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

That you try to compare nak muays to Mohammed Ali or Sugar Ray Leonard only bears out that you really don't understand much about either sport.

Seriously... boxing isn't Muay Thai... neither is Muay Thai boxing. They are very different arts. Ask anyone who's been a competitive fighter in either. Or actually try your hand at either yourself.

The stance in Muay Thai is a completely different stance than in boxing. For good reason. The foot-in-bucket boxing stance isn't going to get you very far in Muay Thai. Primarily because if you're foots in the bucket you're not going to be very good at checking incoming kicks with your rear leg. Nor are you going to be able to cross check effectively.

Seriously... why would you come on a forum and blather on about something you obviously are not well versed in?!?

 

Slip The Jab' oh guru of all knowledge , great sage equal of heaven and all that. I did boxing for many years and fought as amatuer, did Thai boxing just under 4 years too incl. training and sparring with some pros. Competed in full contact also. And eh your experience in both is..........?

In terms of comparison the majority of boxers will move around and avoid hits, they have better footwork and can move better because they are not flat footed. Sure some will stand flat & go toe to toe in wars, but generally they move around. Same generally for kickboxers.

Thai boxers are usually flat footed or at least one foot flat, therefore their mobility is restricted , they cannot move that fast laterally. It is rare to see a Thais boxer move arond well, and most especially Thais themselves adopt the macho 'I'll show you I can take anything you've got by just standing there and taking it.

I'd be delighted to spar with you full contact, where are you - 'keyboard warriors' are my absolute favs to spar with.

 

OK, do you study P'ai Lum King Fu by any chance? Train under Mr. Wilson? You're nutriding something fierce here. I like him, I really do, but jeez...

and this...

this is just plain stupid.

 

Domino,

'This is plain stupid' latter part above, oh no it isn't! If MMA was all out real fighting like Gladiators in olden days or to the death or close enough, then I GUARANTEE it would have evovled differently. People would definitely developed their stand up beyond the crude & basic Muay Thai style which makes it quite easy for people to take you down, and makes it hard for you to keep them off you with limited straightline attacks. In MMA someone good on the ground couldn't care if they go there, some want the fight to go there; if it was real little or no rules, even the most skilled grapplers wouldn't rush to go to the ground when good chance of losing eye,getting nose bitten off , etc (look at any UFC fight on ground & imagine the ample possibilities to do any of those).

There is definitely the MYTH what works in MMA will work in the street, or if it doesn't work in MMA it won't work in the street, this is myth but believe me very widespread. You think Muay Thai style stand up is basically the best or ultimate stand up for the street as you see in MMA like UFC? It works well in the cage or competition, that does not necessitate it will do the same in the street. I've trained with Thai boxer that came second in world championships, his opinion Muay Thai is very poor art for the street , unless opponent backs away or is timid where you can basically use them as a punchbag, he also said even when no.2 in championships he never felt that confident with Thai boxing in the street to defend himself.

 

Domino,

Not 'nutriding' Don Wilson either. Name me some Thai boxers that went to USA fought the best Kickboxers and beat them at their own game (kicks above the belt)? Never heard of one, there may be some but I honestly can't recall any. People talk of Don Wilson, Benny The Jet losing to Thai boxers (usually on pro Thai boxing sites) , so what? Don went to Thailand and fought there, which Thais took on the kickboxers at their own game & won? Each has as much significance, at least the US kickboxers were willing to take on the Thais at their own game.

 

Yes, it is. It is the argument of the weak. Weak minds, and weaker logic. It's a terribly old cliche, and even your precious object of wet dreams has acknowledged that no way could he stand up to a modern MMA fighter. Go watch King of the Cage, which he commentates for. He repeats it ad nauseum, providing me with colorful signature material.

Oy vey. You have to do kung fu, don't you? Damn, this is beyond silly. Let me explain something... despite what you claim, kicking knees, not as easy as you've been deluded into thinking. Kicking the knee in just the right spot with just the right amount of force to break it, even harder than you've been deluded into thinking. As for the rest, go watch a Vale Tudo match from its heyday. You'll be surprised to learn you're full of crap.

