PDA

View Full Version : Why is MT and kickboxing so high in regard



Pages : [1] 2

TheBigSwede
5/29/2007 2:35pm,
When anyone asks at Bullshido which striking/kicking art to start in, MT or kickboxing is suggested more than nine times out of ten in the forums here. My question to you practitioners is -- what makes MT and kickboxing so good?

Is it the set of techniques? The techniques themselves? The training methodology (full contact I suppose)? Or a combination of the above?

If it's the techniques themselves, please elaborate on the finer details. GO!

Torakaka
5/29/2007 2:38pm,
http://boxturtlesite.info/diet.html

Abusivemelon
5/29/2007 2:41pm,
Full contact punching and kicking FTW. I'm guessing a small amount of techniques all trained effectively. Kid your picture looks like an amputee.

SpringHeeledJack
5/29/2007 2:42pm,
http://boxturtlesite.info/diet.htmlThose things can give you salmonella.

WhiteShark
5/29/2007 2:45pm,
I wish this was in my forum so I could lock and delete it.

kwoww
5/29/2007 2:47pm,
If you're asking why MT ended up being so good, I think it's a matter of sheer chance that Thai kickboxing rules and Korean martial arts are usually little more than patriotic pajama sprees.

If you're asking what makes it so good, it's a combination of all three. The training methodology (full contact!), the set of techniques (versatile and simple), and the actual techniques (taking advantage of physiology to maximize effectiveness... knees, shins, and elbows are REALLY HARD, and most styles usually ignore them) are all things that make a style awesome. And, since MT tends to have that, there's your answer.

Torakaka
5/29/2007 2:49pm,
I wish this was in my forum so I could lock and delete it.

Seconded.

sochin101
5/29/2007 2:50pm,
Those things can give you salmonella.
Try boiling them for an extra 5 minutes... it toughens the flesh a shade, but lessens the risk of salmonella...

Shinkengata
5/29/2007 2:52pm,
Questions like the one posed in this thread are best answered with a trip to a MT or MMA gym.

I asked what was so good about MMA until I visited a gym and got tapped out by a guy who'd been there for 4 months, with no prior training.

*edit* Repeatedly tapped out.

kwoww
5/29/2007 3:04pm,
Try boiling them for an extra 5 minutes... it toughens the flesh a shade, but lessens the risk of salmonella...

I eat them raw. With the shell still on.

isol8d
5/29/2007 3:13pm,
because only a mixture of Kickboxing and Muay Thai could defeat Tong Po...

kohadril
5/29/2007 3:46pm,
Questions like the one posed in this thread are best answered with a trip to a MT or MMA gym.

I asked what was so good about MMA until I visited a gym and got tapped out by a guy who'd been there for 4 months, with no prior training.

*edit* Repeatedly tapped out.
Unfortunately, this learning technique doesn't always work with boxing, kickboxing, or MT. This is because the head trauma inflicted by the many excellent and convincing "arguments" the instructors and students will make has a significant chance of causing temporary amnesia.

ronaldk
5/29/2007 3:57pm,
When anyone asks at Bullshido which striking/kicking art to start in, MT or kickboxing is suggested more than nine times out of ten in the forums here. My question to you practitioners is -- what makes MT and kickboxing so good?

Is it the set of techniques? The techniques themselves? The training methodology (full contact I suppose)? Or a combination of the above?

If it's the techniques themselves, please elaborate on the finer details. GO!

basically, kickboxing and muay thai both take the high percentage techniques from striking and practice them hard and full speed.

while in most striking TMAs, you have other things like "advanced" techniques, which are harder to do, are of much lower percentage, and bring you more risk during a fight. some are just flat out useless in a fight. ie. learning a proper combination of jab-cross-uppercut will be a lot more useful than learning to do a 720 spinning kick, even if learning the kick is harder.

most TMAs also tend to present other things, like philosophy and kata, where you must invest time in things not directly related to fighting.

so, boiling it down, with KB/MT, you get to train the techniques you will be using the most, over and over, at full speed, against resisting opponents. not much room to pussify a gym. however, when you have a curriculum that concerns other matters, a bad instructor can hide behind pretty katas or other things to masquerade his incompetence as a teacher, or in actual fighting overall.

Virus
5/29/2007 3:57pm,
Because they work.

KenMasters
5/29/2007 4:02pm,
MT is good for it's training methodology and it's focus on strong basic techinique. It has the punches and kicks as other styles, their just trained differently. That's just my opinion though.

Fighting Cephalopod
5/29/2007 4:06pm,
[/I]Is it the set of techniques? The techniques themselves? The training methodology (full contact I suppose)?

This isn't an "or" question. A proper full-contact training methodolody combined with constant competition in a ruleset with few technique restrictions will nearly always result in the most efficient and effective techniques and set of techniques. Ineffective techniques are shown as such, and therefore are weeded out.