Treebranch Posted October 7, 2003 Author Posted October 7, 2003 No, I would advise everyone to keep up their strength and flexibility as long as they possibly can, but in the end you can always fall back on your knowledge. The moral is don't rely on your strength all the time because there will always be someone bigger and stronger than you and your tactics and know how will save you. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
CPU Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 my guess is that it depends on what your trying to do, if your trying to score points in a tornament then your speed and control is the most important, if your trying to get a knockout at a kickboxing tornament then you want to focus more on power and breaking. that just my way of thinking bout it. Sparring - loved by many perfected by few
Treebranch Posted October 8, 2003 Author Posted October 8, 2003 Well that's exactly my point. A Kickboxer's career is short lived. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
JerryLove Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 if your trying to get a knockout at a kickboxing tornament then you want to focus more on power and breaking. that just my way of thinking bout it. So the most powerful boxer always wins because he is more powerful? This must be why Tyson never lost... oh wait, he did to someone with a more effective strategy. https://www.clearsilat.com
Warp Spider Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 if your trying to get a knockout at a kickboxing tornament then you want to focus more on power and breaking. that just my way of thinking bout it. So the most powerful boxer always wins because he is more powerful? This must be why Tyson never lost... oh wait, he did to someone with a more effective strategy. Well, boxing isn't all about the knockout. The more common way to win is points, which suggests that better technique would be better in boxing. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
JerryLove Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 And yet it was by knockout that Tyson was typically winning (IIRC); so I cannot agree with you here. https://www.clearsilat.com
Warp Spider Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 Well, yes, you CAN win by knockout, but he wasn't beaten by knockout very often, the times he was beat I believe it was by points. (as far as I recall) Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
JerryLove Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 Ahh. I understand where my point missed its mark. Tyson is our poster-child here for strength over tactics. His strategy was to blitz (come in hard and fast). When he won, he won by knockout. When smarter fighters came up against him, their tactical advantage defeated his strength advantage. True, they often won point-victories.. but they also clearly won the fight; and that is what we are interested in, is it not? https://www.clearsilat.com
Warp Spider Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 I suppose so. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Drunken Monkey Posted October 10, 2003 Posted October 10, 2003 hehe... i think that is the closest that we will ever get warp spider to admit defeat... post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Recommended Posts