Value/Effectiveness of the SIDE KICK in 2007 compared to Bruce Lee's day?

Is the Side Kick as effective today as it was back in Bruce Lee's day? As many say it is not or much harder to land these days.

Many MMA people say this , examples rarely used in K1 or MMA - UFC, Pride , etc. Bas Rutten in recent 'Black Belt' (US mag) articles on what techniques are effective for the ring & the street, says of the side kick only a few he has ever seen has the skill to land it well such as Don 'The Dragon' Wilson. He also says that although the kick to the knee or leg with it for the street is not practical, he has never seen nor heard of anyone getting hurt with it in the street or legs broken, and for the ring he hasd never seen a knockout with a sidekick.

My take - it is as effective today as it was in Bruce Lee's day but would agree with Bas Rutten not many can land it that well or train it that hard to be able to do so in the ring MMA or K1, or in the street. Kicking the knee as Bruce Lee advocated , works! and is effective but again most are not good enough at it to land it or are not powerful enough.

The way Bruce Lee sidekicked to the knee for real in JKD not in his movies ,means coming off the floor almost no cocking the leg and without full bend in leg for power to execute the kick. Many in JKD probably feel they have a killer low side kick, the reality - probably few do. Most to do real damage probably need to raise knee higher (than opponents knee or target) then strike down like stomp , as Bas Rutten notes - you try it that way the opponent will see it coming a mile away and avoid.

In MMA & K1 they use frontal stance (Muay Thai type stance) , harder to throw side kick from that. Unless you are very fast with it, harder not to get taken down to the mat when executing it. Due to the guard of many position of hands , harder to hit the front of body with it, easier to hit whilst they are executing a technique like punching when they open up but gain - requires lot more skill & timing. Most MMA people are weak with the back kick (Chuck Lidell, George St Pierre, etc) never mind the side kick!, compared to knockout back kick like Benny The Jet Urquidez's , etc they are poor with it and due it in MMA more like a push not an explosive rib cracker.

INTERESTING SIDE NOTE & NOT WELL KNOWN (at least don't think it is?) :- Don 'The Dragon' Wilson was due to fight Matt Huges in the UFC , but it did not happen as they dropped the money before contest, would have been very intersting to see Hughes deal with someone in side stance (not usual frontal stance) and with a lethal side kick.

For the street & the ring the side kick can keep an opponent off you , like the Straight Lead, as opposed to hook punch or rear Muay Thai kick, where opponent can still get in on you e.g. for street if he has weapon stick or knife better to keep opponent offyou than allow him close in.

 

Savateurs use the side kick to good effect in competitive matches

 

There have been many fighters whohave used the side kick with devastating effect in full contact competition, both past and present. Joe Lewis, Bill Wallace, Benny Urquidez, Don Wilson, Rick Roufus (Who was still competitive in K-1 until his knee blew out a couple of years back, but if you watch fights from his prime when he was just dominating guys like Hoost and Ramon Dekkers, he was truly impressive), and Cung Le. I agree that the side kick does take a lot more work to be an effective tool. This is why many do not include it in their arsenal, but IMO it is worth the investment.

A legitimate concern in using the side kick is about the stance though. Most of the guys listed fought under full contact rules and not Muay Thai or MMA and the side stance that many prefer to deliver side (and hook) kicks from is very vulnerable with these expanded rules and targets. The side stance really is a luxury that can only be afforded by a rule set that restricts the counters against it. Still, this can be overcome by working on the transition from a forward-facing stance to a side hip position as you bridge the gap or as you clear. Many modern fighters don't put a heavy emphasis on kicking, especially in combination, but if they work out this transition, I suspect this will be a tool of future champions.

 

While I absolutely agree that Rick Roufus was an amazing fighter - he never dominated Dekkers... because he never fought Dekkers.

Not that it takes anything away from him because Roufus sure did have some brutal battles some of the top notch fighters of his day...

Changpuek Kiatsonkrit
Carter Williams
Stan 'The Man' Longinidis
Ernesto Hoost (twice)
Jerome LeBanne
Maurice Smith
Rob Kaman (twice)

But it's also worth noting that Roufus never fought under Muay Thai rules (knee's, elbows and leg kicks allowed)... so there is always the lingering question as to how far he would have gotten under MT rules. He wouldn't fight other fighters under their rules... but many fighters stepped up and fought him under his rules.