Wow, more anecdotes with NO PROOF. You have no credibility. And you still didn't answer my questions regarding your riding of the nut of Don Wilson... (use one post, I don't have time to repsond to four and five, thank you very much)...

Uhm, yeah, you are nutriding Don Wilson. HARD.

And I did American Rules (read ISKA rules) kickboxing many years ago. No way in hell would I compare it to modern Thai boxing. No way at all.

 

I swear to Krishna, it's like he's blind or something. Or stuck in 1988.

If I were you, I don't know what I'd be most embarassed by: the fact that after training Thai for four years that you apparently didn't actually learn anything, or the fact that in a little while you're gonna find out why Slip is one of the most respected boxing and MT pundits on MAP. All ya had to do to save yourself from that last one was to just skim through a few other posts he's made.

See, that's something else to be embarassed by. You could just have looked at his profile... or again read a dozen or so posts of his... and discovered that he's all over Asia. Mostly Hong Kong, I take it. And you're calling out someong who's an eighteen-hour plane ride away. Brilliant.

For starters, here's a bit of historical accuracy: gladiatorial events were hardly ever to the death. They actually put these guys on a diet of barley to increase the layers of fat in their skin, so a surface cut, delivered for entertainment and not to kill, wouldn't harm the tissue beneath, but would make the crowd think that things were serious. Kinda like modern pro-wrestlers who "juice", or cut open their scalp with concealled razors.

Second, I fail to see how MMA would have evolved differently, unless you can give me another way to attack someone besides throws, takedowns, jointlocks, slams, clinchfighting, kicks, punches, knees, elbows, ground strikes, stomps (legal in some events) and headbutts (legal in early events).

Tell me how you think it would have developed.

The alternative to the head-on stance, which allows for sprawling (you may not have heard of it, but it's THE basic takedown defense), is a side-on stance, which actually makes it easier to take you down. See some of my earlier posts in this thread.

The "limited straightline attacks"... what, like the roundhouse kick? Guess not. Maybe the push kick? Rarely used in MMA anyway. Straight punches? More efficient, generally, than circular ones. What are you talking about?

This has been covered by me and others so many times that even I am growing weary of explaining it. It's a little like explaining that you can't get AIDS from a toilet seat: everyone should know the deal by now, and it's exasperating when it comes up, but I just can't let this ignorance slide. Some important fights in the early days of Vale Tudy/NHB/MMA:

Nov. 12, 1993: At the inagural UFC event, Gerard Gordeau bit Royce Gracie as the latter was applying a chokehold. Gracie still got the hold in, and Gordeau tapped.

April 20, 1995: Yuki Nakai was gouged in the eyes by his opponent in Vale Tudy Japan, 1995, before finishing him, undaunted, by heel hook. His opponent, incidentally, was Gerard Gordeau. Kind of a jerk, this guy.

Two weeks earlier, on April 7, we had a non-Gordeau gouging incident. John Hess was able to defeat Andy Anderson, gouging his eyes in the process. Two things should be noted. The first is that under the UFC's rules at the time, he was not disquallified, but simply fined. The second is that Hess, at 6'7" and 300lbs, would probably have beaten the 5'6", 240lbs Anderson anyways, by virtue of being gargantuan.

Even today, figters occationally get gouged. Sometimes the ref stops it, but not always. Ya know what it changes? Nothing.

A non-MMA event, but anecdotal evidence: my buddy Goose is stationed, with the Army, in Afghanistan. One night a soldier got drunk and refused to be led back to the barracks. A scuffle ensued, and Goose applied a RNC (rear naked choke, guess I have to translate for the uninitiated). He was bitten on his finger in the process, but still completed the move and restrained the guy.

Why would something that works in a full-contact, limited-rules environment suddenly STOP working in a full-contact, no-rules environment? Are you suggesting that a choke no longer works, perhaps because on the street your opponent's arteries magically morph into copper piping? Are you saying that a knee that would have knocked a guy out in competition suddenly has the impact of a Nerf ball? There are more variables in a street confrontation, and some of the strategies used in MMA would have to change or be abandoned, but as far as raw techniques go, you're quite wrong, once again.

Not saying it's the "ultimate", per se, but I can't imagine that knowing how to punch, kick, knee, elbow, and fight from the clinch would be a disadvantage.

