If you stand out of punching range of a MT Boxer, he will chop your legs like trees. However, if you come in to punching range, most MT fighters (myself included) will simply counter your punches by clinching and using straight and curve knees, which render punches relatively useless. I personally believe that because the MT Boxer has a wider array of tools at his disposal he is a more proficient ring fighter, in his element. Were you to square a MT Boxer off with a Boxer using Western Boxing rules, there is little doubt that the Western Boxer would prevail. If we are looking over to street effectiveness, well I feel that is a matter of personal preference. There are a number of factors that would contribute to making a decision here. First, you have the sheer brutality ingrained into the MT fighter. The real deal guys bang round after round after round out on the bags, before they even start sparring. And they train hard. This is not meant to discredit Western Boxers, who also train extremely hard, but because they are using legs, knees, fists, and elbows, they are inherently using more energy per round, if they are training right. Second, you have to look at conditioning. Both Boxers and MT Boxers are superbly conditioned athletes. I see no real advantage to conditioning on either side, so long as you put in the effort.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    10
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Also in this age, most Thai boxing schools teach boxing techniques to supplement their fighters hand striking skills, especially under International Thai Boxing or K-1 rules, were elbows are not allowed.

    Speaking as a Thai Boxer, I have yet to fight a Full Muay Thai rules fight, so I rely heavily on boxing techniques. Especially since I am shorter than most fighters in my weight range and prefer to fight in the inside.

    IMO both arts supplement each other.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    477
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Botha vs. Abidi.

    The only major example we have of kickboxing vs. boxing. It's not MT but at least it offers a glimpse of what could happen if elbows and clinching were allowed.
    Punches in bunches and kicks kicks kicks!

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    10
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I think a good example would be to watch the Choppa Vs. Kraus fight on the K-1 Max 2002 finals highlights vid to see the difference in traditional Muay Thai style and Modern Thai Boxing. Notice when fighting in range Choppa is more inclined to clinch and throw knee strikes, then push his opponent off and throw kicks and punches when his opponent is off balance. Kraus on the other hand felt more comfortable using kicks to bridge the gap, then staying on the inside to work punching combinations.

    Either way both guys were awesome fighters, Kraus just won on that day.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    222
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I done both and my striking style is a blend of the two, I canít say for sure where one leaves off and the other picks up. If I had to pick one Iíd say MT but then so much depends on the club.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,529
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Shemfu is on track. In the ring, the boxer's hands on the inside are too much to deal with. Boxer's typically have to rely on better footwork as well since they can't lead in or defend with kicks. The blend of the two arts is awesome.

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO