slow kicks for high kicks?

[fabrizio]

A number of posts seem to mention doing slow kicks to develope kicking strength and I suppose help with your flexibility.

I have very little flexibility when cold and even when warmed up I use momentum with my muay thai kicks.

How would you go about doing them ?

[jazzysingh]

go about doing what? slow kicks?? best way is start off maybe with 1 hand on the wall to help with balance - after time let go - see how long u can hold the kick out - defo helps with leg strength!

[Socrastein]

Slow kicking will neither help your strength nor flexibility. Standing on one leg for a prolonged period of time will improve your balance and control, but that's it.

For strength, do squats, deadlifts, and single leg variations thereof.

For dynamic flexibility, do lots of kicks with good form and slowly increase your range of motion. Dynamic flexibility (the kind you need for kicking) boils down to the ability to activate the antagonist to the muscle that's stretching very quickly and forcefully with correct timing.

In other words, kicking high has less to do with how much you stretch your hamstrings (has almost zero to do with this, as the carryover between static and dynamic flexibility is about 40%, which is terrible) and more to do with your ability to contract your quadriceps at the right time to create a rapid, brief stretch in the hamstring.

Also, it should be noted, the more you practice your kicks slowly, the more you're negatively impacting the motor pattern, and the more you're teaching your body to move slowly.

[Kuma]

Just go as high as you comfortably can. Make sure you work your kicks at regular speed afterwards as well.

Socrastein - Have you ever done slow kicking? You are after all holding your leg up in the air for an extended period of time which causes all sorts of muscles to contract and you can get quite a sore feeling the next day if you go overboard too quickly. They build strength at specific positions for kicking. Depending on how long you hold the full extension at the end, they can also develop active flexibility.

[jazzysingh]

I tend to disagree with 'Slow kicking will neither help your strength nor flexibility' because I know first hand holding out my kicks for 5, 10, 15 seconds with good balance has had a positive effect in term of strength on my legs/kick(s). Personally, I dont think slow kicks help with flexibility. Stretching is your answer there. But seriously, maybe in the sense your referring to, its not the same strengthening as squats for example, they are a great leg conditioning exercise. However I stand by my comment above which states it will help with leg strength. Its not easy to hold a side kick for example for prolonged periods of time - but the more you do 'slow kicks' the better you become at it.

[fabrizio]

Socrastein,

For dynamic flexibility would I just kick on a bag or pads and just increase gradually the height of the kicks?

"more to do with your ability to contract your quadriceps at the right time to create a rapid, brief stretch in the hamstring"

Does this happen because of the dynamic flexibility training?

Can you improve your dynamic flexibility from home with out a bag?

[SenseiMattKlein]

I would also disagree with the statement that doing the kicks slowly will not build strength. Most exercises, like push-ups, pull-ups, etc. when performed slowly definitely stress the muscles more and allow for greater growth. Kicks are the same. Also believe that strength and flexibility go together. You need the strength in your legs and hips to perform higher kicks.

[jazzysingh]

There is a wealth of good information regarding stretching etc right here:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85373

have a read, you will gain some knowledge :)

[Socrastein]

Socrastein - Have you ever done slow kicking? You are after all holding your leg up in the air for an extended period of time which causes all sorts of muscles to contract and you can get quite a sore feeling the next day if you go overboard too quickly. They build strength at specific positions for kicking. Depending on how long you hold the full extension at the end, they can also develop active flexibility.

I used to do slow kicking and hold horse stances for far longer than anyone should when I was in Kung Fu. It's almost surreal to be discussing this in fact because my first memory on MAP was debating with AdMcG years ago about strength, and what it means to be strong. I was saying something along the lines of being able to hold a kick is strength, being able to hold horse stance for 10 minutes is strength, standing on your hands is super strength, etc. He schooled me, I hated him (not for too long), and I have learned a lot since then.

Perhaps I'm using a different definition of strength that everyone else, but I thought strength generally means the ability to produce force. More specifically, being really strong means you can produce a lot of force, and/or produce it very quickly. It really depends on the type of strength we're talking, there are a lot of classifications.

So how much force does it take for your body to hold your leg up for a prolonged period? Even if you're very overweight and have huge heavy legs, you're still not producing a lot of force to lift it. Holding it for a long time will develop endurance, the ability to produce that small amount of force for a long time, but you won't increase your capacity for force production by any meaningful amount.

It can certainly improve one's kicks in the sense that your ability to produce force is limited by how much stability you have at the involved joints. As I said you'll improve balance, which is important for being able to kick powerfully, but you aren't going to increase strength.

I actually use a similar example whenever clients tell me "Exercise X is fantastic because it made my muscles burn and I was sore the next day". I tell them that if they were to hold their arm over their head for 25 minutes straight it would burn very badly, and they would be in a lot of pain the next day. But they should not think they are building shoulder size or strength.

Without a minimal essential strain your muscles will not respond with hypertrophy or strength gains. Holding one's leg up is not sufficiently challenging.

Most exercises, like push-ups, pull-ups, etc. when performed slowly definitely stress the muscles more and allow for greater growth. Kicks are the same.


With a push-up you're pressing around 2/3rds of your body weight with your arms. With a pullup you're pulling nearly all your bodyweight with your arms. That takes a lot of force production, enough to elicit a response in the muscles. While extending your time under tension can be good for growth in certain cases, the term could more appropriately be termed "time under optimal tension" as Christian Thibadeau is fond of saying. Holding up your leg does not create optimal tension, not even close, and will not result in mass gains. It will result in localized muscular endurance, and that's about it.

Like I said, people need to do their squats. When you can squat over 1.5x your body weight nice and deep you'll probably lose a bit of appreciation for standing on one leg for a long time. You'll also be able to kick opponents through a wall.

[Kuma]

Like I said, people need to do their squats. When you can squat over 1.5x your body weight nice and deep you'll probably lose a bit of appreciation for standing on one leg for a long time. You'll also be able to kick opponents through a wall.

At one point I was squatting 2.6x bodyweight for reps but could barely hold a chudan mawashi geri (middle roundhouse kick) in the air for 10 seconds. There are all different types of strength, and strength is relative to what you do. Many aspects of strength do carry over to others, but specificity is what pays off. An Olympic lifter could probably have a pretty fair showing at a powerlifting meet, but since they train for different movements it'd be very doubtful he would win. There's really no harm in doing them, and to you they may not be optimal, but everyone responds to different things, so it's worth trying.

[slipthejab]

Below is some food for thought. Conversations about strength and conditioning often start to get all convoluted because everyone thinks they have an understanding of what strength is... but often they don't understand how it's broken down into different types of strength... so in a sense everyone is speaking a different language. Important to be on the same page and agree on the same terms otherwise it's just babble.

Types of Strength:

1) Concentric Strenth/contraction:
The muscle develops and shortens, causing movement to occur.



2) Eccentric Strength/contraction:
The muscle lengthens while producing tension, thus braking, slowing or controlling the speed of movment



3) Isometric Strength/contraction:
The muscle develops tension without producing any external movement


4) Dynamic Strength/contraction:
A more accurate description of the term "isotonic". Dynamic contractions are those occurring in the presence of varying levels of muscle tension and joint speed. Dynamic contraction is used interchangeably with the European term "auxotonic".


5) Limit Strength:
The ability to exceed ordinary levels of absolute strength. A person under hypnosis or perceived life-threatening stress may display this type of strength.



6) Maximal Strength:
The peak force or torque that the nueromuscular system is capable of producing in a single maximal voluntary contraction, irrespective of the time element.

a) Absolute Strength/endurance:
The maximum amount of force your muscles can produce irrespective of body weight and time of force development. Absolute strength is important for sports in which extra body weight helps performance. Many field events in track and most positions in football require high levels of absolute strength.

b) Relative Strength/endurance:
The more force your muscles can produce in relation to your body weight.


7. Optimal Strength:
The amount of strength needed for maximum performance in that additional strength will not improve performance.


8. Strength Endurance:
The ability to produce muscular contractions over an extended period. For example, a distance runner or rower would benefit most from this type of strength.


9. Speed - Strength:

a. Starting Strength:
The ability of a muscle to generate maximum force at the beginning of a movement.

b. Explosive Strength:
The ability of the muscle to continue increasing the force developed from starting strength.

c. Reactive Strength:
The ability of the muscle to switch from eccentric (negative) to concentric (positive) work.


These definitions by Paul Chec and they are heavily based on the work of M.C. Siff and Y.V. Verkhoshansky.
You can easily do worse than basing your work on the research of Siff or Verkhoshansky... both are really pioneers in the field and are responsible for much of the actual hard data and it's interpretation that we have that exists on the subject of sports science.

[SenseiMattKlein]

I used to do slow kicking and hold horse stances for far longer than anyone should when I was in Kung Fu. It's almost surreal to be discussing this in fact because my first memory on MAP was debating with AdMcG years ago about strength, and what it means to be strong. I was saying something along the lines of being able to hold a kick is strength, being able to hold horse stance for 10 minutes is strength, standing on your hands is super strength, etc. He schooled me, I hated him (not for too long), and I have learned a lot since then.

Perhaps I'm using a different definition of strength that everyone else, but I thought strength generally means the ability to produce force. More specifically, being really strong means you can produce a lot of force, and/or produce it very quickly. It really depends on the type of strength we're talking, there are a lot of classifications.

So how much force does it take for your body to hold your leg up for a prolonged period? Even if you're very overweight and have huge heavy legs, you're still not producing a lot of force to lift it. Holding it for a long time will develop endurance, the ability to produce that small amount of force for a long time, but you won't increase your capacity for force production by any meaningful amount.

It can certainly improve one's kicks in the sense that your ability to produce force is limited by how much stability you have at the involved joints. As I said you'll improve balance, which is important for being able to kick powerfully, but you aren't going to increase strength.

I actually use a similar example whenever clients tell me "Exercise X is fantastic because it made my muscles burn and I was sore the next day". I tell them that if they were to hold their arm over their head for 25 minutes straight it would burn very badly, and they would be in a lot of pain the next day. But they should not think they are building shoulder size or strength.

Without a minimal essential strain your muscles will not respond with hypertrophy or strength gains. Holding one's leg up is not sufficiently challenging.


With a push-up you're pressing around 2/3rds of your body weight with your arms. With a pullup you're pulling nearly all your bodyweight with your arms. That takes a lot of force production, enough to elicit a response in the muscles. While extending your time under tension can be good for growth in certain cases, the term could more appropriately be termed "time under optimal tension" as Christian Thibadeau is fond of saying. Holding up your leg does not create optimal tension, not even close, and will not result in mass gains. It will result in localized muscular endurance, and that's about it.

Like I said, people need to do their squats. When you can squat over 1.5x your body weight nice and deep you'll probably lose a bit of appreciation for standing on one leg for a long time. You'll also be able to kick opponents through a wall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJF2rLaRAZM&feature=player_embedded#at=187
You might want to take a look at this, Sacrostein. Are you going to tell Bill Wallace he is not developing kicking strength, lol?

[jazzysingh]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJF2rLaRAZM&feature=player_embedded#at=187
You might want to take a look at this, Sacrostein. Are you going to tell Bill Wallace he is not developing kicking strength, lol?

thanks for that vid. awesome. gona do that later - maybe without a chair lol :p

[fabrizio]

Just watched the video. Don't you need good flexibility to get your leg that high in the first place?

[jazzysingh]

Just watched the video. Don't you need good flexibility to get your leg that high in the first place?

yep. for high kick - u need a decent amount of flexibility.

[simon s]

Just watched the video. Don't you need good flexibility to get your leg that high in the first place?

Everyone has to start somewhere. This is how I started and if I get asked it is what I recommend.

[Master Betty]

I'd quite happily tell bill wallace that slow kicks like that do not build the required strength for a roundhouse kick. I'd also be willing to point him towards a whol bunch of people I've met personally who can probably kick a lot harder with a roundhouse despite being a lot lighter and never having done slow kicks in their lives for anything other than correcting a subtlety of technique.

As the OP mentions his thai style roundhouse I would therefore respond in terms of thai knowledge. Go look up videos of people like Samkor, Buakaw, Yodsaenklai etc - all famous kickers. Everything I know of thai style training and coaching tells me they only do slow method stuff to correct technique - never to improve flexibility and DEFINATELY not to improve power.

It'd be ike training for the 100metres sprint by doing marathon training - totally different use of muscles.

[fabrizio]

Thanks for the advice so far. Will try and take it on board.

[Kuma]

Everything I know of thai style training and coaching tells me they only do slow method stuff to correct technique - never to improve flexibility and DEFINATELY not to improve power.

Correcting technique will build power, though.

YouTube - how to train high kick! girl kick champ gracyer aki

[simon s]

Power is one thing, but how much strength do you have?

Pick your favourite kick, one above the waist. Now do it dead slow. Are you off balance, do you have the strength to maintain good form throughout the move? Not normally is what I have found.

[Kuma]

Power is one thing, but how much strength do you have?

Pick your favourite kick, one above the waist. Now do it dead slow. Are you off balance, do you have the strength to maintain good form throughout the move? Not normally is what I have found.

Great point. In many cases people make up for improper technique with sheer momentum and thus don't have complete control of their technique. In his book "Martial Mechanics" Philip Starr mentions that apparently there is a Chinese MA principle that says at the height you can extend and hold out a kick is the height you can effectively kick at.

[Socrastein]

You might want to take a look at this, Sacrostein. Are you going to tell Bill Wallace he is not developing kicking strength, lol?

Uh, yeah. I would tell him that. Nothing in the video addressed any of my points, it was just some dude in tights stretching his adductors a bunch.

Correcting technique will build power, though.

Correcting technique will allow you to apply more of the power you already have more efficiently, yes, but standing on one leg doesn't build power.

Like Betty says, it's preparing for a 100m sprint (a fast powerful kick) by running marathons. I'd say it's more like getting ready to sprint by walking in slow motion :)

[Hannibal]

Depends how you define a "slow kick"

I believe that this is what is meant;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJF2rLaRAZM

If anyone has better kick than Bill I might listen!

[Master Betty]

Correcting technique will build power, though.

YouTube - how to train high kick! girl kick champ gracyer aki (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bygQcvuxfM)

It will, but there are a multitude of ways in which to do that - and he never said he had a problem with technique. As for what I speak of when I say slow kicking can be used to correct technique, it's a little different from that useless pile of dog poo that bill wallace is advocating in his video. When I had a problem with my kick I was told to spend an entire training session on the bag, kicking no higher than waist height and with absolutely no effort put into power or speed. Basically training the movement. The way that bill wallace is advocating in that video is NOT for a full contact roundhouse kick. Sure, do that if you're into point sparring TKD/shotokan style stuff. Don't train that technique if you want power. Taking technique out of the equation, the way you increase power is by training the correct muscles to respond with power. The usual way of doing this is by using them at full power every time you do it.

Hence why I think there's nothing that beats simple padwork ever. Problem is that it's rare to find people training padwork correctly for this, throwing absolutely everything they have behind every shot instead of trying to pace themselves so that they can last the 4 or 5 rounds they have to do on the pads - its GOOD if you're knackered after 3 rounds - it means the next 2 rounds are pushing your boundaries. Although I might say it's even rarer to find someone who can hold pads correctly as well and thats a BIG deal.

[Emil]

Slow kicking will neither help your strength nor flexibility. Standing on one leg for a prolonged period of time will improve your balance and control, but that's it.

For strength, do squats, deadlifts, and single leg variations thereof.

For dynamic flexibility, do lots of kicks with good form and slowly increase your range of motion. Dynamic flexibility (the kind you need for kicking) boils down to the ability to activate the antagonist to the muscle that's stretching very quickly and forcefully with correct timing.

In other words, kicking high has less to do with how much you stretch your hamstrings (has almost zero to do with this, as the carryover between static and dynamic flexibility is about 40%, which is terrible) and more to do with your ability to contract your quadriceps at the right time to create a rapid, brief stretch in the hamstring.

Also, it should be noted, the more you practice your kicks slowly, the more you're negatively impacting the motor pattern, and the more you're teaching your body to move slowly.

^
QFT

[Master Betty]

Depends how you define a "slow kick"

I believe that this is what is meant;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJF2rLaRAZM

If anyone has better kick than Bill I might listen!

As I previously mentioned - there are many. Buakaw first.

YouTube - Buakaw kick

yodsaenklai second, commonly thought to have the hardest kick at 72+ kg.

YouTube - Yodsaenklai Fairtex pad training

The Iron Hands of Siam himself, Anuwat Kaewsamnrit. Seen him fight at 63kg and I'd wager he kicks harder than bill.

YouTube - Anuwat Kaewsamrit Training

People forget that Bill trained udner a ruleset which didn't encourage power in the kicks - it rewarded the kick if it landed cleanly, that was the scoring criteria - not effect. Speed, agility and control are much more important for a kickboxing fight than power.

[Hannibal]

Errr...You do know Bill was a full-contact fighter right? And that he KO'd people with those kicks of his?

And can either kick higher? (which was the OP's question)

Not that the other guys are not good - they are - but I personally would opt for Bill...but then it is all a personal preference....I would pick Rickson Gracie over all of them and he cannot kick for poop!

[Master Betty]

Errr...You do know Bill was a full-contact fighter right? And that he KO'd people with those kicks of his?

And can either kick higher? (which was the OP's question)

Not that the other guys are not good - they are - but I personally would opt for Bill...but then it is all a personal preference....I would pick Rickson Gracie over all of them and he cannot kick for poop!

Yes but "full contact kickboxing" as it's known was developed in the 70's from guys coming from a Shotokan Karate point sparring background. They wanted to fight in a ring in a full contact form like boxers did - so that's what they went and did. Indeed, in the early days that's why it wasn't known as "kickboxing - it was known as "full contact karate". As such, the rules and scoring criteria are very much still based off shotokan point sparring rules. It make no distinction between a kick that lands cleanly on the head/body with obvious power behind it and a kick which lands in the same place with an obvious LACK of power behind it. Both kicks would score equally.

And I'm not saying that Bill Wallace didn't have power - of course he did. But then, knocking someone out takes more than simply power.

And yes lol, all 3 of those guys I posted are ranked in the top 3 in the WORLD in their weight classes. They can kick to the head, and I'll guarantee that, since they've all had 200+ fights, they've knocked out more people than billy wallace ever did. Obviously it's only my opinion and it'll never be more than that, but I'd say any 1 of these guys would've eaten bill wallace in his prime for breakfast if they had the chance. If you don't do a thai style roundhouse, you severely reduce the power of your roundhouse. It's why muay thai, kyokushin, sanshou and MMA guys all use it over the traditional karate style snappy thing that bill wallace advocates.

[proteinnerd]

People are talking about strength in the legs like they only have 1 muscle and if that one muscle is strong, you have strong /powerful high kicks.

It completely depends on what leg strength you are talking about, is it force you can generate in the kick or is it a combination of flexibility and strength in your abductors resulting in the ability to hold you leg in a high kick position?

Both relate to leg strength but involve completely different different muscles and are virtually unrelated unless you train them specifically.

Slow kicks definitely do build strength, but they build it in the stabilizing muscles of the supporting leg and in the abductors of the kicking leg and allow you to lift the leg quicker and hold it longer but it doesn't necessarily increase the impact force of the leg (unless it is a lack of strength in the supporting leg that is the weak link in your kicks).

Where as squats, dead-lifts etc will have more of a direct effect on the impact force of the kick, but wont do anything for holding the leg high.

[Hannibal]

Fair point - actually it may be useful to find out what the OP wants the kick to be applicable to...thai is great for FC but less applicable to semi...

Bill does not flick it so much when he means it - watch his full contact fights. Again I suppose it is horses for courses

I have a bias toward Wallace as I kick in a similar manner - largely because i am aiming at your balls, but that is another issue!

[Master Betty]

Fair point - actually it may be useful to find out what the OP wants the kick to be applicable to...thai is great for FC but less applicable to semi...

Bill does not flick it so much when he means it - watch his full contact fights. Again I suppose it is horses for courses

I have a bias toward Wallace as I kick in a similar manner - largely because i am aiming at your balls, but that is another issue!

He said muay thai roundhouse in the OP so I think we can safely assume power is his goal. Therefore, no slow kicking for him.

[Master Betty]

People are talking about strength in the legs like they only have 1 muscle and if that one muscle is strong, you have strong /powerful high kicks.

It completely depends on what leg strength you are talking about, is it force you can generate in the kick or is it a combination of flexibility and strength in your abductors resulting in the ability to hold you leg in a high kick position?

Both relate to leg strength but involve completely different different muscles and are virtually unrelated unless you train them specifically.

Slow kicks definitely do build strength, but they build it in the stabilizing muscles of the supporting leg and in the abductors of the kicking leg and allow you to lift the leg quicker and hold it longer but it doesn't necessarily increase the impact force of the leg (unless it is a lack of strength in the supporting leg that is the weak link in your kicks).

Where as squats, dead-lifts etc will have more of a direct effect on the impact force of the kick, but wont do anything for holding the leg high.

He said thai style roundhouse - you shouldn't BE holding your leg high for any length of time under ANY circumstances. A thai style kick is a lot different than a shotokan or tkd style kick. There's very little that you can do for this kick that you can't gain from simply kicking pads or bags. And kicking slowly will do nothing for the standing leg in a thai style roundhouse since if anyone usually has an issue with the standing leg it's either balance related, which kicking slowly won't remedy, or they're not rising onto the ball of the foot and rotating with the natural momentum behind the kick.

[Hannibal]

He said muay thai roundhouse in the OP so I think we can safely assume power is his goal. Therefore, no slow kicking for him.

*re-reads OP post and blushes*

WHOOPS! Missed that!!

I retract my previous statements!!!

[Kuma]

Correcting technique will allow you to apply more of the power you already have more efficiently, yes, but standing on one leg doesn't build power.

They work a lot more than just the balance for standing on one leg, but since you mentioned that, if you have superior balance for standing on your supporting leg compared to someone else who doesn't, don't you think that would actually have a positive effect on your power output? It's simple physics. If you hit something that is more solid than you, you're going to be on the losing end. If your balance improves, that actually improves your force output simply due to the fact that now you are far more stable.

There are many aspects of athletic power, and just because you do something slower doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Take Andy Bolton, world record holder in the deadlift. When you watch him deadlift over a thousand pounds, you can see him grind it out and it's a slow lift. Watch him train his speed deadlifts with 500+ pounds, and you can see how incredibly fast he is. Strength is not limited to just one medium, it correlates with everything else you do. The term "functional strength" that is so popular nowadays is ridiculous, because being very strong in one area does transfer over to others.

You actually recommended squats and deadlifts as training to assist the kick, but both of those lifts are typically trained in a slow manner as well (especially once you start going heavy). If slow training is unnecessary, then why recommend two slow lifts? If it's the argument of resistance, you can make slow kicking more difficult by increasing the height, slowing it down even more, stopping at certain points for isometric contractions, etc.

So to flip it around - what's the actual harm in training slow kicks? There is a fair amount of studies in the exercise physiology field that supports training athletic movements with slightly more resistance than they would normally encounter (i.e. as in baseball with the heavier bats). The balance is you need to ensure you are doing regular speed reps right after. By training slowly you cannot rely solely on momentum to finish the technique thus it makes the movement harder and more beneficial (i.e. such as pausing at the bottom of a bench press in powerlifting, rather than just bouncing it off your chest like you see a lot of knobs doing). Powerlifting itself is a slow strength sport, but when you see 300+ pound guys with impressive vertical leaps you realize how the strength correlates over.

It all comes down to what works for YOU. Since there's loads of contradictory advice in the exercise physiology world, nothing can or should be taken as strictly gospel. It should be something you experiment with and see if it works for YOU and/or your athletes if you think it has some merit, and if you see results you use it. Exercise physiology changes so rapidly that what is right one day is wrong the next, and biased studies can haunt the field for years (i.e. the study claiming squatting below parallel damages the knee joints of Olympic lifters, where they completely disregarded the actual ballistic lifts they routinely do).

[SenseiMattKlein]

Just watched the video. Don't you need good flexibility to get your leg that high in the first place?
Unfortunately, most of us are not that flexible. But as Wallace says, the increase in strength of the external obliques and other surrounding muscles plays a big factor in getting those kicks up there. It needs to be combined with stretching for the maximum effect.

[Atre]

What the hell is wrong with this thread?!!

There are two issues here:
1) Strength of kick
2) Static flexibility

Both were mentioned in OP
slow kicks for high kicks?
A number of posts seem to mention doing slow kicks to develope kicking strength and I suppose help with your flexibility.