At any rate... no sane person would want to get caught out by the punching power that Roufus had. Just massive. For those that don't know he was also a professional boxer. Though he was never attained the same level at boxing in the pro ranks that he mastered in fighting in the kickboxing ranks. Anyone who has an interest in competitive fighting can't call themselves well researched until they watch most or all of the Rick Roufus fights. He was a force to be reckoned with.

His pro kickboxing bouts:

Rick Roufus vs Tommy Richardson (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Gerald Murphy (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Tony Smith (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Lavelle Robinson (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Stan Longinidis (Kick boxing IKF)
Rick Roufus vs Jordan Kepeers (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Kevin El Whaley (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs William Knorr II (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Jersey Long (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Rich Lopez (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs J.C. Owens (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Oliver Miller (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Bob Thurman (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Andy Mayo (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Marek Piotrowski I (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Michael Mcdonald (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Ernesto Hoost I (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Ernesto Hoost II (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Rob Kaman I (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Rob Kaman II (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Luv Verheye (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Josef Warchol (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Igor Sharapov (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Jean Yvves Theriault (Full contact karate rules)
Rick Roufus vs Champeuk Kiatsoncrit (Mixed rules Muay thai and Full contact karate)
Rick Rofus vs Cyril Diabate (Muay thai rules)
Rick Roufus K-1 Fights (In K-1 events list)

*it's worth noting this list doesn't list many of his K-1 fights actually... because he also fought Dewey Cooper, Francisco Fihlo, Kurt Hasley and Mike McDonald. Roufus' fight with McDonald came to a very controversial end and there was much issue/talk of a torn ACL and K-1 rules keeping Roufus from taking the 2004 K-1 title. He had previously KO'd Mike McDonald cold to win the IKF Full Contact Rules World Title in 1994 (it only took him 43 sec. of the first round to suss the KO).

 

I think it terms of sidekicks being used competitively in full contact bouts... some of the best examples you're going to see are going to be in San Da rules tournaments from China. Some of them have been devastating.

Here's a side kick instructional showing the sidekick in it's current incarnation in China: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Az0rXBj6bt4&mode=related&search="]YouTube[/ame]

Here's a bit of HL from the Kings of San Da fights in China - note the sidekicks:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRwWMEGOTh4&mode=related&search="]CHINA THE KING OF SANDA COMPETITION-5. - YouTube[/ame]

and here's a bit more from the same series:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg7-dG8gWG8&mode=related&search="]CHINA Sanda wang-7 (Liu Hailong VS Zheng Yuhao) - YouTube[/ame]

No one can ever accuse the Chinese of not being game for a scrap.
Sidekicks and all.

 

err... do you really think Don 'The Dragon' Wilson would have had a snowflakes chance in hell against Matt Hughes under a UFC rules format?!

Sorry but that's just absolutely absurd. He was long past his fighting days to even consider taking on Matt Hughes. He's have been a breakfast snack for Hughes at that point in his life.

Furthermore... despite Don's supposed ability to fight and beat anyone under any rules... the reality is actually different:

source: Ajarn Mike Miles
http://www.mikemiles.com/

Don't believe the myths until you've done the research. Below is one of the shots from Don's mysteriously disappearing bout in Thailand. Note he's being kicked in the neck by nak muay Samart Prasamit.

 

Kwan Jung,

Most of those you mentioned did not have very devastating side kicks - Bill Wallace was more a side kick jab , I don't think he ever did any real damage with it or ever knocked anyone out (may be wrong but have seen many of his fights) / Joe Lewis used it to good effect in point fighting but it was point fighting back in the days were his opponents generally had poor footwork so could not easily avoid them, in Full Contact he wasn't so good with and I think no knockouts with it either (he probably had no kick knockouts in full contact? Despite his the Greatest Fighter claim in his era the competition was weak overall and Lewis's record was something like 16-8)/ Benny The Jet weak side kick , no knock outw with it or any real damage, did have strong spinning back kick though. Don 'The Dragon' Wilson has strong side kick, but not sure if he ever knocked anyone out with it in all his fights?

 

Slip The Jab,

You say Rick Rufous never fought under Muay Thai rules, then in list of fihts you give one near bottom was Muay Thai rules in brackets (Cyril Diabate)? Or you not incl. that as it did not include elbows or something? Many pro Muay Thai fights around the world have stopped elbow usage, too easy to cut people and stop fight early, but it certainly does not take away from how tough the fighters are. Even in Thailand the traditional elbow technique coming down on top of head is baned as people were getting skulls cracked with it.

 

I think the side-kick is under-rated in general, but I also think it's possible that Lee over-rated it. Look at the prevalence of karate and kung-fu around at the time Jun Fan/JKD was being developed. The idea of round-kicking someone in the leg 'til they couldn't stand was something of a foreign concept, while guys like Chuck Norris and Joe Lewis were side-kicking their way to medals in competitions that didn't allow leg kicks or takedowns.

I think you're right in that most fighters don't properly train the side kick, if they train it at all. However, the round kick is, I think, much more utilitarian. While the side kick is best used to target the midsection, the round kick can be aimed virtually from head to toe. Or at least head to ankle. I also think the round kick is a more natural motion, and even in matches where the competitors use the sidekick with some frequency, the round kick seems to be thrown at least five times as often.

I also question it's effectiveness as far as knee destructions go. I've trained it, invited folks to try it, and have tried it myself a few times. The result seems to be that, yes, it hurts, but the bent possition of the knee in a fighting stance stabilizes the joint pretty well. Conceivably, if the leg was straight it could work, but who walks around like that?

Probably the same thing that happened every other time a striker with no takedown defense faced a grappler: takedown, followed by a maulling. I'm currious as to where you got this info. Wilson's association with the UFC, as a commentator, seems to have ended back in '96, two years before Hughes even began fighting. Hughes made three appearences in the UFC in '99 and 2000, when Don made his two-fight "comeback". Considering that at this time Wilson was concentrating on a minimalist kickboxing career, and Hughes was a 2-1 in the UFC and far from a hot commodity, the dates just don't seem to match up.

Anyway, no doubt Lee was skilled with the sidekick, but he seems to be the exception rather than the rule. Of course he'd emphasize it if he was good at it, but even for fighters trained in it, it largely seems to run secondary to the round kick. And, of course, punching.

 

There is a difference between modified MT rules and MT rules. Rufous never fought under MT rules. He fought under modified MT rules. Thus no elbows, knees or leg kicks.

Not quite. If a bout is held under the original and complete Muay Thai rules then elbows are still legal and valid strikes. In fact they're still very common. This last year we've had several fighters win their bouts in the I-1 and the X-Plosion competitions because of elbows. (Note that K-1 is NOT Muay Thai rules by any stretch!!!)Nathan 'Carnage' Corbett/Aus. being one of them. As well the Kings Cup in Thailand has always allowed elbow strikes.

Not sure where you got your info on the the downward elbow strike being illegal in Thailand but it's wrong. It's still a legal move in for nak muays. I was involved in the Kings Cup/S-1/Xplosion events and it was legal for our fighters and for all the fighters involved.

Can you cite your sources that show that Muay Thai rules in Thailand have changed?

The source of rules in Thailand and the basic reference for the vast majority of sanctioning bodies for Muay Thai is the World Muay Thai Council (WMC) here is their list of fouls:

source: http://www.wmtc.nu/html/wmc03rle.html

It's worth noting that many people from a kickboxing background have had a problem with elbow being allowed. Benny 'The Jet' Urquidez was a rather vocal opponent of elbows. Yet despite his take on elbow strikes... Muay Thai is more popular and stronger today than ever before. It's worth noting that strikes to the groin by knees were only made fouls in the mid '80s!!!