Go and find some honest-to-Vishnu evidence instead of just spouting off theories. This will add a little thing called "credibility" to your posts. You'll like credibility. Most of us do.

 

Domino,

English your first language? Just to check , if not appreciate the effort.

Your English interpretation skills are particularly lacking, in first paragraph below I never even mentioned Don Wilson in that paragraph what has he got to do with anything? You having a laugh write - I said that MMA would have evolved very differently if it was real no rules , you say it wouldn't have?

They would not have different defences on the ground to stop gettung eyes gouged, pokes in eyes, fish hooking, biting, ear ripping, etc? They would roll about doing mounts , etc as they do in MMA like UFC with no regard for losing an eye, etc? After getting eye gouged, finger rammed hard into eye to damage eye or blind person they would just continue as normal trying to submit the person , or ground and pound like you see in UFC. MMA like UFC evolved the way it did due to the rules & restrictions, and the cage tactics used pushing off cage , size of it, etc. If rules were different or no rules at all, you are saying it would not have evovled differently? That could define as you termed it the 'arguement of the weak'! Separate weight classes/ changing rules - no kicking oponent on ground / bringing in rounds - changed things in the UFC. Change it to limit of 30 secs on the ground till you get stood up by ref. / straight kicks to legs - side & front/ allow eye jabs, gouging, scratching eyes, etc would change things again. You are saying otherwise with a straight face, which is very alarming indeed.

2nd paragraph never mentioned anything about kicking the knees in the paragraph, yet you go on about it, again the English interpretation skills are not too polished.

As for no way you would compare Kickboxing to Thai boxing, insinuating Thai boxing is far superior. Well, you are entitled to your opinion, many share it with you. I'm not advocating either is superior.

As you dodged the question last time here it is one more time - name some Thai boxers that went to the U.S. or anywhere else and beat Kickboxers at their own game (kicks above the belt, or no knees and elbows)? Don Wilson went to Thailand to fight them at their own game, as did others, Benny fought Thai boxers, etc. My point which I think you missed again the English interpretation not being too strong - people make big deal of some Kickboxers losing to Thai fighters, at least they took them on at their own game, vice versa when & where did any Thai boxers do it - go to America or anywhere else beat the top Kickboxers at Kickboxing, there is far more money in it also for them? Maybe some have done it, I've never heard of any though.

Are you saying you think MMA is the best art for the street or anything in it can be used on the street well? Again your language skills mean it's hard to tell what you are saying , or what points you are trying to make. Commando Krav Maga (Moini Aizik), Krav Maga (IKMF/IKMA), Systema, Jun Fan JKD, etc are all street effective arts that look little like MMA as you see in UFC, they all contain a great deal of techniques that are effective that you would never use in MMA competition. As I said many think if it's not used in MMA it is useless for the street, or MMA type fighting is all you need for the street and the most effective, as I stated before this is myth but a popular one, I know many that think that.

 

lol.... a thread about the supposed superiority of the sidekick has now become a challenge has it?

Tell ya what Kickin' It...

You hop on a plane to HK and it's on. Only let's not beat around the bush with half measures.... eg. sparring. If it's gonna go... let's do it right. Seriously... who challenges someone to a sparring match?!

Surely you don't want to come all this way to just spar. Surely you're going to want to add to your fight record/book no doubt.

Bring your 8oz. gloves... bring your gumshield and your corner people and we can set it up. I've got no problem with that at all. I can fight anywhere from 80kg to 90kg. We can fight full MT rules (eg. elbows and knees) or modified (no elbows, knees allowed) - or we can fight under straight boxing rules (am or pro is fine).

We can go for broke and fight under some sort of MMA style ruleset if you're keen. We've got enough rings here and enough qualified non-partial refs (WMC/WBC/HKMT) for any of the above listed formats that it's not a problem.

You're more than welcome to rock on up with your uber sidekick.

It's got to be after Dec. 15th as I'm already committed to a bout on that date... but other than that I have no commitments. Not that I expect you to show up... but if you do I'm game to throw down... that is if you're prepared to actually walk the walk now that you've talked the talk.