Now, everyone decide which point you are addressing and which point someone else is addressing before you type anything out. I'm waiting for Van Zandt to turn up and school us all :P.

PS. I would suggest that the OP is getting at a desire to have sufficient flexibility to make kicks at the height he wants (without feeling like he's fighting his hamstrings/adductors to get there). This may or may not be an issue with flexibility in those muscles, could be that more strength is needed in his fasciae latae (and if anyone knows weighted exercises to target that I'll be impressed) and the flexibility is fine *shrug*.

[Master Betty]

They work a lot more than just the balance for standing on one leg, but since you mentioned that, if you have superior balance for standing on your supporting leg compared to someone else who doesn't, don't you think that would actually have a positive effect on your power output? It's simple physics. If you hit something that is more solid than you, you're going to be on the losing end. If your balance improves, that actually improves your force output simply due to the fact that now you are far more stable.

There are many aspects of athletic power, and just because you do something slower doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Take Andy Bolton, world record holder in the deadlift. When you watch him deadlift over a thousand pounds, you can see him grind it out and it's a slow lift. Watch him train his speed deadlifts with 500+ pounds, and you can see how incredibly fast he is. Strength is not limited to just one medium, it correlates with everything else you do. The term "functional strength" that is so popular nowadays is ridiculous, because being very strong in one area does transfer over to others.

You actually recommended squats and deadlifts as training to assist the kick, but both of those lifts are typically trained in a slow manner as well (especially once you start going heavy). If slow training is unnecessary, then why recommend two slow lifts? If it's the argument of resistance, you can make slow kicking more difficult by increasing the height, slowing it down even more, stopping at certain points for isometric contractions, etc.

So to flip it around - what's the actual harm in training slow kicks? There is a fair amount of studies in the exercise physiology field that supports training athletic movements with slightly more resistance than they would normally encounter (i.e. as in baseball with the heavier bats). The balance is you need to ensure you are doing regular speed reps right after. By training slowly you cannot rely solely on momentum to finish the technique thus it makes the movement harder and more beneficial (i.e. such as pausing at the bottom of a bench press in powerlifting, rather than just bouncing it off your chest like you see a lot of knobs doing). Powerlifting itself is a slow strength sport, but when you see 300+ pound guys with impressive vertical leaps you realize how the strength correlates over.

It all comes down to what works for YOU. Since there's loads of contradictory advice in the exercise physiology world, nothing can or should be taken as strictly gospel. It should be something you experiment with and see if it works for YOU and/or your athletes if you think it has some merit, and if you see results you use it. Exercise physiology changes so rapidly that what is right one day is wrong the next, and biased studies can haunt the field for years (i.e. the study claiming squatting below parallel damages the knee joints of Olympic lifters, where they completely disregarded the actual ballistic lifts they routinely do).

As I previously said, given the mechanics of a thai style roundhouse, standing on one leg for balance won't aid the balance of this particular kick. the whole body should be moving and rotating with the kick and you will rise onto the ball of the foot with your body weight moving forward at teh same time as it also rotates swinging the body mass round as well. The standing leg is also not locked as well. All this leads to a movement which slow kicks will not aid the balance for although, as you asked, it won't do you any harm, that's not what the OP asked. He asked if it would aid the kick. The answer is no.

[Socrastein]

Kuma

See my point on minimal essential strain in relation to your point on slow lifting vs slow leg raises. Also remember that even if a heavy weight is moving slow, you're still producing a LOT OF FORCE.

Acceleration is only one part of the equation. You can stimulate muscular gains by moving heavy weights slowly (lots of mass, little acceleration) or by lifting semi-light to moderately heavy loads quickly (little mass, lots of acceleration) but you're not going to build power and strength (the kind that knocks people out) by lifting a tiny bit of mass slowly (little mass, little acceleration = puny force).

Kicking someone hard takes a lot of force. You don't improve your ability to do so in any significant way by practicing producing a little force. I don't know how to break it down any more than that.

As I said previously, you'll get localized muscular endurance, like #8 on Slip's list. That's not the kind of strength that helps you knock people out. It's the kind of strength that helps you stand on one leg with your other leg held in the air.

Specificity of strength and specificity of motor patterns are important.

Exercise physiology changes so rapidly that what is right one day is wrong the next

That's a gross over-exaggeration IMO. The squat "study" you mentioned was flawed to begin with (no double blind control) and didn't change anything about exercise physiology, it just changed the perception of squats in the lay public. While the lay perception of exercise science might wax and wane on a whim, the actual science doesn't change as radically as you imply. That goes for nearly every field of science.

[Kuma]

the whole body should be moving and rotating with the kick and you will rise onto the ball of the foot with your body weight moving forward at teh same time as it also rotates swinging the body mass round as well. The standing leg is also not locked as well. All this leads to a movement which slow kicks will not aid the balance for although, as you asked, it won't do you any harm, that's not what the OP asked. He asked if it would aid the kick. The answer is no.

This is the exact same principles as a mawashi geri (roundhouse kick) in Kyokushin, the only difference is for jodan (high) kicks we still favor a bit of a chamber. Somehow we can still train our kicks slowly and with control though.

Watch Kenji Midori at about 6:00. Very similar to what you already described, and Midori was a huge fan of slow kicking to develop his powerful kicks.

YouTube - Kenji Midori Kyokushin Winning Techniques - 1

If you cannot slow your kick down, you don't have control of it. And if you don't have control of it, you're just relying on momentum to carry you through your weak areas.

[Master Betty]

Take a look at this man kicking and ask if you want to be on the receiving end. I've seen him training personally when he was in the UK last year and I know a few people who've trained with him as well as MANY people who've spent a lot of time training in thailand. Obviously, the info coming from them is second hand but NONE of them have mentioned doing any kind of stretching beyond that of warming up and cooling down stretches. And none have ever mentioned doing slow kicks to develop power or flexibilty. buakaw certianly didn't do any and whenever we've had some thai fighters over to take our coaching for a couple of months they do very little stretching and have never done slow kicks.

[Master Betty]

This is the exact same principles as a mawashi geri (roundhouse kick) in Kyokushin, the only difference is for jodan (high) kicks we still favor a bit of a chamber. Somehow we can still train our kicks slowly and with control though.

Watch Kenji Midori at about 6:00. Very similar to what you already described, and Midori was a huge fan of slow kicking to develop his powerful kicks.

If you cannot slow your kick down, you don't have control of it. And if you don't have control of it, you're just relying on momentum to carry you through your weak areas.

Yes, if you have the correct technique in thai boxing you can slow the kick down - but it is by no mean a "slow kick" as I think he was referring to: ie. the bill wallace type and nor does it develop power or flexibility which was what the OP asked.

At the end of the day, for me it's really simple. The thais kick better than anyone else on the planet and that's not really butt worshipping them or anything like that, they simply produce so many more good kickers with speed, technique, power, flexibilty and control when compared with other sports. Bearing that in mind, why would I want to perform the same kick they do but train it in a way which none of them advocate?

Anyone who wants to have the characteristics of their "idol" or whatever will find out how they attained it and train that way. That applies to pretty much every profession on the planey - why would kicking be any different?

[SenseiMattKlein]

I guess we need to throw out all the knowledge we have learned from yoga as well. They develop serious flexibility, strength, and balance from many of their one legged and one-armed asanas, or static poses. I would know, I've done it for two years, and it works. Folks, we are confusing power with strength. You still need to work your fast-twitch muscles, no one is denying that. But to get those kicks up there in the first place we need strength. It also develops control and technique.

[Kuma]

While the lay perception of exercise science might wax and wane on a whim, the actual science doesn't change as radically as you imply. That goes for nearly every field of science.

Having worked as an intern in an exercise physiology lab back in my college days as part of my degree, I can say that my statement was not that far from the truth.

Considering my own personal experiences as well as those I have trained with and alongside, my own experiences don't dictate that they are unuseful nor incapable of improving one's kicks. As mentioned before, there was a point a few years ago where I was squatting well over twice my body weight for reps and diligently stretching, yet aside from low kicks I wasn't kicking any harder than lot of guys there. Working slow kicks in addition to those previous exercises greatly improved my kicks through the control, coordination, balance, and yes strength I developed through those. Seeing them incorporated into others' routines and how they helped them only solidifies my opinion. Again, that's all we're really exchanging is opinion. Mine differs from yours.

[Socrastein]

Yeah, I'd say you can throw most of yoga out too. But that's another thread ;)

[Kuma]

Anyone who wants to have the characteristics of their "idol" or whatever will find out how they attained it and train that way. That applies to pretty much every profession on the planey - why would kicking be any different?

Quoted for truth.

[Master Betty]

I guess we need to throw out all the knowledge we have learned from yoga as well. They develop serious flexibility, strength, and balance from many of their one legged and one-armed asanas, or static poses. I would know, I've done it for two years, and it works. Folks, we are confusing power with strength. You still need to work your fast-twitch muscles, no one is denying that. But to get those kicks up there in the first place we need strength. It also develops control and technique.

Then please explain how 99% of thai boxers can consistently kick harder with a roundhouse than most other martial arts despite never training "slow kicks". The proof is in the pudding. Everything I've found out about the training routines of the hardest kickers I'm aware of leads me to believe they don't train it.

Also, knowing the correct technique behind a thai style roundhouse tells me it's a waste of effort. I think before anyone else makes any comments on whether or not "slow kicks" will help a thai style roundhouse, they should be completely honest and ask themselves whether or not they can even DO a thai style roundhouse. Most people don't but a lot of people think they do.

[Kuma]

I guess we need to throw out all the knowledge we have learned from yoga as well. They develop serious flexibility, strength, and balance from many of their one legged and one-armed asanas, or static poses. I would know, I've done it for two years, and it works. Folks, we are confusing power with strength. You still need to work your fast-twitch muscles, no one is denying that. But to get those kicks up there in the first place we need strength. It also develops control and technique.

I agree. I first got into yoga when I was deployed and my wife sent me a DVD to work out with. Not only did I notice a huge increase in my flexibility and recovery (and a fair increase in stamina) but when we took our physical fitness test I absolutely destroyed the push-ups thanks to all the downward dogs. There is an element of endurance to the 2-min push-up tests, but also power as when you're doing 100 reps in less than 2 min you're obviously moving pretty fast.

My friend still has the hardest kicks of any I've ever taken, and he attributes a lot of it to his yoga practice. If I can kick like him someday, I would be ecstatic.

[Mitch]

Then please explain how 99% of thai boxers can consistently kick harder with a roundhouse than most other martial arts despite never training "slow kicks". The proof is in the pudding. Everything I've found out about the training routines of the hardest kickers I'm aware of leads me to believe they don't train it.

Also, knowing the correct technique behind a thai style roundhouse tells me it's a waste of effort. I think before anyone else makes any comments on whether or not "slow kicks" will help a thai style roundhouse, they should be completely honest and ask themselves whether or not they can even DO a thai style roundhouse. Most people don't but a lot of people think they do.

What flexibility training do thai boxers do MB?

Mitch

[SenseiMattKlein]

Yeah, I'd say you can throw most of yoga out too. But that's another thread ;)
Sometimes you need to look outside of your world for wisdom and knowledge.

[SenseiMattKlein]

Then please explain how 99% of thai boxers can consistently kick harder with a roundhouse than most other martial arts despite never training "slow kicks". The proof is in the pudding. Everything I've found out about the training routines of the hardest kickers I'm aware of leads me to believe they don't train it.

Also, knowing the correct technique behind a thai style roundhouse tells me it's a waste of effort. I think before anyone else makes any comments on whether or not "slow kicks" will help a thai style roundhouse, they should be completely honest and ask themselves whether or not they can even DO a thai style roundhouse. Most people don't but a lot of people think they do.
With all due respect, Master Betty, the Thai's have some great kickers, but they are not the only great kickers in the world.

[Master Betty]

What flexibility training do thai boxers do MB?

Mitch

In my experience very little. some schools will do a lot, most will do nothing beyond warm up and cool down stretches.

At the moment with my guys I'm going for a bit more stretching than I trained with. I get them to do 5 minutes skipping, 1 minute shadow boxing as an active rest/stretch then 5 minutes skipping. after this warmup I'll then give them about 10 minutes of stretching. Not pushing the boundaries, but enough to make sure they can train without injury and can do things like kick at their full height. At the very end I'll give them about 15 minutes stretching again - usually the same stretches but pushing the limits of them etc.

