Printable View
Think about it.
1. It starts from the hips.
2. It travels from the hip to the target and back again.
3. The other fist is pulled as the punching fist is thrust forward with a twist.
Why did the ancient martial artists decide it was better to start a punch from the hip instead of keeping ones hands up like a Muay Thai boxer or a western boxer?
good question. because traditional martial arts are a joke. People who defend them always cite their use as "a deadly weapon." BS. That's an excuse for them being ineffective otherwise. "Oh, but in self defense killing someone is ok." Yet another BS line. I'm sick of hearing it. Show me a kung fu guy or karate guy in the UFC. Again, they'll cite that it's true use is for killing, or whatever. Yeah, sure. Because killing people is something we can do on a daily basis.
Init, if those fighters can fight, then fight and prove it. Excuses can only hold for so long, then its time for action. I'm with you on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Von Milash
and how do they know that it's so effective for killing? How many people have they killed? Oh. None. Then how can they objectively state that it's so effective? Shit like that is effective in a dojo with a submissive/passive opponent.
Some of the hand and kick techniques are not possible to use when you got some guy in front of you who is tense and ready to chuck a punch or grap you in the front.
The main thing is, each technique, esp. hand, is telegraphed, just practise the,
knife hands and you will see what I mean. Strange why did they create such
an interesting and part useful and part useless art (re: karate & TKD?)
I think it FEELS like your punching stronger from that stance, because your body is doing a lot of movement. Unfortunately, its all useless movement. Back then, they couldnt exactly measure force as well.
But I think the main thing is that a lot of TMAs focus more on the art aspect than the martial aspect. What the hell good are the animal stances? They just look nice.
As far as the whole "deadly weapons" thing, I actually almost came to blows with this one guy at work (he's a juicer, and suffers from serious roid rage, and I just hate him, so I wouldn't back down from a fight from him no matter what its about), because he was talking about the palm strike to the nose being the easiest way to kill someone. I politely explained that it wasn't true, and the simple physics behind it don't hold up if you know anything about anatomy. You would have to shatter the entire nasal cavity and somehow have it travel INTO the skull, instead of up along the outside, and then pierce the base of the brain where the essential functions are, not the frontal lobe, where higher thought occurs (i.e. non-essential to life, but handy to have if you like talking and whatnot). I said it was possible, but you'd be better off feeding him laxative and waiting for him to have a brain aneurysm. He took huge offense, saying that his karate master or whatever told him it, and it was true. So I asked how many times he had killed someone with it. Or his master had. Or HIS master. Or anybody any of those people had trained. Granted, he didnt take kindly to that, and threatened to try it on me and find out. I took that as my having won the argument :P
These Karate masters are full of cabbage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy D
Also, forgot to mention that if it's possible, why in the last 100 yrs of boxing hasn't it happened with an uppercut? Or why in Pankrase (where there is no striking to the face with a closed fist, palm strikes only) has it never happened? Or in MMA, where GnP regularly places people in the necessary position for this to occur?
Reverse punch is most effective against a non-expecting opponent - you know the ones that stand there and talk a big game...its a surprise punch IMO - nothing more, unless you want to look fancy against a weak opponent...
Yea I would love someone to square up to be and try that weak telagraphed punch, think about the possibilities for a bicep destruction and a throw(perfect opportunity for Dumog) or counterpunching opportunites..Quote:
Originally Posted by cnote111
The options seem endless indeed...Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
I look at it this way, my instructor gave us in illustration about sparring and drills, he said something to the effect of " if someone whipped a baseball at him he would probably turn his body out of the way and shield himself, were a ballplayer would catch it without even blinking or looking stressed since thats what baseball players do they throw the ball they catch the ball it becomes 2nd nature muscles get trained to react just like reflexes do since its part of the culture, same as martialarts we train, spar, isolate drill, fight each other in a controlled manner so when a punch is thrown at you you can react naturally for the above reasons as a ballplayer"Quote:
Originally Posted by cnote111
I mean when I am on and training 3 nights a week I would tell my friends to try to punch me in the face fast and hard and when the punch came I was able to react calmly whether I moved my head, intercepted the fist mimicked a nerve destruction etc... I been slacking lately cause of work and stuff so I couldnt do that now but I like to think I have more skill and confidence than a good majority of the people walking the streets..
