elbows_and_knees

let's turn this one around so you ca see how belittling it sounds: Also, if you have a perfect guard - chin down, hands up, etc. lower your level and enter with speed, then no striker will ever be able to hit you hard enough to even thinnk about knocking you out, no matter how great a striker he is. Any grappler that gets hit hard by a striker doesn't have enough speed and has not been realistically training his takedowns. He is therefore not a real martial artist and likely the product of a McSchool...

in thailand, I think most matches are only 5 rounds... it's not about time. it's about money. There has always been money in boxing because people have always bet on it. it's become something of a tradition. Now, there is big money in boxing. it's entertaining (moreso than wrestling) which attracts many people. more people = more money. A WWE wrestler will get paid more than a MMA fighter. Why? bigger fanbase. There is more money there. It's all about economics. UFC has an additional problem.... relative skill level. In addition to fan base, the average pro boxer is WAY more skilled than the avg pro MMA fighter. He's been doing it longer, had more fights, etc. (however, you can begin to see a change in this now) This also commands more money. Why do you think Tyson turned down royce's challenge back in the day? They don't have enough money to make it worth his while. And he was already a household name, so it wouldn't help his popularity. He had nothing to gain, whereas royce had everything to gain.

not always as easy as "going for the cripple" a lot of crippling places are smaller and / or more mobile, making them harder to hit accurately. I have a better chance of hitting your facial region than I do hitting your throat, for example. I can kick your leg from any angle much easier than I can hit your knee head on while it is extended, etc. Also, if you are in the street, it's not about submitting. you just snap the limb and keep going, you don't submit them. Lastly, there is also the issue of rules (yes, in real life situations) for example, I have a night job as a bouncer at a popular club - we aren't allowed to strike, but we can grapple. So, my life is in danger daily, but I can't "go for the cripple or the kill"

with the exception of smith, every fighter you named has an extensive grappling history. They prefer strikes but are very accomplished grapplers. THAT is why their striking is so effective.

I've trained both, but prefer the thai kick. more power and better striking area.

straight in the sense that it does not chamber. don't just swing the hip - turn it over. The result: a very whip like action from the hip to knee to the leg. the best way to describe it it non MA related - a whip and a baseball bat. A bat is a blunt object that just plows through something - that is a thai kick. Other TMA chamber the leg relying on the snap - like a whip. how bent a leg is will vary from person to person - you let it keep the natural bend your leg has when you lift it - don't bend or straighten it any more than that. dead leg is a relative term. you leg can never really be dead unless you are asleep, in which case you wouldn't be kicking. there is always residual tension in a muscle, so it's never truly dead. That term is merely used to describe an unchambered leg - it's not actively, consciously bent and is therefore dead.

people train for various reasons. I think you'll find that most people do NOT train with fighting in mind. The biggest reasons are probably fitness and art. next would be self defense, followed by competition, as far as major answers go. Also, that's not to say that it's not effective at all. It still has the same core techniques that muay thai has, but has some extra stuff as well, like any other TMA.

AFAIK = as far as I know

that's not what he's asking though... white crane has already been said. snake may be another.

I wouldn't call it a problem per se. Also, if you set your kicks up properly, you won't have to worry about it much anyway.

What? No we don't, AFAIK. I only used the examples I used becuase thailand has had seeral deaths occur. Chances are, you will not die in a sport fighting match.

yeah, it is, but you most likely won't find it.

I've seen a WC guy who trained iron palm do the same thing - he broke his hand. It's one of those things that can happen, regardless of conditioning.

that was muay boran, not muay thai.

No, I actually agree with what you said here. Heck, I started in shotokan and in longfist. currently, I train capoeira with my muay thai and grappling. I am disagreeing with what you said above about hand conditioning.

Actually, I have several friends that are mantis players - they all say that ground grappling is a weak point of theirs. They have stand up grappling from shuai chiao incorporation, but the ground work lacks. yes, you can tell those people that their style lacks. Anyone who wouldn't listen should get over themselves. As an evolving martial artist, you should ALWAYS be open to constructive criticism.

non-lethal is in the eye of the beholder. An elbow to the head can kill. There have been several deaths in thailand from kicks to the neck. I understand what you are getting at, but I'm not sure that mma can be classified as non-lethal. a kick to the neck can kill. a sustained choke can kill. all submissions can maim, etc.

you do, but it's temporary... very temporary. the fight or flight response it something that happens quickly... we have all heard the stories of the old woman who lifts the car so her grandkid can climb from under it. Also, think of how quickly most fights are over... When the duration is longer, your reserves will be gone. That old woman couldn't hold the car any longer than a few seconds.

the problem with the 360 is the you don't know where the counter will come from, but you had better be expecting one. By turning 180, you have a counter of your own - the back kick.

a standard knee to the head is just as deadly. a lot of those older techniques are simply too hard to pull off - look at the stuff you see in ong bak - the double uppercut, the jumping elbows, the simultaneous knee/elbow lunge... all of those are valid techniques, but chances are you will never pull them off in a fight. They were therefore abandoned. Nothing ALWAYS causes an instant KO... fighting is very dynamic. muay boran is gaining popularity from what I hear, but will never be as popular as muay thai. muay boran is actually a combination of what is left of the knowledge of other old muay. These remaining techniques were combined into muay boran.

that's not what it is, actually. It's not a conditioning issue, but a numbers issue. When you are in a 12 round boxing match, you will throw hundreds of punches. most of those are to hard areas, like the skull (inadvertently) - by doing this, you have a MUCH greater chance of breaking your hand than someone who punches less and against non-resistance - like a makiwara. Also, from a power perspective, someone with the power of tyson is bound to break his hand eventually - even if he trained in a tma.

I agree with Zaine. 1st comes control, then comes speed, then power. Its better off learning correct technique then working on the power. In my opinion that is, im no expert. there is a difference between technique and control. He didn't say teach them power instead of technique; he said power instead of control - there is a difference.

Thats very dangerous for the fighter to do, control comes first in my bookthe thing about learning contro first is that it takes longer. IME, when someone is taught cntrol first, when they do start sparring, they hold back - they are so used to control and no power that they can't do it. When they learn power first, you can teach them to tone it down. if a person can kick high, he can always kick low. But, just because he can kick low, that doesn't mean he can also kick high. The same applies to hitting with power.

exactly. That's why you really can't go around making posts about how effective wing chun is. you leave to many variables open. Now, if you were to say "more effective than...", or "more effective against..." then you can more realistically make a comparison. For example, statistically, wing chun is not effective in MMA. That's not saying that wc isn't effective, but that in the venue of mma, it has yet to be so. once again that is a civilation thing. japanese karate came from okinawa, which came from china. What he did was take his chinese art and give it an okinawan flavor. That's like the koreans taking a very japanese-esque tang soo do and giving it a korean flavor, creating tae kwon do.

nah, it's easier to catch. it's easier because it's slower. it's more powerful, true, but there are ways to deal with that. Either step laterally away from the kick as you catch it - moving you away from the area of strongest impact, or step into it - cutting off the power before it reaches it's maximum. the snapping kick is faster, but lacks the power of the thai roundhouse.