Most thai camps that I'm aware of do nothing more than basica warm up and cool down stretches. The thai roundhouse kick is funny with flexibilty - it requires very little hamstring flexibilty but lots in all the different hip muscles. I know guys that can kick well above my head but can't touch their toes etc. Most gyms just tell you kick as high as you can on the bag without ruining your technique and with time the flexibilty increases. It's probably not the most efficient method but theres usually a whole host of more important things to work on than spending time making people kick to the head. Hell, in a full contact setting like thai boxing it's hard enough getting people to even try kicking instead of just boxing.

[Hannibal]

Master Sken used to demo slow kicks...he had a TKD background as well though....

[Master Betty]

With all due respect, Master Betty, the Thai's have some great kickers, but they are not the only great kickers in the world.


I think the martial art community at large would say that the average thai comparing his roundhouse with the average martial artist of the same weight in virtually most other martial arts in the world will usually come out tops by a large margin.

I'm not saying that there aren't other good kickers out there or that other martial arts don't produce a high quantity of good kickers either. I AM saying that no other martial art consistently produces fighters who kick with as much power and with correct timing. Every effective kick IS allowed and DOES score if it lands with effect under thai boxing scoring criteria. Every kick you can think of. There's a reason few of them do little more than variations on push kicks and roundhouses though - the others have too high a risk when compared with the effect. That's material for PMs or another threadthough if you really want to go into it.

[Master Betty]

Master Sken used to demo slow kicks...he had a TKD background as well though....

Yeah he had NO training in muay thai whatsoever. He's produced some decent fighters and I have respect for him as a promoter AND what he did for the sport. However the crap he does for demos etc is not the stuff he gives a fighter to do.

Actually, the man is seen as a bit of a joke sometimes among the thai boxing coaches and fighters and his method is often referred to snidily as "sken kwon do".

Bad Company and Wicker Camp are probably the two best thai gyms in the country and none of them advocate slow kicking, that I know first hand.

[Fish Of Doom]

a thought on the slow kicking debate: slow kicking serves mostly to develop leg muscle control and body coordination, and TMAs usually have mildly complex kicking techniques, thus needing that coordination to correctly focus their power generation, whereas muay thai, from what i've seen (correct me if i'm wrong) relies more on pure power generation with the leg moderately relaxed and "whipped" by the hips, which is a fairly simple motion and requires less coordination, enabling those who do muay thai to focus on pure power as they have less complex motions to develop. a TMA guy who focuses on his leg control and coordination AS WELL as his power generation will be able to approach the level of effectiveness of a serious (although not necessarily pro) nak muay pretty closely, although with more kicks instead of fewer but more powerful ones.

on the other hand, slow kicking, if done properly, is good for hip joint health too, so if you're into the whole not destroying yourself with your training, the occasional session can't be bad for you, even if you don't do it aiming to increase your MA performance.

[Kuma]

I think the martial art community at large would say that the average thai comparing his roundhouse with the average martial artist of the same weight in virtually most other martial arts in the world will usually come out tops by a large margin.

That's because the average martial artist doesn't train full contact. If you compare between the different full contact styles, however, that margin will be much slimmer and can go either way.

[Master Betty]

That's because the average martial artist doesn't train full contact. If you compare between the different full contact styles, however, that margin will be much slimmer and can go either way.

not really, Full contact kickboxing as I pointed out will almost always prove the thai boxer more powerful. same with MMA. Kyokushin as we know owes a lot of its current roundhouse kicking technique to thai boxing but I'd still be willing to bet on th ethai boxers.

As I said however, I'm not saying its always the case or that there aren't people out there with harder kicks. I've met people who've trained full contact for kickboxing, mma, tae kwon do and karate and none have kicked as hard as the thai boxers. I also know, because of the motions of the thai style roundhouse, that there is NO other way to generate more power with a roundhouse. If there was someone would've discovered it after a dozen centuries of training.

Taking ONLY people from full contact setting and pitting them against thai boxers of the same weight, yes there'd be less of a disparity but I'd still be willing to say that the thai boxers will win out most of the time. After a while this becomes less about technique and more about laws of averages and quality of instruction.

I've seen Liam Harrison, undoubtedly the best stand up striker in britain, pound for pound, being coached by some thais from jittigym - and they were STILL correcting minute little details in his kicking technique. They guy has been training and fighting thai since he was a kid - much like the thais themselves. But that's the difference in instruction when your coach was a professional fighter, who was in turn coached by an ex-pro and so on and so forth.

[Master Betty]

a thought on the slow kicking debate: slow kicking serves mostly to develop leg muscle control and body coordination, and TMAs usually have mildly complex kicking techniques, thus needing that coordination to correctly focus their power generation, whereas muay thai, from what i've seen (correct me if i'm wrong) relies more on pure power generation with the leg moderately relaxed and "whipped" by the hips, which is a fairly simple motion and requires less coordination, enabling those who do muay thai to focus on pure power as they have less complex motions to develop. a TMA guy who focuses on his leg control and coordination AS WELL as his power generation will be able to approach the level of effectiveness of a serious (although not necessarily pro) nak muay pretty closely, although with more kicks instead of fewer but more powerful ones.

on the other hand, slow kicking, if done properly, is good for hip joint health too, so if you're into the whole not destroying yourself with your training, the occasional session can't be bad for you, even if you don't do it aiming to increase your MA performance.

I understand where you're going with this and I would agree if it weren't for one minute little detail - the thai style roundhouse simply can't be trained slowly in the method spoken. It becomes a different kick. the reason is that the rotation of the hips, shoulder and standing foot all occur because of the momentum of your entire body rotating. A lot of TMA guys talk about how to chamber the leg at X angle then engage Y muscle and blablabla. the thai style kick doesnt do that. As you said, the leg is completely relaxed and its this whipping motion caused by the rotation of the hips with all your bodyweight behind it that cause so much power. No matter how much you've built up your quads and hip flexors etc. if you're not putting your body weight behind the kick it wont cause as much power as otherwise.

Therefore, training a slow kick might improve certain aspects of technique behind specific kicks. It is NOT directly beneficial to strength and flexibilty however - in ANY kick. And it's literally impossible with a thai style roundhouse which I suppose makes the whole thing a moot point.

[Fish Of Doom]

exactly, which is why i'm mentioning that the thai roundhouse is so powerful precisely because, being a much simpler movement, it does not require complex motor skills and there is no need at all to train slowly, leaving the nak muay a lot of time available to simply refine his power generation.

[Coges]

Is there nothing to be said for muscle memory and movement patterns with doing slow kicks? I would imagine that the slow kicks technique is aimed at more of a beginner level. I can't imagine any skilled thai kickers would need to practice slow kicks. It could be why you don't see them doing any flexibility work. Once you've developed your flexibility to that level there's no real need to work on it every day.

I don't know about the thai roundhouse. I don't do that style but the amount of people I see in and MA style using poor technique for their kicks is astonishing. Also, once you add speed to that poor technique you are just compounding the problem. Maybe slow kicking is one technique, amongst others, that can remedy this problem.

Just recently, Joe Defranco has espoused the benefits of using prowler sprints for correcting sprint technique. That's using a slow, by comparison, exercise to correct technique for an explosive event.

And Master Betty, just a quick one. Do you have any information to support your claim that slow kicking is "NOT directly beneficial to strength and flexibilty however - in ANY kick"? What about active flexibility? And as others have mentioned, strength in the stabilizing muscles, the hip joint, the obliques? Not an attack as you would know more than me, just curious.

[slipthejab]

God these threads become absolutely tedious with all the constant reference to Muay Thai as the be-all end-all. That coming from someone who lives it and trains it and fights it. Seriously... overselling it doesn't do anything for anyone. Muay Thai this and that... RAWR!!! Seriously. Grow up.

:rolleyes:

Ironically... I have been in camps where they do work out finer points of the Muay Thai roundhouse by kicking it slowly and leaving it on the bag. That's right a kick is thrown slower and makes the impact on a bag and then is held there at point of impact. No it's not full speed nor full power. The point is to show the conditions at the point of impact. So as to make the kids aware of exactly what position their foot and shin need to be in relation to the bag/opponent. It's also done like that as a drill to improve balance. It's primarily for the little ones coming in and of course they do all the regular full speed/full power kicks as well or as we used to say at Jocky... All power/All the time.

It's entirely akin to having someone do plyometrics. Explosive movement. At some point early on.. they're going to need cues. Which usually require breaking the move down slowly and piece by piece to help the person doing it get their head around it. It's a great drill for helping novices learn exactly what position their bodies should be in at the point of impact. It doesn't take long to improve their kicks if they can get their head around the simple bits broken down. You don't start someone off doing heavy duty box jumps or barbells squat jumps without first breaking down the different components of a squat first. Seriously.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Some people get it and dig their heels in so deep they don't realize there are tons of variations. So from someone who's lived in Thailand, trains and fights Muay Thai... yes there are drills that are similar to what the karate guys mentioned... yes the get done at times by Thai's and westerners. Mostly by little kids when they're getting clued into the finer points. I use the same drill for many novice fighters starting out to show them the possible variations in how the hip needs to rotate and how the heels needs to elevate in order to allow the leg and hip joint to generate the most force. It's not like this is something new... I picked it up in Thailand.

Are you going to see Buakaw doing them in a seminar? lol.... what do you think?

[Master Betty]

God these threads become absolutely tedious with all the constant reference to Muay Thai as the be-all end-all. That coming from someone who lives it and trains it and fights it. Seriously... overselling it doesn't do anything for anyone. Muay Thai this and that... RAWR!!! Seriously. Grow up.

:rolleyes:

Ironically... I have been in camps where they do work out finer points of the Muay Thai roundhouse by kicking it slowly and leaving it on the bag. So as to make the kids aware of exactly what position their foot and shin need to be in relation to the bag/opponent. It's also done like that as a drill to improve balance. It's primarily for the little ones coming in and of course they do all the regular full speed/full power kicks as well or as we used to say at Jocky... All power/All the time.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Some people get it and dig their heels in so deep they don't realize there are tons of variations. So from someone who's lived in Thailand, trains and fights Muay Thai... yes there are drills that are similar to what the karate guys mentioned... yes the get done at times by Thai's and westerners. Mostly by little kids when they're getting clued into the finer points. I use the same drill for many novice fighters starting out to show them the possible variations in how the hip needs to rotate and how the heels needs to elevate in order to allow the leg and hip joint to generate the most force. It's not like this is something new... I picked it up in Thailand.

Are you going to see Buakaw doing them in a seminar? lol.... what do you think?

You know fine well that they're talking about things like that which bill wallace is talking about - and if you're being completely honest, you'll freely admit that the thais don't do that crap. you should also know fine well that it's quite frnakly impossible to do correct thai technique that slowly.

As for the comparisons with thai boxing, since it came up, the OP specifically asked about this in relation to practicing his thia style kick so why don't you actually take things in context instead of posting simply to contradict someone you don't like. I get it, you don't like me, and I, from everything I've ever seen of you, reciprocate the feeling. but please don't come on and tell me to grow up when you clearly let said dislike of me colour your every response to the point where you deliberately nitpick and try to argue things in a deliberately selective manner. Have a look at your own attitude first before you post ANOTHER of your damned repetitive "grow up guys" comments again mr moderator.

despite how a large quantity of you posts these days go on about how "YAWN!" some of these threads are, it never seems to discourage you from reading them or eventually becoming involved. Get off the high horse mate.

[slipthejab]

You know fine well that they're talking about things like that which bill wallace is talking about - and if you're being completely honest, you'll freely admit that the thais don't do that crap. you should also know fine well that it's quite frnakly impossible to do correct thai technique that slowly.

The drill I'm talking about is essentially the Thai equivalent of what they're on about. It's not my drill I got it from watching the trainers work with the Thai kids at camp. Some day get yourself to Thailand and then you might understand there are things that go on the don't exactly fit your current perceptions of Muay Thai via the route of seminars you've been to and second hand info from mates.


As for the comparisons with thai boxing, since it came up, the OP specifically asked about this in relation to practicing his thia style kick so why don't you actually take things in context instead of posting simply to contradict someone you don't like.

Sigh. It's all fine and well that he's asked about it in relation to Muay Thai. I don't think anyone has taken issue with that. But I find it ridiculous as it seems every thread you wander into it becomes the whole RAWR! effect with Muay Thai in relation to everything.:rolleyes:



I get it, you don't like me, and I, from everything I've ever seen of you, reciprocate the feeling.