have you ever noticed that it doesn't matter which martial art it is, a real combative encounter always, ALWAYS turns into something that looks like a crude boxing match with a few kicks interspersed. This is why I'm adamant about the idea that a TOP boxer would still beat the top mma guys, with the exception of a few, which are good boxers in their on right. MMA guys argue the contrary, but we always seem to see medicre boxers get beat by the top mma guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy D
No not always, definitely not always. IT often goes to the clinch and then the ground.Quote:
have you ever noticed that it doesn't matter which martial art it is, a real combative encounter always, ALWAYS turns into something that looks like a crude boxing match with a few kicks interspersed. This is why I'm adamant about the idea that a TOP boxer would still beat the top mma guys, with the exception of a few, which are good boxers in their on right. MMA guys argue the contrary, but we always seem to see medicre boxers get beat by the top mma guys.
So even a TOP boxer who doesn't have any ground game or take down defence will get taken down and submitted or slammed. OR they'll be clinched and knee'd to pieces or they'll leg kicked to pieces from range.
We'll probably not see a top boxer versus MMA'er for a while yet. Not until the money improves.
see, we keep hearing that very thing. If an mma guy tried to come in, which would HAVE TO be behind the jab, they'd get fookin destroyed. Like I said, we only ever see MEDIOCRE boxers in mma. If Roy Jones Jr had fought someone of his weight, he'd kill them.
I once said something similar on another site, but refering to Jermaine Taylor and Matt Hughes. The mma proponent come back with, "you're compaing jermaine taylor to a DIVISION 1 ALL AMERICAN? Are you CRAZY?" Well, where do mma guys come off comparing COLLEGIATE sports to an international boxing federation? It would be like comparing Florida Gotors football to the NFL. No contest.
excellent post....tell them "go ahead and keep your hands at your waist...and I'll break that jaw with my hands held high".... good for movies and cool action sequences...that is it..Quote:
Originally Posted by Von Milash
How do you figure that? Have you ever heard of kicks? If the MMA guy came in he'd most likely just try and avoid punching range if he had any sense with the boxer and keep it at kicking range. He'd have to go through it at some point if he couldn't finish with kicks which is mostly unlikely but how would the boxer defend kicks?Quote:
see, we keep hearing that very thing. If an mma guy tried to come in, which would HAVE TO be behind the jab, they'd get fookin destroyed. Like I said, we only ever see MEDIOCRE boxers in mma. If Roy Jones Jr had fought someone of his weight, he'd kill them.
Yeah we have only seen mediocre boxers in MMA but even a mediocre boxer could make it to the clinch with even RJJ. If that happened in MMA then it would be all over for RJJ.
RJJ would hit the guy 10x before he made it that far.
I'm sick of hearing how good mma guys are.
Being a little shortsighted arent you Von??? So what your saying is that even the elite boxers cant be held or clinched... any athlete or fighter can initiate a clinch at smoe point in a fight... Specially taking a Roy who relies just on his hands and not his feet or knees.... IF that was the case than Championship Boxers would be salivating at a chance to take a payday in the cage with such inferior strikers...Quote:
Originally Posted by Von Milash
They will be salivating when that payday exists. Hopefully it isnt too far away and we can see some huge names in boxing start transitioning to MMA.
My one big fear is that they don't take it seriously and try to come in with boxing alone, instead of learning to check the kicks and stuff a takedown.
no, jt. let's be honest, mma striking is AWEFUL. Anyone who watches both would agree. All I'm saying is that it's a hell of a lot harder to come in on a boxer than everyone thinks. People talk like they'd just roll over like turtles and not defend themselves.