 

Slip The Jab,

Don 'The Dragon Wilson' Thai fight I spoke to him face to face on it, the match was well rigged in the Thai's favour - bigger gloves so Wilson could KO him so easily with hands, forced Wilson to drop weight fast & he even went in the ring with a fever! The Thai one but it was a close match. Besides so what? In his prime under full contact rules Don would have probably beat up any Muay Thai fighter. Going into different rules against someone that fights under them all the time is never easy, it's like being Judi champ & jumping into BJJ touranment , very different.

Benny The Jet fought Thais twice I think & lost, again very rigged in Thais favour, heavier big gloves so Benny could not KO him with hands. In The Jets & Don's fights with Thais they all went the distance I think.

Don & Benny are probably best Full Contact fighters ever , as they fought & beat the best with high record. People like Joe Lewis despite self proclaimed 'The Greatest Fighter of All Time' fought mainly bums or far lesser competition than Don faced - Alexio, Jean Yves, etc.

As for Don vs Matt Hughes sure Matt is used to MMA more but anything could happen! If Don blasted him hard and connected well with just one side kick he could do serious damage to him especially as Matt is small, have you seen Don hit a heavy bag with side kick? Geez, he hits hard (check out 'Modern Warriors' DVD U.S. edition with extra footage you see him on bag). Matt has been dazed with hook/rear thai kicks (George St Pieree caught him hard) , could he take a hard straight kick? Also take downs against someone in side stance easier or harder, I'd say harder.

Don The Dragon Wilson at around 50 is still in shape, he told me he would absolutely maul & play with Cung Le under Full Contact rules!

 

Callsignfuzzy,

From Don Wilson himself & his manager! regarding fighting Matt Hughes, you can email him and ask , it is true.

 

I'll have to disagree... the footage of the fights is available online. Have you seen it? It's been kicked around on more discussion forums than one - for at least several years now. If you want to say Don was one of the best 'full contact' fighters there was... sure... that's not really the issue though... (I'm assuming you mean under the FC ruleset)... but what I do find a bit silly is when you go on the record as he did saying that he will/has fought anyone/anywhere under any rules and win or has won... well then that's obviously a different story. Furthermore when your organization removes the fight from your record not once but twice... well that pretty much speaks for itself I think. 'Nuf said.

To be honest I really couldn't care... I'm not really at that fussed about 'full contact' rules. Why would I be... I think a far better ruleset is the full Muay Thai rules.

Sorry dude... but look at the age gaps and training differences. Anything could happen? Pigs are more likely to fly out of my butt than Don Wilson win against Matt Hughes in a UFC rules bout.

I've never frankly been that impressed with Cung Le to be honest.
And again... what you theorize he would do with Cung Le is all fine and well but has zero bearing on Don Wilson and Matt Hughes. It didn't happen, it won't happen. Why? Becuase Don is way smarter than to take someone on under rules he's never fought under and try to match skills he doesn't have (eg. takedown defense/grappling etc.) when he's long past his fighting prime. It's as simple as that. All the impressive vids of Don kicking a bag aren't going to change that.

None of which really takes away anything from Don Wilson. He was an impressive fighter. Do I think he beat Samart? Nope. Not even close. Track down the footage and score it yourself. Did Don Wilson take all comers under any rules and win? Nope. It's a matter of record. Plain and simple. Is he still an impressive fighter and person? Yes absolutely.

 

Here's a fun clip...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhqqVJ2O224]Karatemania!!![/ame]

Some oldschool FC fights there for ya.

 

rufous did kick some **** there slippy

 

i got as far as "matt is small..."

 

OK, can you find an independent, unbiased source? Because again, during the period when Wilson was working with the UFC, commentating and, quite frankly, boasting about past glories, Matt Hughes wasn't even fighting, much less fighting in the UFC, or again being a big-name draw enough to warrent him being the UFC's choice to take down a kickboxing champ.

Sure, anything could happen, but with the exception of a lucky punch, a slip, or, say, a pack of flying monkeys invading the cage, I don't see Don taking this. Sure he's in shape, but far past his prime and again, no apparent takedown defense. Hughes isn't gonna stand & trade with him, he's gonna take him down, trap him, and beat on his head until pink stuff oozes out of his ears & nose.

According to this Wilson fought between 170lbs and 190lbs. According to this Matt Hughes walks around above 190lbs a month before his fight. They're comparable in size.