Like you? I don't even know you other than by what you post here at MAP. Nothing personal other than you seem to be trying so insanely hard to convince people that you are the true source for all things Muay Thai. This thread is a case and point. I've lived in Thailand and trained there long before you took it up... there is a drill similar to what's being talked about and I've posted it up. So really... just because you didn't hear it second hand from a mate, see it in a seminar or read about it online... doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


but please don't come on and tell me to grow up when you clearly let said dislike of me colour your every response to the point where you deliberately nitpick and try to argue things in a deliberately selective manner.

Save your admonishments for those who are emotionally attatched to you.. I frankly am not. lol... My point is selective and deliberate as you are making it out that nothing like the drill that's being talked about exists in Muay Thai... I am deliberately and flat out telling you that something similar does exist in camps, Thai's use it... westerners have used it and if you'd been to Thailand and actually trained there instead of relying on second hand info then you might actually know and tone down the whole RAWR!! Muay Thai bit in this thread.:rolleyes:



Have a look at your own attitude first before you post ANOTHER of your damned repetitive "grow up guys" comments again mr moderator.

Again... you're just off your moms apron strings and certainly in no position to tell anyone what to do. lol.

despite how a large quantity of you posts these days go on about how "YAWN!" some of these threads are, it never seems to discourage you from reading them or eventually becoming involved. Get off the high horse mate.

1) I'm not your mate

2) non sequitor much?

To further avoid derailment of this thread if you have a response to anything other than the drill I mentioned as it pertains to the Thai roundhouse then do myself and everyone a favor and PM it to me. If you do have some insight or first hand info regarding the drill then by all means post up. But so far what you're trying to post up as absolute died-in-the-wool fact about Muay Thai isn't necessarily true.

[Master Betty]

The drill I'm talking about is essentially the Thai equivalent of what they're on about. It's not my drill I got it from watching the trainers work with the Thai kids at camp. Some day get yourself to Thailand and then you might understand there are things that go on the don't exactly fit your current perceptions of Muay Thai via the route of seminars you've been to and second hand info from mates.



Sigh. It's all fine and well that he's asked about it in relation to Muay Thai. I don't think anyone has taken issue with that. But I find it ridiculous as it seems every thread you wander into it becomes the whole RAWR! effect with Muay Thai in relation to everything.:rolleyes:





Like you? I don't even know other than by what you post here at MAP. Nothing personal other than you seem to be trying so insanely hard to convince people that you are the true source for all things Muay Thai. This thread is a case and point. I've lived in Thailand and trained there long before you took it up... their is a drill similar to what's being talked about and I've posted it up. So really... just because you didn't hear it second hand from a mate, see it in a seminar or read about it online... doesn't mean it doesn't exist.




Save your admonishments for those who are emotionally attatched to you.. I frankly am not. lol... My point is selective and deliberate as you are making it out that nothing like the drill that's being talked about exists in Muay Thai... I am deliberately and flat out telling you that something similar does exist in camps, Thai's use it... westerners have used it and if you'd been to Thailand and actually trained there instead of relying on second hand info then you might actually know and tone down the whole RAWR!! Muay Thai bit in this thread.:rolleyes:



Again... you're just off your moms apron strings and certainly in no position to tell anyone what to do. lol.



1) I'm not your mate

2) non sequitor much?

To further avoid derailment of this thread if you have a response to anything other than the drill I mentioned as it pertains to the Thai roundhouse then do myself and everyone a favor and PM it to me. If you do have some insight or first hand info regarding the drill then by all means post up. But so far what you're trying to post up as absolute died-in-the-wool fact about Muay Thai isn't necessarily true.

"similar" - please tell how it's similar. I'd love to point out the differences. As for not training in thailand, you know that I train regularly with thais. We have some who live here and we regularly have fighters over for months at a time to coach - my knowledge isn't all second hand as I pointed out.

And for all you're big talk about derailing the thread - i noticed that you've posted 3 times in this thread, and not a single one of them is directly contributing to the OPs question as to whether or not kicking slow trains power and flexibilty in a thai kick. It doesn't. Argue that if you want but we'll both know you're just doing it to be difficult.

[SenseiMattKlein]

It is clear everyone differs widely on this issue, just as everyone was taught in a different way by a different teacher. For me, I like what Bill Wallace is able to do even at his age, and when he was in his prime, his kicks were as fast as most men's punches. I have trained a group of our elite fighters over the past several years in his methods. These people have stood head and shoulders above the competition (our team has been the number one rated team in NSW for six years running), and I can't help but believe his drills were a big part of that. Their kicks not only increased in height from this training, but they became lightning quick. This is the only "case study" I need. It works for me, so I will continue doing the slow kicks--they work. I respect everyone's opinion here, but for me, I have all the evidence I need.

[Van Zandt]

There are three things you must do if you want high kicks:

1) Increase passive (static) flexibility.
2) Increase dynamic (kinetic) flexibility.
3) Increase strength in the agonists (prime movers or "kicking muscles").

However, before you do any of the above you must determine what type of kick you want to develop. Just as there are different types of strength and endurance there are also different types of kick. Note that by "different types of kick" I am referring to the method of delivery rather than the actual technique itself (e.g. roundhouse kick vs side kick).

Since it has been mentioned, I will use the roundhouse kick as an example. Most members here would agree there are generally two ways to deliver a roundhouse kick in modern martial arts:

A fast "snapping" movement focusing on speed of delivery over power generation. This method features several kicks delivered in quick succession with the same leg without touching the foot to the floor. Some of you might liken this method to Bill Wallace's style or modern-day sport karate/semi-contact Taekwondo tournaments.

A powerful "whipping" movement focusing on penetration and follow-through. This method is more akin to full-contact fighting such as Muay Thai and K-1. Some of you have referred to this as the Thai roundhouse kick.
It is relevant to state that each of the above methods is specific to the needs of its environment. That is, method #1 doesn't particularly belong in full-contact fighting and method #2 is no good in a semi-contact tournament where power of delivery is restricted. Training for either method requires exercises which develop specific attributes (and specificity is the buzzword here). Neither is better than the other and it is entirely possible for an individual to develop both (I do).

That said, if you are a semi-contact fighter you should primarily concentrate on passive (static) stretches, static holds and consecutive kicks while keeping your knee up in the air. Full-contact fighters should focus on passive (static) stretches, dynamic (kinetic) stretches and kicking a heavy bag or dense foam. It goes without saying that both types of fighters should regularly perform full range of movement compound strength exercises such as squats, deadlifts and lunges with moderate to heavy weight. If you want advice on how to correctly arrange exercises in your workouts you can consult the following thread:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89245

A number of posts seem to mention doing slow kicks to develope kicking strength and I suppose help with your flexibility.

I have very little flexibility when cold and even when warmed up I use momentum with my muay thai kicks.

How would you go about doing them ?

In basic terms your ability to perform kicks "cold" (without a warm up) will not improve until you are able to display your maximum passive (static) flexibility when cold. This usually occurs 1-3 months after reaching your maximum passive (static) range of movement with a warm up.

Whether you want fast snapping kicks or powerful whipping kicks -- without a warm up -- you first need to examine your passive (static) flexibility. Splits are a good baseline for this. I can already picture some of you spitting potato chips all over your computer screen as you scream that passive (static) flexibility (and thus passive [static] stretches) are not specific to dynamic (kinetic) flexibility. You're right that passive (static) stretches won't necessarily increase your dynamic (kinetic) flexibility. But the range of your dynamic (kinetic) flexibility is limited by the range of your passive (static) flexibility. Exceeding the range of your passive (static) flexibility when doing dynamic (kinetic) stretches will turn the exercise into a ballistic one -- and that is a big no-no.

Let's say you can perform a split to 140 degrees. You should keep your dynamic [kinetic] stretches within this range. The angle between your thighs in a dynamic (static) stretch -- a leg raise to the side for example -- should not go beyond 140 degrees. And for those of you who can "only" stretch in a split to 140 degrees, know that this range of movement in ample for most people to kick at their own head height. Here is a picture of what kicking at 140 degrees looks like:

http://www.fightingmaster.com/legends/wallace/superfoot2.jpg

You can place a protractor on your screen and measure the angle between Bill's thighs if you don't believe me.

When doing multiple snap kicks on one leg you are displaying a number of different strength types, most notably isometric strength in the iliopsoas, tensor fascia latae, gluteus medius, piriformis, rectus abdominus, transverse abdominus, internal & external obliques, erector spinae, serratus posterior inferior and latissimus dorsi. Strength is position specific. Therefore slow kicks -- especially holding a kick in place ("static holds") -- are ideal for developing the strength needed to hold your chambered up there as you throw multiple kicks. Note that passive (static) flexibility development is especially important as range of movement suffers a 5-30% decline when holding your leg in place. Slow kicks are also useful to full-contact fighters for the merits of technique development which have already been discussed in this thread. The wise practitioner is the one who invests in both types of training methodologies however.

I'm often asked what it takes to be a great kicker. Many people seem to think there must be a trade off between speed and power. There are actually seven attributes which I believe are absolutely essential to being a great kicker. These are: timing, distance, control, accuracy, endurance, speed and power. Note that this list is in no particular order of preference. It isn't until an individual has all these attributes in spades that they can be considered a great, or even good, kicker.

[Master Betty]

Best damn information yet.

[Hannibal]

And it has a picture of Bill in it too! ;)

[Atre]

I TOTALLY called it :P.

I'm waiting for Van Zandt to turn up and school us all :P.

PS. I would suggest that the OP is getting at a desire to have sufficient flexibility to make kicks at the height he wants (without feeling like he's fighting his hamstrings/adductors to get there). This may or may not be an issue with flexibility in those muscles, could be that more strength is needed in his fasciae latae (and if anyone knows weighted exercises to target that I'll be impressed) and the flexibility is fine *shrug*.

[dormindo]

Totally off topic and immature, I know, but I never thought I'd ever be reading the likes of the following sentence:

You can place a protractor on your screen and measure the angle between Bill's thighs if you don't believe me.

That is all.

I now return you to regularly scheduled thread as I go off into a corner and begin to ponder whether grad school is melting me brains.:cry:

paz,

dormindo

[Kuma]

Great post, VZ.

What's funny is I can totally see VZ sitting in front of his computer with a protractor measuring the angle between Bill's legs.

[TKDDragon]

Feel Free to split this off to a separte thread, but as much of the thread has focused on the two type of roundhouse and their effectiveness. What does everyone's opinion on the results of the national geographic fight science episode where they compare kicking effectiveness? I am especially interested in Slip's and MB's take on this one. When I get a chance I'll see if I can get a direct link.
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/fight-science/
For now the general one will have to do. I'll hold my thoughts till we've gotten a few responses.

[Kuma]

Feel Free to split this off to a separte thread, but as much of the thread has focused on the two type of roundhouse and their effectiveness. What does everyone's opinion on the results of the national geographic fight science episode where they compare kicking effectiveness?

Do you mean the one where they compared several different kicks and mysteriously found out that by grabbing and kneeing a guy you can deliver a lot more force than most kicks simply because you're now pulling your target into your strike? Yeah, that was a bit flawed, in case you didn't realize.

[TKDDragon]

No this was the one comparing capuarai (sp) to other TMA. It had the moving platform as part of the the experiment but that has many possible flaws. I was thinking more of the pretest where the Platform was stable. '

It was in the stealth fighter Episode. Kindof a buried jewel so to speak

[Kuma]

Kenji Midori worked slow squat kicks frequently.

Here he is demonstrating his roundhouse kicks:

YouTube - Kyokushin karate speed kick tutorial

I certainly would not ever want to be kicked by that man.

Different strokes for different folks.

[Master Betty]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. taking technique out of the equation, explosive power comes from training the muscles with explosive exercises. Given all the different views by leading physios out there etc. this is commonly agreed upon by most of them. Explosive power comes from muscles with explosive potential which they only gain by training explosive movements. not slow squats, not slow kicks not slow anything. the fact that someone does it does not mean that's why they have power.

[Kuma]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. taking technique out of the equation, explosive power comes from training the muscles with explosive exercises.

Not necessarily. That definitely helps, but building maximal strength can also increase explosiveness. Everything is related. If you can squat 600 pounds for one rep, chances are you can be pretty darn explosive with 300-400 pounds. The stronger a muscle gets, the more explosive potential it has. The two are not exclusive to each other.