I have this gut feeling that it'll be Shannon Briggs to make the first move to the UFC. 6'4", 235. God would I love to see him clean someone's clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy D
MMA elites are big fish in small ponds.
Let me ask the mma proponents a simple question.......
back when Royce was dominating the UFC scene, do you really think he could have taken Tyson????? Tyson with 4oz gloves would have killed him. literally.
Although I'm on the boxing side, I almost think Tyson would be an "easier" matchup for Royce. Tyson relied VERY heavily on upper body movement to get inside and deliver the killer blows. I think this fight would be more of a coin toss than your traditional style boxer would be. It would basically depend on whether or not Tyson could drop Royce as Royce was going in. Maybe he would land that shot a majority of the time (and literally kill him with it, as you said). But it would basically always come down to that one moment when Royce tried to shoot on him, at least in my opinion.
But Ali would destroy Royce 9.5 times out of ten, in my opinion. He was the kind of boxer who uses footwork to avoid his opponents, and lure them into him, while destroying them with careful shots the whole time. Royce wouldnt be able to get his shot in, and hence would never stand a chance.
So like I said, Tyson would most likely win, and I would bet on him every time. But I wouldn't bet the house on him ever. Ali, maybe so, simply because grapplers tend to like the guys who come inside and work for the big punch to end it all. Ali wouldn't give him that.
pound for pound as good as royce was, I just don't see him having aNY chance. Tyson would only have to land one punch. people overlook how good tyson's jab was becasue he WAS an inside fighter...but that inside destruction was always against taller oponents. He wouldn't have had to fight Royce on the inside. He could have kept Royce back with the jab and simply looked to land that one shot that would have ended things instantly.
The guy I'd give the most chance to against Tyson would be Ken Shamrock, but only because he was so strong. I don't think Royce would have been strong enough to haul Tyson to the mat even if he COULD get in on Mike, but Shamrock had such super human strength. But again, all those mma guys, ever the greats, would still have to get past the boxers hands, and that's no so easy, IMO.
Again, we're talking the great boxers. Not the chump that transitioned to mma because their title shot was never coming.
you guys are just assuming Tyson could Stuff a shoot attempt... Royce alot of the times would use a Thai front kick and paw with it..... that way he could create enough distance and go for the shoot.... Have you ever been in a sparring session with someone who has nasty takedown skills???? again you fail to realize a one dimensional grappler will beat a 1 dimensional striker more than 75% of the time its been proven numerous occasions... Thats why Royce Gracie, Ken Shamrock, Dan Severn, Mark Coleman, Mark Kerr, even a guy like Kevin Randleman were succesful early on was because they were excellent wrestlers and subission specialists that would eat Strikers up 9-10 times well over the past 10 years those guys havent been signifigant players in mma because the sport has evolved were yo cant be 1 dimensional.
The pure strikers can grapple now and the pure grapplers can strike you need to be more versatile to survive..... you can drop Roy jones or Mike Tyson in a cage this afternoon with either Royce Gracie, Ken Shamrock, Dan Severn, Mark Coleman, Mark Kerr or even Randleman and I will guarantee and even endorse over 3 months worth of paychecks that those grapplers will either ground and pound those two or sub them out.... ;)
[youtube=425,350]Tp5GUW70arE[/youtube]
Note that Frank never used his grappling skills, only his boxing, and about two kicks. If Shamrock can do this (essentially a wrestler who can strike a little) to a Gracie, why wouldn't Tyson be able to do the same thing?
Also, if you checked my message, I never said Tyson would stuff the shoot attempt. What I was saying is that he would either knock the guy out as he went for the shoot, or get taken down and lose. Hence my coin flip scenario.