Not taking away from his status as a kickboxer, but he'd get destroyed in an MMA fight, especially against an explosive grappler. Shoot, since he's retired from all active fighting, he can make all the claims he wants, since he's not about to step up and prove them.

To bring things back to the topic, I'd say he's an example of someone with an excellent side kick, but we have to be aware that the environments he used them in never had grappling and normally didn't allow leg kicks. So what does that say about the side kick's place in the totallity of the fight?

 

Do you have any actual empirical backup for this? I agree with Kwan Jang that a side-on stance is more of a hazard than a boon when takedowns are allowed.

Sprawling has been pretty firmly established as the most reliable counter against many takedown attempts. And a sprawl from a more squared-off position is a lot easier than a sprawl from side-on. In side-on, the lead foot has a lot further to go to be even with the rear foot (as in a sprawl). And the hips have further to rotate. Both hip position and foot placement being central to making the sprawl work.

Besides, think about the angles. If someone throws a sidekick, the foot comes in on a straight line. Which means that sidestepping a couple of degrees in either direction gets you off that line. And sidestepping in one of those directions immediately puts you at the side kicker's back. And once a takedown artist is behind you, takedown defense is going to get radically more difficult.

So I'm curious to hear why you think the side-on makes takedowns harder.

As for the original question, I don't know. If you watch footage of Bruce Lee really rocking the bag with a sidekick, it's very often that skipping sidekick, where the base foot travels behind the kicking leg. Doing that automatically chambers the kick. Couple that with the forward momentum and you get a fair amount of power. But you're citing the un-chambered low-line sidekick to the knee. And while it doesn't feel good, as has already been said, against a bent knee, it's really not all that catastrophic.

I think Chris Kent and Tim Tackett drew a distinction (which others may too) between a side kick and the "jeet tech." The side kick was chambered to generate force. The jeet tech was more of the straight leg rising up. Served more to disrupt balance, snuff forward momentum, draw the opponent's attention, and elicit a reaction than do actual, flat-out damage. As an entry into trapping or boxing, for instance.

I suspect, also, that this is partly a case of taking weapon theory and applying it to empty hand. Lee was heavily influenced by Western fencing. And in fencing, it's perfectly valid that the foil should come into play without being chambered. It simulates a sword, after all. It doesn't need much momentum to do its thing. An impact weapon is utterly different in that regard though. It needs momentum against most targets (with notable exceptions, such as the finger jab to the eyes).

There are certainly arguments for the sidekick. But in my experience, the round kick is a much higher-percentage technique.


Stuart

 

SlipTheJab,

Actually Don is well versed in Grappling, he has trained with Gewne Lebell, & his top student Gokor and others. Worth noting too Matt Hughes stand up is - pretty crap CRAP! So for however long it remained on the feet Don would have an advantage for sure & Wilson obviously hits harder with feet & hands & has KO'd many, Hughes has never KO'd anyone with stand up as far as I know, I may be wrong there. It's Hughes territory but again anything could happen, stand up Don would maul him & Don would not be so easy to take down he is well versed in grappling and takedown defence. Of course Hughes would have the advantage on the floor. Age difference you say , so what? Don returned to Win a title just a few years back.

The footage of Benny / Don's fight with the Thais - post some links! To the full fights, not very short clips. I've only ever seen small clips.

Only my personal view pure Muay Thai fights bore me to absolute tears, seen one you've seen them all basically.

 

Again... you can nuthug Don 'The Dragon' Wilson all you want that doesn't change the fact that him being well out of his fighting prime taking on an up and coming MMA fighter is going to bode well for Don's health.

Again... do your homework. I've provided you with a ton of info. Get your Google-Fu up. I'm not here to do your homework for you.

Compete in Muay Thai and then maybe I might care. Until then learn to actually be able to back up what you post. Actually that you take this view goes a ways towards explaining why you are under some misunderstandings about Muay Thai and legal strikes in competition. It also sheds some light on why you think when someone is struck on the top of the head with an elbow their head instantly shatters into a million pieces. Posting wrong information in regards to Muay Thai rules etc. doesn't do any wonders for your credibility.