EDIT: Just to continue along that point: in Olympic lifting once you have the technique down a lot of work is then based on supporting exercises. One of the best exercises for the clean is the front squat which, despite guys working them heavy and grinding out reps, adds serious poundages to their cleans. All strength is related.

[slipthejab]

"similar" - please tell how it's similar.

Ok since you're not able to figure out how the drill I pointed out is similar then I'll have to spell it out:

The OP's original post was about slow kicking drills. My posted drill was about what is essentially a slowly thrown Thai style roundhouse that is then held on the bag while you are up on one foot in the end position right at the point of impact. It's not that hard to see the similarity between the two drills. The two kicks are different. No one has argued they're not. At least I haven't. The drill doesn't work if the Thai style roundhouse is thrown full speed or power... but the mechanics are the same... in case you didn't realize it... a Thai kick can be thrown slower. I do it all the time with students... especially when thrown to the neck. So do many other trainers... Malaipet throws his kicks when training at about half speed and certainly half power in drills. It's not as if the Muay Thai kick in training is all power all the time. It all depends on what you are trying to point out and what you are trying to explain to your student. The mechanics of the kick can be entirely different but it's of no real import as what's being focused on in the drill is to show the student the posture, point of balance/center of gravity, why the legs needs to be strong enough to support it, where the heel rotation and why the ball of the foot is the main support and the heel is up to allow the roundhouse to strike unimpeded by the heel on the ground.

I must use about a dozen slowly thrown roundhouse kicks on a student for explanation to the rest of the class and other students. As an instructor you can't throw full power kicks to the armpit or the floating rib or the obliques on your students. There are many instances where a kick on the bag thrown full power isn't going to be very useful for explaining the more subtle points in the various stages of a kick. So what then? Just gloss it over? Hope the students get it by osmosis? Injure your students. I prefer to think things through and look for tools that are useful for explaining the components of a kick that don't run the risk of me creasing a student. Much of what I use in this respect I've gotten off of training with other fighters. Many things I'm using at the current moment are from training with Teelek Fairtex... he's obviously not throwing full power/speed when he shows me the stuff or I wouldn't have a head and I'd be minus a ribcage. The drill must really be something of a shock for you because it obviously rocks the foundation of your beliefs in how Thai's train and that any person Thai or not could possibly train with a drill similar to a Karate or TKD drill really seems to tie you into fits of insecurity. You really should relax and realize there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Is it the optimal way to build strength for a roundhouse? No of course it's not but it is a great tool for teaching the angle of the shin and torso during the point of impact. It's also a great tool to show where the heel needs to be. Different people learn different ways. Not everyone teaches the same either. I've been teaching this for quite a while and I've seen all types of learners and all types of instructors. I picked up the drill way back in the day in Thailand... the reason it stood out so much is precisely because I hadn't seen it at another camp. The young Thai kids being shown this were able to get their head around it and they did all the other drills associated with Thai camps.

So what do we have from all of that:

1) kicks are not thrown full speed
2) kicks are not thrown full power
3) kicks are held statically for a time in position of impact
3) students walk away with an increased understanding of the strength needed to maintain the supporting leg
4) students walk away with an increased understanding of the actual mechanics because it's been broken down to separate components
5) student walk away with some gains in proprioception - which are linked to both strength and flexibility

Is it being argued that this teaching technique is the premier way to build absolute strength? No.
Is it being argued that this teaching technique is the only one to use or the only one Thai's use? No.
Is it being argued that this teaching technique should replace kicks at full speed/power? No.
Is it being argued that this style of teaching suits all students and all instructors? No.


I'd love to point out the differences.

Sure knock yourself out. But you're entirely missing the point. No one is arguing there aren't differences - In fact look above... I've just pretty clearly explained that there are quite a differences. So you're having an argument of 1. The tool is a useful one for strength and flexibility primarily because it allows the person doing it to understand where their body and limbs and torso need to be in relation to an opponent at the point of impact. To get stronger there are lots of great techniques out there for getting stronger... squats/dead lift/Bulgarian split squats and TVA work for one... just as there are many way to get more flexible... such as dynamic stretching and all the other forms of flexibility training.

There are drills which can help as student get their head around the why's and the hows of doing a said technique... beyond doing the technique. It's a subtle but crucial distinction to make. No one can force you to make it. Personally... I'd really have to question the skill and intent of any trainer who couldn't make that distinction and has dug his heels so far in that he's unwilling to remain open to new possiblities.


As for not training in thailand, you know that I train regularly with thais. We have some who live here and we regularly have fighters over for months at a time to coach - my knowledge isn't all second hand as I pointed out.

Well good for you... lots of people train with Thai's. Training with Thai's a few times a week isn't the same as training in Thailand across a good spectrum of camps over several years. Get there... do that... and you'll then understand what I mean.

And for all you're big talk about derailing the thread - i noticed that you've posted 3 times in this thread, and not a single one of them is directly contributing to the OPs question as to whether or not kicking slow trains power and flexibilty in a thai kick. It doesn't. Argue that if you want but we'll both know you're just doing it to be difficult.

Just because you're having trouble what's being understood doesn't mean it doesn't pertain. So really you need to wind your neck in a bit. You can respond to what's been posted and how it applies to the OP's question and is easily in the realm of acceptable thread drift and conjecture... or you can not post... or you can PM me with blather related to you feeling persecuted or me not liking you... there's your three options. Have at it.:rolleyes:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. taking technique out of the equation, explosive power comes from training the muscles with explosive exercises.

Good now take a class full of novice nak muays who don't do much if any supplemental weights training and don't have any clue how to properly incorporate a plyometrics program into their training let alone perodize it and you end up with a situation where the instructor needs to be able to have any tool at hand to get their heads around the finer points of the kick and how it generates power. Just having them kicking full speed, full power - explosively as it were is pretty much pointless if they haven't got the right alignment or anything else.


Given all the different views by leading physios out there etc. this is commonly agreed upon by most of them. '

You have your terms mixed up. Physios? They don't often deal with plyometrics programs. Which physios are you referring to? If you mean to say personal trainers... well... most PT's have no clue about plyometrics. If you had said college level athletics coaches then I might be inclined to believe... but physios? Their main concern is rehabilitation of existing or previous injuries and generally they aren't prescribing anything remotely plyometric or explosive.


Explosive power comes from muscles with explosive potential which they only gain by training explosive movements. not slow squats, not slow kicks not slow anything. the fact that someone does it does not mean that's why they have power.

You really need to get your head around what progression is in the training world and how it factors in. Because if you start just by handing out explosive movements and plyometrics with no periodization and no build up then your just driving your students towards injury plain and simple.

Out of curiosity - this explosiveness that you speak of... have you actually trained it yourself? Care to give us an example of what your explosive or your plyometric program actually looks like?

[Patrick Smith]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. taking technique out of the equation, explosive power comes from training the muscles with explosive exercises. Given all the different views by leading physios out there etc. this is commonly agreed upon by most of them. Explosive power comes from muscles with explosive potential which they only gain by training explosive movements. not slow squats, not slow kicks not slow anything. the fact that someone does it does not mean that's why they have power.

I'm just jumping in here in this, and I haven't been following this debate, BUT

No offense meant, Master Betty, but you really aren't making any kind of scientific or logical argument against using slow squats, kicks, or any kind of training method to increase explosiveness, quickness, and power. To say that to be fast you must do everything fast is, quite simply, too simplistic.

Slow squats, especially with a very heavy weight (which would be more like a negative), would be quite isometric, and isometric exercises coupled with dynamic ones (i.e. complexes) have a HUGE effect on the CNS and are being used more and more by a lot of the big names in the industry. Joe DeFranco, Zack Even-Esh, Alwyn Cosgrove, John Chaimberg, etc.

You have to look at what constitutes speed and what makes it possible. Simply saying that slow squats won't be productive because they are done slowly, whereas you want to move quickly, is not logical when you consider the evidence for isometrics and slow (but intense) movements.

Again, if I've got something wrong (because I've just jumped into the thread), then please excuse me.

[Master Betty]

I'm just jumping in here in this, and I haven't been following this debate, BUT

No offense meant, Master Betty, but you really aren't making any kind of scientific or logical argument against using slow squats, kicks, or any kind of training method to increase explosiveness, quickness, and power. To say that to be fast you must do everything fast is, quite simply, too simplistic.

Slow squats, especially with a very heavy weight (which would be more like a negative), would be quite isometric, and isometric exercises coupled with dynamic ones (i.e. complexes) have a HUGE effect on the CNS and are being used more and more by a lot of the big names in the industry. Joe DeFranco, Zack Even-Esh, Alwyn Cosgrove, John Chaimberg, etc.

You have to look at what constitutes speed and what makes it possible. Simply saying that slow squats won't be productive because they are done slowly, whereas you want to move quickly, is not logical when you consider the evidence for isometrics and slow (but intense) movements.

Again, if I've got something wrong (because I've just jumped into the thread), then please excuse me.

No, you're correct, and I'll willingly say there are a lot of people on this forum who have a much more in depth knowedge in that direction than I do. However it's completely irrelevant to kicking slow - invariably this thread derails into arguements about semantics. Ie. the heavy weight squats etc, or arguments about technique.

For a thai kick, kicking slow will not develop power, flexibility or speed.

That's about as direct an answer that's been given yet on this thread and so far, people have argued with it by providing arguements that are only relevant to something else entirely lol.

[slipthejab]

It's only irrelevant if you're not able to grasp the bigger picture and the connection between doing things slowly and in a broken down manner.

No one learns how to drive a Ferrari F-1 car at qualifying speed on their first day behind the wheel.... why should kicking for speed and power be any different?

[slipthejab]

I'm just jumping in here in this, and I haven't been following this debate, BUT

No offense meant, Master Betty, but you really aren't making any kind of scientific or logical argument against using slow squats, kicks, or any kind of training method to increase explosiveness, quickness, and power. To say that to be fast you must do everything fast is, quite simply, too simplistic.

Slow squats, especially with a very heavy weight (which would be more like a negative), would be quite isometric, and isometric exercises coupled with dynamic ones (i.e. complexes) have a HUGE effect on the CNS and are being used more and more by a lot of the big names in the industry. Joe DeFranco, Zack Even-Esh, Alwyn Cosgrove, John Chaimberg, etc.

You have to look at what constitutes speed and what makes it possible. Simply saying that slow squats won't be productive because they are done slowly, whereas you want to move quickly, is not logical when you consider the evidence for isometrics and slow (but intense) movements.

Again, if I've got something wrong (because I've just jumped into the thread), then please excuse me.

You have it exactly right. But for anyone to understand that they would have to have a deeper understanding of that type of training... and not just the training paradigm that's limited to Muay Thai.

[Master Betty]

It's only irrelevant if you're not able to grasp the bigger picture and the connection between doing things slowly and in a broken down manner.

No one learns how to drive a Ferrari F-1 car at qualifying speed on their first day behind the wheel.... why should kicking for speed and power be any different?

Actually, no, kicking slow is something completely different entirely to the concept of deadlifting or squatting large weights. So where in all that stuff did you somehow come to the conclusion that kicking slow aids power and flexibility? I said I'd be willing to concede the point about large weights. That, however, was not the point asked for by the OP. Or have you forgotten what the OP originally asked?

[Master Betty]

You have it exactly right. But for anyone to understand that they would have to have a deeper understanding of that type of training... and not just the training paradigm that's limited to Muay Thai.

It's in reference to a thai kick. I think my thai boxing training is enough of a knowledge base.

[slipthejab]

Actually, no, kicking slow is something completely different entirely to the concept of deadlifting or squatting large weights.

No it's not. Especially when in reference to dynamic loaded movements like weighted squat jumps and squat jumps and all the other forms of movement like box jumps and and split lunge jumps. None of those would you start someone out on a the end of the progression curve. You'd start them out on the relatively static, slow and controlled style and move them forward. As a learning aid... and an aid to be able to point out where the strength, balance and flexibility need to be in a kick they're invaluable.


So where in all that stuff did you somehow come to the conclusion that kicking slow aids power and flexibility?

Because if a kick is broken down into it's movements over the arc of the kick and the person learning how to kick understands each phase of the kick and the posture and the recovery then they're more likely to spend less time programming bad motor skills into their muscle memory and then having to correct them when they can't get the kick down.