A more traditional boxer would use his (much more effective than the front snap kick) jab to keep the grappler away. The way for strikers to beat grapplers is to jab jab jab jab jab jab jab and so on until the guy is rocked, then drop him quickly. If a striker commits too early, he is taken down and beaten. If he keeps working the jab or right cross without overcommitting to anything, he generally wins. Patience is key.
I'm not even a very good boxer, but in the backyard crap I do a lot (generally when under the influence :P ) I've beaten undefeated HS wrestlers all the time by doing just that. I just jab the hell out of them. Every time I can see they are rocked, I step in with a hard hook and hope for the best. I think I've lost 3 or 4 times to the better wrestlers from the area while winning maybe 14-15 times against them. Granted, this isn't exactly the greatest scenario, but as I said, I'm not even a terribly good boxer, and I'm very drunk when doing so, and often have fought 2 or 3 other people before them. If I can manage, why couldn't a pro?
I personally don't think RJJ could keep Matt Hughes/GSP/BJ Penn/Dan Henderson from getting the take down. As far as the age old discussion of how a world class boxer would fair against an equally talented MMA fighter in an MMA fight, well I personally believe that the boxers one dimensional fighting style simply dooms them most of the time and conversely I can't think of a single MMA fighter that I'd give any more than a punchers chance in a boxing match. I also feel that what works in traditional boxing(stance, defense, punching etc) do not directly correlate to MMA success. Great take down defense is something that takes a lot of work. If you dont' work on a great sprawl a good wrestler will put you on your back time and time again. You dont need to get that close(clinch) to use a good single and double leg take down, and in MMA they are quite often set up with strikes(albeit not usually effective). I usually like to pump a double jab then shoot in for a take down. I don't throw the punches b/c I think they are going to hurt my opponent, only to give me that split second I need to shoot. If you look at KO's that come on fighters shooting in, its almost always a knee not a punch that ends the fight. On a different note I think the typical statement of how sloppy and atrocious MMA punching is misguided. MMA is striking and boxing is punching. Although marginally similar they are not the same thing. I will agree that MMA striking is not nearly as technical as boxing but this is due to the gloves and variety of MMA. Its like comparing softball and baseball. Similar sports but with some very different aspects. Due to the variety of strikes available to a MMA fighter and the neccesity for takedown defense it is going to look vastly different. I'd quickly admit that boxers are the world experts on the best way to throw and setup a punch, but I think it also safe to say that the techniques used in the two sports for striking/punching have some large differences.
Van,
Gomi, who's widely considered the best 170lb fighter the MMA game has ever seen, just got his face handed to him by a guy who couldn't last 2rounds with even an average journeyman boxer, but who can actually throw a jab and a 1-2. So what makes you think that it would be different with a boxer who is actually GREAT? Like I've said time afte ttime, it all starts with, and distills down to boxing. Look at Antonio Tarver. 175lb. Do you honestly think a 175lb MMA guy could take him down? Tarver is string too. Diaz's hands were too potent for Gomi and his hands aren't a fraction as potent as a guy like Tarver or RJJ. For example, do you really thin that diaz could punch with Tarver, and do you really think that Diaz would be even strong enough to take him down? Never.