I've seen this for years and years. Much likely long before you were even training. I've also applied to this students for many years. I've seen what different methods of teaching do and how they apply to different demographics. Just because the Thai's do things a certain way doesn't mean it's the best way. Far from it... they have a very different style of learning based heavily on their culture. I've seen what happens when many westerners try to go this route of learning the basics of kicking. I've spent plenty of time helping to correct and essentially rewrite peoples movement patterns because no one ever took the time to break down a movement into components and go through it slowly and without power.

There are any number of muay thai trainers who do the same. That is the value of kicking slow. You have to widen your understanding of what goes into teaching someone about kicking. Or not... you're entirely free to stick with you existing knowledge base if you think that's sufficient - no one can force you to keep an open mind.

I said I'd be willing to concede the point about large weights. That, however, was not the point asked for by the OP. Or have you forgotten what the OP originally asked?

Again what I've posted is in relation to the OP. Whether or not you're able to see that is another matter entirely.

[slipthejab]

It's in reference to a thai kick. I think my thai boxing training is enough of a knowledge base.

Yeah lots of people think that. Unfortunately it's very myopic. Most people who train Muay Thai have a very, very limited grasp of functional anatomy and how it actually relates to what they're doing. I'm guessing you fall right into that lot as you were busy referring to physios for plyometrics.

Teaching is again another paradigm as well. Anyone can throw on Muay Thai shorts and run drills and tire their students out by having the bash away on the heavy bag and the pads.... but to actually pass on an understanding of why their body reacts the way it does and what muscle groups it uses and basic terms and concepts of functional anatomy and movement... well then it requires you to have a much more open mind and the ability not just to have information... but the ability to convey knowledge.

But I digress... if you feel secure in your training to the point that you feel you don't need to dig deeper and look at the bigger picture then hey that's your choice. Entirely your right. Carry on.

[simon s]

"What do you want from your training?" would be my question.

Muay Thai is awesome, but all the fighters are knackered before they are 35 years old (just to clarify here, I only use the Thai roundhouse and teep kicks, in addition to the shin kicks nowdays).

It is alright training for power and just throwing the kick, but and it is a big but, can you do it slowly. Why do I ask, because if you can't you have no control over your limbs, you leg is just carried by momentum.

When I first started at 17 I did loads of stretching, both dynamic and static. I also did loads and loads of work holding the back of the chair and kicking, such as shown in the Bill Wallace clip. I could raise my leg slowly, hold it at head height and then place in on a partners shoulder. So in other words I had control over my limbs.

Now although I don't stretch as much as I should, at 46 years old I can still do the spilts (just). I am convinced it is because the time spent doing static work has become embedded into my muscle memory.

For what it is worth I think I kick damn hard, but a lot of it is through body mechanics, relaxation, strength yes, but not just throwing the legs.

Power is nothing without control.

I have students who go to the gym and lift weights, which I did at their age. I always say the same thing to them. Come back when you are my age and do what I do.

You must train smart and stretch. Take the burdon away from your body which spends all day driving, at a desk, at work lifting and so on.

Anyone who thinks I am wrong (the best Thai Boxers included) can come and see me when I am 60 and tell me so.

[cloudz]

Well, I don't know if the following will be helpful. But I noticed you guys were arguing about whether it can be helpful to train slowly(sometimes) or not.

I'm not knowledgable enough personally to know if the following is right on the money, but I'll throw it out there anyway. in the course of reading this and other forums I sometimes copy and keep certain information for future reference that I like the sound of and is relevent to what I practice. As some of you will know, I practice tai chi, which is typically practiced slowly. I found the following posts to be of interest..

Though I've never once seen even a single poster assert that slow training is alone sufficient, I've covered this topic so many times in detail that it's just getting boring. Explosiveness is comprised chiefly of two components. In order of priority, they are 1) motor cortex/motor unit synchrony and 2) total white fiber power generation.

Nothing, I repeat, nothing does more to both optimize motor nerve impulse synchronization and stimulate specific motor nerve myelination than slow, relaxed movement. As for white fiber power generation, this is a function of 1) the individual's proportion of white fibers to red and red/white fibers, 2) the strength of individual white fibers, 3) the collective/relative strength of involved muscle groups, 4) relative insertion length of associated tendons, and 5) leverage/torque ratio of the skeletal structure (which is most easily expressed as bone length).

In the simplest terms, slow, relaxed practice with as much perfection of form as one can muster, combined with hypertrophy-inducing resistance exercise, and occasionally punctuated by callibration sessions of fast, explosive performance is the optimal way to develop this capability.

one of the main benefits of the "relaxed" part of slow, relaxed practice is that it avoids unnecessary firing of uninvolved muscle fibers. In that light, perhaps the worst kind of training if pure speed is the objective would be to train as fast as possible with as much tension as possible. Training slowly provides the opportunity to trigger only those muscle fibers involved in the actual movement without exceeding the threshold whereby antagonistic muscle groups are unnecessarily fired.

Firing only the necessary fibers stimulates myelination of the involved motor nerves as well as strengthening the engrams of that particular motor nerve pattern in the motor cortex. Avoiding the firing of antagonistic or other unnecessary muscles means that with every firing of the desired motor cortex engram and its associated motor nerves, the pattern is strengthened, including the exclusion of unnecessary muscles. Generally speaking, the faster you move, the more the likelihood that you will also fire unnecessary muscle fibers with the movement. Unfortunately, the net effect is the strengthening of the firing of unnecessary muscles with the movement pattern, meaning slower movement ultimately than could otherwise be had.

[Socrastein]

Slow heavy lifts aren't done slowly: they're done as quickly as possible, but the significant mass limits the amount of acceleration achieved.

If I do "slow squats" with 315lbs, I'm trying to lift it as fast as possible (going slow with a heavy weight on purpose is just screaming for CNS burnout and injury) but you can only move a heavy weight so fast.

How does that compare to holding your leg in the air?

I think it's been established that slowing things down is great for learning technique and proper coordination, whether we're talking kicks or lifting. However, once someone has the technique down there's no longer a good reason I can think of to keep slowing things down. And if you do so, it's to reinforce technique.

The term "slow squats" keeps getting thrown around a lot but everyone is forgetting how much FORCE PRODUCTION is required to squat a really heavy weight at ALL, whether it's slow or not. It takes next to zero force to hold your leg in a static position; just enough to get some localized slow twitch endurance in your hip flexors and/or abductors primarily.

Is doing a controlled squat with a couple hundred pounds on your back similar to holding your leg in the air with no external weight on it? If you think so, I'd say you're only seeing the obvious details (the apparent speed) and missing the important bits (the power and force production, the amount of mass being moved, the type of muscle fibers being recruited, the involvement of the CNS, etc.)

[simon s]

Without re-reading all posts I cannot recall anyone saying that slow kicks is the only method any good for power delivery. Just that it should not be discounted as part of your training.

[fire cobra]

"What do you want from your training?" would be my question.

Muay Thai is awesome, but all the fighters are knackered before they are 35 years old (just to clarify here, I only use the Thai roundhouse and teep kicks, in addition to the shin kicks nowdays).

It is alright training for power and just throwing the kick, but and it is a big but, can you do it slowly. Why do I ask, because if you can't you have no control over your limbs, you leg is just carried by momentum.

When I first started at 17 I did loads of stretching, both dynamic and static. I also did loads and loads of work holding the back of the chair and kicking, such as shown in the Bill Wallace clip. I could raise my leg slowly, hold it at head height and then place in on a partners shoulder. So in other words I had control over my limbs.

Now although I don't stretch as much as I should, at 46 years old I can still do the spilts (just). I am convinced it is because the time spent doing static work has become embedded into my muscle memory.

For what it is worth I think I kick damn hard, but a lot of it is through body mechanics, relaxation, strength yes, but not just throwing the legs.

Power is nothing without control.

I have students who go to the gym and lift weights, which I did at their age. I always say the same thing to them. Come back when you are my age and do what I do.

You must train smart and stretch. Take the burdon away from your body which spends all day driving, at a desk, at work lifting and so on.

Anyone who thinks I am wrong (the best Thai Boxers included) can come and see me when I am 60 and tell me so

."but all the fighters are knackered before they are 35 years old"

Where did that stat come from! I know plenty of ex Nak Muay who are no way knackered and they are well past 35 years of age,Im 53 and can still kick,actually its Bill Wallace that had the double hip replacement many years ago!.

Also Simon whats a Muay Thai shin kick if it isnt a round kick?.:)

[Master Betty]

"but all the fighters are knackered before they are 35 years old"

Where did that stat come from! I know plenty of ex Nak Muay who are no way knackered and they are well past 35 years of age,Im 53 and can still kick,actually its Bill Wallace that had the double hip replacement many years ago!.

Also Simon whats a Muay Thai shin kick if it isnt a round kick?.:)

I know a lot as well. Far as I can tell they just retire because they cant keep that edge that they need to stay ranked at raja or lumpinee anymore and would make more money as a coach. Every single coach in thailand was an ex fighter but they seem pretty spry to me.

[Master Betty]

Slow heavy lifts aren't done slowly: they're done as quickly as possible, but the significant mass limits the amount of acceleration achieved.

If I do "slow squats" with 315lbs, I'm trying to lift it as fast as possible (going slow with a heavy weight on purpose is just screaming for CNS burnout and injury) but you can only move a heavy weight so fast.

How does that compare to holding your leg in the air?

I think it's been established that slowing things down is great for learning technique and proper coordination, whether we're talking kicks or lifting. However, once someone has the technique down there's no longer a good reason I can think of to keep slowing things down. And if you do so, it's to reinforce technique.

The term "slow squats" keeps getting thrown around a lot but everyone is forgetting how much FORCE PRODUCTION is required to squat a really heavy weight at ALL, whether it's slow or not. It takes next to zero force to hold your leg in a static position; just enough to get some localized slow twitch endurance in your hip flexors and/or abductors primarily.

Is doing a controlled squat with a couple hundred pounds on your back similar to holding your leg in the air with no external weight on it? If you think so, I'd say you're only seeing the obvious details (the apparent speed) and missing the important bits (the power and force production, the amount of mass being moved, the type of muscle fibers being recruited, the involvement of the CNS, etc.)

Finally, someone else seems to be responding directly to the OP with regards to power and flexibility... rather than technique.

[Master Betty]

No it's not. Especially when in reference to dynamic loaded movements like weighted squat jumps and squat jumps and all the other forms of movement like box jumps and and split lunge jumps. None of those would you start someone out on a the end of the progression curve. You'd start them out on the relatively static, slow and controlled style and move them forward. As a learning aid... and an aid to be able to point out where the strength, balance and flexibility need to be in a kick they're invaluable.



Because if a kick is broken down into it's movements over the arc of the kick and the person learning how to kick understands each phase of the kick and the posture and the recovery then they're more likely to spend less time programming bad motor skills into their muscle memory and then having to correct them when they can't get the kick down.

I've seen this for years and years. Much likely long before you were even training. I've also applied to this students for many years. I've seen what different methods of teaching do and how they apply to different demographics. Just because the Thai's do things a certain way doesn't mean it's the best way. Far from it... they have a very different style of learning based heavily on their culture. I've seen what happens when many westerners try to go this route of learning the basics of kicking. I've spent plenty of time helping to correct and essentially rewrite peoples movement patterns because no one ever took the time to break down a movement into components and go through it slowly and without power.

There are any number of muay thai trainers who do the same. That is the value of kicking slow. You have to widen your understanding of what goes into teaching someone about kicking. Or not... you're entirely free to stick with you existing knowledge base if you think that's sufficient - no one can force you to keep an open mind.



Again what I've posted is in relation to the OP. Whether or not you're able to see that is another matter entirely.

And once again you completely miss the mark. I can only assume one of a small number of possibilties. Either A) you've spent so long abroad that your understanding of English has degraded, B) You haven't even read the OP nevermind the whole thread or C) you're simply posting contradictory posts because of a childish dislike for me.

Let me say it again - oh and NOTHING you've said has provided any evidence to the contrary for this - kicking slow does NOT build flexibilty or power. I already said earlier that you MAY be able to correct a degree of technique by kicking SLOWER (note, i exclude crap like billy wally advocates), but correcting technique is NOT training power or flexibilty. At least, not in the way in which the OP quite obviously meant it. You've made contradictory statments to these points previously, yet every time you comment you either quote VERY selectively or out of context, then you start arguing the point on a subject which is always NEARLY what I was saying, but just different enough to be completely bollocks. Now if you're done being a contradictory menace to the internet can you please follow the rest of the thread a bit more dilligently and stop acting so goddamn childish.