Ah, I missed this argument with ya. ;) :D
D, your argument is fundamentally flawed. It wouldn't have taken Tyson that long to end it. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Heavy D
I think using gomi and diaz is a poor example. Gomi is a slugger and he is considered the best 155 pound fighter, so he would be fighting someone more like Winky Wright not Tarver. So would Winky be able to use his southpaw stance and outstanding defense to pull off a boring UD in an MMA fight against Gomi? I don't know, but I'd say no. Now more importantly I think Sean Sherk(premiere wrestler) would wreck just about any Jr. Middleweight in the world. Diaz for all of his BJJ prowess doesn't use them enough. He attempts to trade and slug too often. So how does he fair against Tarver? Well if he trys to trade punches they yes he loses. If he works to get the clench and starts working knees/elbows and thai leg kicks then yes I believe he could beat Tarver. Nick has never shown me really good takedowns so could he takedown Tarver? Hell I don't know I've never seen Antonio's sprawl. That being said there is no doubt in my mind that Frank Trigg or Matt Hughes could get Tarver on the mat. Obviously Diaz or just about any MMA fighter couldn't punch with the same effeciency as tarver, but they don't have to be able to do just as well. Just good enough to captilize on on their MuayThai, Wrestling, BJJ or whatever. The difference in gloves plays a big part in the styles of striking and boxing. You can't afford to get hit nearly as often in MMA as you can in boxing: hence a very different style
I would give an outside shot to Hughes because he's very strong, but again, it starts on the feet and Tarver would keep him away with a jab, the likes of which he's never seen. But don't underestimate the strngth of boxers. They have zero weight on them but muscle. Look at the physique of RJJ back in the day.
Trigg would die. Period.
And wright wold make Gomi look like a kid. If Diaz did that him then wright would have a field day with his peekaboo style and his awesome jab.
Re the gloves, yes they're smaller, but that's to the advantage of the boxer. Just think how much faster their hads are when you cut 10oz down to 4.
Von one of the best times to shoot in on a fighter for a takedown is WHEN they throw punches....a great jab is not a takedown defense if anything its and invitation to time it and shoot in. I think you overestimate a boxer's ability to keep a determined opponent from gaining the clinch. once in a thai clinch all of the boxers training is a moot point. It doesn't necessarily mean they going to be incompetent, but theyutilization of knees, elbows, leg strikes and sweeps is not something they train for. Tarver, RJJ, Jermain Taylor etc are great athletes and their natural abilities will make them a game opponent but good take down defense and avoiding sweeps in the clinch is something that is just as much technique as it is athleticism. Think about how long great wrestlers dominated MMA. It hasn't been until recently that there has been a surge in fighters that are predominantly strikers at the top of most divisions. It has been the implementation of training to avoid the takedown and get back up when put on the mat. No MMA fighter would choose to attempt to "box" a prizefighter in an MMA bout. They would work the boxers weaknesses. If they chose to strike it would be with lots of leg kicks and in the clinch or with groundfighting. For instance I used to work out in a boxing gym a long time ago and occasionally do some bag work and sparring. I have a pretty strong left hook and jab but this pales in comparison to your boxing skill. That being said my knowledge of sub. wrestling is much more than yours with a little Muay Thai mixd in. If we were to have an MMA fight I'd be crazy to try and just trade punches, much like you'd be ill advised to go to the ground. Yes I'm sure you'd land some nice punches, but I personally believe that the striking skills that I do have would be enough to allow me to get close enough to make you fight my fight. Maybe not. I've only fought in "non sanctioned" mma fights, and none of my opponents have had worldclass boxing skills, but a number have had a boxing background. I didn't win all of them but I never found it overly difficult to close the distance. In fact in my 4-3 record all of my losses have come against former college wrestlers. Usually due to the fact that they were better conditioned and overall simply more athletic than I was. I mentioned the gloves b/c unlike in boxing the effects of a flush shot in MMA usually means the fight is over and this is why MMA striking is so much different than boxing.
u are both probably write in some ways the way i see it is that if roy jones jr was to take a fight in mma he would give himself maybe six months of hard takedown defence training and ground defence if he had any talent at all in wresling then i could see him making himself into a ufc champion yes if he went in without thought he probably would get taken down but if you look at how hard he trains for boxing why wouldnt he train that hard to avoid getting taken down. this whole argument about boxers having no takedown defence is stupid becouse thats just assuming that their stupid. Tyson with decent takedown defence would murder people in the ufc like u said the new champions are strikers who have good ground defence the ref stands u back up and its lights out. im a striker primarilly but i dont look like a fish out of water if i get taken down
Good take, TKD. cc.