If you've got an issue with me, at least have the balls to say it like a man instead of being contradictory, childish, lying, condescending, petty and above all else hypocritical. If you have to do that in a PM then go ahead, just stop pretending that you're so "above it all" when you're motivations are clearly no different you pretentious prig.

[Kuma]

Is doing a controlled squat with a couple hundred pounds on your back similar to holding your leg in the air with no external weight on it? If you think so, I'd say you're only seeing the obvious details (the apparent speed) and missing the important bits (the power and force production, the amount of mass being moved, the type of muscle fibers being recruited, the involvement of the CNS, etc.)

Now what if you practice those slow kicks with a pair of work boots on, or some ankle weights?

The OP asked if slow kicking could improve strength and flexibility in one's kicks. There are many different types of strength. Strength endurance is the combination of slow twitch and fast twitch to continue to display power over an extended period of time. Slow kicking can develop strength endurance, therefore it can develop strength. Part of flexibility is also strengthening through the range of motion, which if you want a higher kick the best way to get one is by practicing higher kicks. Slow kicking therefore can also improve flexibility.

Everything from this point on is everyone either agreeing or disagreeing on different training methodologies. Just ten years ago, the exercise physiology field would be scratching their heads at all the athletes we have now flipping tires, the differences between GPP and SPP, and all the other current training fads. Ten years from now everything will most likely be all different again. Just because things are "old" doesn't mean they're not useful at all to the modern athlete.

Kenji Midori, the fellow I posted before, has also coached many successful knockdown fighters and has emphasized slow squat kicks in their training too. And some of his fighters have brutal kicks. If you want stronger legs, look at the array of exercises you can do to strengthen them: back squats, front squats, overhead squats, deadlifts, pistols, lunges, single-leg deadlifts, sandbag squats, yoke walks, heavy carries, sled dragging, car pushing, plyometric jumps, step-ups, cleans, high pulls, etc. Regardless of which one or couple you pick, ALL will give you stronger legs.

Again, strength training is not mutually exclusive to anything. Get strong in one aspect of strength, you will get stronger in other areas. Gain endurance in one area, it will give you more in others. Granted, being awesome in one will not make you awesome at all others, but it will correlate.

[Socrastein]

Yes, there are many different types of strength. This has been brought up and addressed already. A couple times if I'm not mistaken.

The type of strength that you develop by holding your leg in the air (localized endurance of slow twitch fibers) is not the type of strength that helps you kick someone harder (rapid force development from fast twitch fibers in the hip and knee extensors).

While it can help improve technique, which ALWAYS improves your kick strength, you haven't added power to the human machine, you've allowed it to more efficiently apply the power it can already generate in a specific movement. If you want to improve the amount of power that your machine can generate, you lift heavy things, and lift semi-heavy things explosively.

This might sound shocking, but holding your arms out in front of you for 20 minutes straight will do nothing for your punching strength either ;)

Just ten years ago, the exercise physiology field would be scratching their heads at all the athletes we have now flipping tires, the differences between GPP and SPP, and all the other current training fads. Ten years from now everything will most likely be all different again. Just because things are "old" doesn't mean they're not useful at all to the modern athlete.

Again, you're referencing popular understanding of science with the "behind the scenes" action. We've known for longer than 10 years why the things you referenced work. As Charles Poliquin often says, "There's nothing knew under the sun".

Fads come and go, but the underlying science changes very little.

Kenji Midori, the fellow I posted before, has also coached many successful knockdown fighters and has emphasized slow squat kicks in their training too. And some of his fighters have brutal kicks.

Those fighters also probably brush their teeth every day, but I'm not about to conclude causation where I find association, especially if it contradicts simple facts about human physiology.

[Kuma]

The type of strength that you develop by holding your leg in the air (localized endurance of slow twitch fibers) is not the type of strength that helps you kick someone harder (rapid force development from fast twitch fibers in the hip and knee extensors).

However, if you want to keep kicking that person harder rather than just a handful of times, it's going to have some positive correlation. Again - I would rather have someone work a proper back squat than do some crazy Bosu ball squat, but if the crazy Bosu ball squat can help someone more than that, then that's what works for them.

This might sound shocking, but holding your arms out in front of you for 20 minutes straight will do nothing for your punching strength either ;)

That's because they're designed to be that way. Raising your leg as high as you can in the air is different due to the leverage. That's why an inverted body row is a heck of a lot easier than a pull-up, and an Iron Cross is way harder than a pull-up.

Again, you're referencing popular understanding of science with the "behind the scenes" action. We've known for longer than 10 years why the things you referenced work. As Charles Poliquin often says, "There's nothing knew under the sun".

Fads come and go, but the underlying science changes very little.

Hence why I emphasized "old." Things that are fashionable now were also used years ago. That's how kettlebells were "rediscovered", using just one example. That's why in his book from the early 1900s Arthur Saxon is scoffing at the critics who claim muscle mass will slow you down. The same principles and myths will continue to exist for a long time.

Slow kicks cover the training principles of specificity (training the kick) and overload (you can increase reps, sets, or reduce rest periods). Much like any body weight exercise, it can and will make you stronger. Once you reach a certain point, that is where you need to adjust it so you can continue to provide progressive resistance.

[Socrastein]

However, if you want to keep kicking that person harder rather than just a handful of times, it's going to have some positive correlation.

Slow-twitch endurance does not have a positive correlation to how many times you can explode with your fast twitch fibers. Like I said before, walking doesn't help you sprint.

Slow kicking is not specific to kicking, and it does NOT produce overload.

You repeatedly fail to justify the claims you make, even when they fly in the face of established science. It seems to me you just really can't let go of static kicking. That's fine. You love it. Keep doing it. But stop pretending it's founded in biomechanics. It's not.

[Kuma]

Slow-twitch endurance does not have a positive correlation to how many times you can explode with your fast twitch fibers. Like I said before, walking doesn't help you sprint.

"Supertraining" would disagree with you considering the example of strength endurance I produced.

Slow kicking is not specific to kicking, and it does NOT produce overload.

As I already mentioned before, you can produce overload with shorter rest periods, more reps, or even slowing the movement down. The main idea of overload is to create a greater stress than normal. You can accomplish that.

You repeatedly fail to justify the claims you make, even when they fly in the face of established science. It seems to me you just really can't let go of static kicking. That's fine. You love it. Keep doing it. But stop pretending it's founded in biomechanics. It's not.

I fail to see how, when the last two things you were just arguing against were overlooked. Is it optimal for some? No. But can it be a useful training medium for others? Yes.

[Socrastein]

Could you cite the Supertraining section you mentioned?

You've never addressed my point on minimal essential strain. The concept of overload doesn't apply unless the MES is met. I could write a progression for holding one's arm over the head that would slowly "overload" the movement for 12 weeks. And after 12 weeks it would have done exactly nothing for the client.

You haven't addressed the difference in force production. You haven't addressed the REASON why heavy squats are slow, and how that is different than a slow kick. You haven't explained how training your slow-twitch fibers somehow improves recruitment of your fast-twitch fibers.

You keep asserting that slow kicks are good because X. When X is rebutted, you don't acknowledge it, you just make a slightly different point.

I think that's a good place to start.

[slipthejab]

And once again you completely miss the mark. I can only assume one of a small number of possibilties. Either A) you've spent so long abroad that your understanding of English has degraded, B) You haven't even read the OP nevermind the whole thread or C) you're simply posting contradictory posts because of a childish dislike for me.

Ok let's take a look at this drivel:

A) This bit really says a lot more about your ability or lack thereof to respond to what's been posted regarding the subject and the conjecture in the thread. Obviously you're not able to come up with much so you decide it's better to attempt and attack someones English ability. Which I can easily assure you is just fine after living in Asia for more than a decade. Keep it up and you'll have plenty of time to train while you're on a ban.

B) Obviously I have read the thread but you simply haven't been able to respond with anything to several rather lengthy posts explaining my position and it's relevance to the subject matter at hand. Again... you might want to consider that before looking for cheap shots. Because you're not getting yourself any further ahead by them.

C) Because you either don't understand what's being posted or choose not you call it contradictory and then go on to call it childish. Well Master Betty I suggest you go back and reread what's been posted and why and how it actually factors into the discussion at hand because at this point you are simply grasping at straws for something to say.

Let me say it again - oh and NOTHING you've said has provided any evidence to the contrary for this - kicking slow does NOT build flexibilty or power.

Again as I've clearly pointed out it's a very valid tool used for teaching students so they can get their head around the ranges of motion, the flexibility and the strength that needs to be integrated into a full speed/power kick. That's it. Take a look. Go back and read it again. I'm pointing out the bigger picture here and you're busy stuck not seeing the forest for the trees.

I already said earlier that you MAY be able to correct a degree of technique by kicking SLOWER (note, i exclude crap like billy wally advocates), but correcting technique is NOT training power or flexibilty.

1) Grow up. If you can't refer to people properly when you full well know their names why do you even bother to post?

2) Anything that helps a person to understand the components of a kick even if they are broken down into separate components and not done at full speed do improve a persons ability over the broader spectrum of training. Again - you need to figure out that no one is arguing that slow kicking replaces kicks at full speed or power. They are like anything else supplemental to training. Just like plyometrics are.

At least, not in the way in which the OP quite obviously meant it.

Well welcome to the world of MAP. Thread drift happens and no one should have to be forced to listen to page after page of your ridiculous rants because you can't figure out that the horizon is slightly broader than you're able to imagine. Deal with it.


You've made contradictory statments to these points previously, yet every time you comment you either quote VERY selectively or out of context, then you start arguing the point on a subject which is always NEARLY what I was saying, but just different enough to be completely bollocks.

Yawn. Absolute rubbish. Pull your shirt down.


Now if you're done being a contradictory menace to the internet can you please follow the rest of the thread a bit more dilligently and stop acting so goddamn childish.

Keep it genius. Let's see how far this tact gets you.

If you've got an issue with me, at least have the balls to say it like a man instead of being contradictory, childish, lying, condescending, petty and above all else hypocritical. If you have to do that in a PM then go ahead, just stop pretending that you're so "above it all" when you're motivations are clearly no different you pretentious prig.

Welcome to a ban smart guy. :)

[Kuma]

Socrastein - I'll try to dig up Supertraining when I get home and PM you the results (not at home right now so no access to it). However, I also recognize that you're not a fan of yoga either, which is along the same lines of what we're talking about, yet I think yoga is a great supplementary exercise for martial artists (though I'm certainly no mutant pretzel like Van Zandt). I think we're admittedly beating a dead horse by this point and may have to agree to disagree.

[SenseiMattKlein]

I might suggest people look at this article. This guy ran a trial on slow exercises that showed improvements in strength on the order of 50% versus the normal way of lifting. Why? Because it makes it almost impossible to cheat by using momentum "swinging" movements if you practice your form correctly by doing it slow. Has anyone here actually tried these slow kicks? They are not easy. If done correctly you will feel a burn that will make you realize what a workout you've had.
http://www.ehow.com/way_5243265_slow-burn-exercise.html

[simon s]

Also Simon whats a Muay Thai shin kick if it isnt a round kick?.:)

Just for clarification I did not say Muay Thai shin kicks, I said shin kicks, obliques and the like. Stamping kicks if you like.

[Van Zandt]

In terms of the OP's question regarding slow kicks and flexibility, there is an important distinction to be made. Flexibility is range of motion; mobility is control through that range of motion. Some authors refer to mobility as "static-active flexibility" and "kicking strength." Mobility is an integral part of an athlete's training program, even for full-contact fighters who use full-speed and full-power "whipping" kicks (refer to my previous reply), because mobility enables him or her to exercise better control of the limb along the plane of motion in dynamic stretches. Performing kicks and dynamic stretches slowly, and holding the limb in place at the apex of the movement, are good exercises for developing mobility. They can be done either as a standalone exercise or as a drill in a warm up preceding the main part of the workout in which movements are done with steadily increasing speed and range of motion (and which are specific to the skill being practised).

Regardless of whatever arguments have been raised in this thread thus far, the importance of developing passive (static) flexibility cannot be overlooked. Passive flexibility is integral to all other forms of flexibility (static-active, dynamic, etc). As I have already said, passive flexibility is range of motion. How do you expect to move through the range of motion if you do not have it?

As Kevin Costner famously said when referring to high kicks, "Do splits and they will come."