As for you're whole take on boxing/MT... frankly your not dropping science on anyone... if you'd bothered to actually read more of what's been posted on MAP copious amounts of times by myself (and others)... you'd easily see that I've gone into great detail to cover the differences between nak muays and boxers - everything from technique to stance to ring generalship. In fact I've covered it several times. Use the search function... you can save yourself from having to play Captain Obvious.

You gotta love MAP... a thread about t3h d34d733 sidekick in the JKD forum becomes a grudge match.
Abso-frickenlute comedy!

 

Calsignfuzzy,

By 'limited straightline attacks' with straightline attacks it is easier to keep someone off you to prevent them grabbing you for holds or trying to take you down, it is easier but that does not mean easy! Ask someone like Paul Vunak in theory some of the arts that should be the last people to get taken to the ground? He will tell you arts like Wing Chun because they are always occupying centreline. In the street when fights go the ground it is often because they are swinging haymakers and end up close in.

Now that certainly does not mean it is easy to keep someone off you with straightline attacks by any means, but you sure have more chance of doing so than the Muay Thai type style in MMA - there straightline attacks? Weak jab, never seen anyone damaged by it or KO'd / front kick or teep not used that often / side kick rarely if ever used & rules prevent using it on leg/ oblique kick not allowed either/ straight blast never used (some like Chuck Liddell run forward or chase people with punches but they are wild)/ eye jab not allowed, etc.

In MMA common attacks are rear Thai kick, boxing punches again weak jab & usually swings wild ones at that , cross is used but most are second rate boxers so they don't take people out with it all the time.

I've trained with Wing Chun guys for example that would be very hard to get on ground and who use much moe straightline attacks , making it very hard to get close to them. I've even seen a few that using Straight Blast can keep even a good MMA guy or grappler off them & hurt them as well.

In the street better to use more circular attacks like MMA stle or more straightline attacks, it all depends on the situation, anything can work. But you should have a strong arsenal of straightline attacks if you want to keep people off you, which in serious situation is usually best thing to do e.g. you are fighting multiple opponents - more circular attacks mean probably more chance of them getting in on you, you throw a hook punch one leaps in if you miss or as it is coming out same with rear kick, etc. Or opponent has weapon, generally better to use straightline like kicks to leg front or side or to body, straight blast, straightlead, fingerjab, simultaneous straightline attack & defence against knife, etc. You have a hook that can KO anyone and miss against someone with knife you get slashed or stabbed, or they come in as hit is going out, it opens you up and allows more chance of them getting in at you.

Besides the obvious , you want to avoid at all costs going to the ground in the street - guy has several friends ready to kick your head in , has concealed knife, dog poo on ground and smears it in your eyes (it happened, I know someonbe it happened too!), or glass or brick on ground to be used.

 

*yawn* It's obvious you question my linguistic abilities because you refuse to answer basic questions, so I'll just keep repeating them until you answer them or you get binned for being an idiot.

Little boy, I asked you three times for an answer as to why you ride of the nut of Don Wilson. Stop dodging and just answer the question. Really, it's ok for you to have a man-crush on him. He's alive, everything you'll never be in terms of martial arts ability, good-looking, and has a good amount of money. Hell, just typing that gives me a woody.

OK, here's the drill. I have two years of American Kickboxing under my belt. I have a brown sash and instructor-level credentials in Kung Fu. I currently do BJJ. I am telling you right here and now that you are full of it. Period. End of discussion. You can whack off with Rosie and her five friends all you want as you think of how you'd mount Don Wilson and then gouge his eyes out but the reality of the matter is that most of the crap you mention is some of the least effective in terms of application as you never practice it full-bore. And yes, even knowing you have a millionth degree black belt in bullshido fu, I'd still mount your ass and pound the living crap out of you. Top or bottom, I don't care. I'm not worried about your uberbad techniques because I learned them all and they, quite frankly, SUCK.

Damn, I wish this were bullshido so I could properly flame you. It's obvious logic sure as hell isn't going to work here. *sigh*

Let's continue, shall we?

Yes, I term it "argument of the weak". The reason I do so is that the only people who actually make that lame and pathetic argument are people who have absolutely NO IDEA of what they speak. People such as yourself. The more you post the more painfully obvious is is that you really don't get it. I'll try logic...

-side kicks (or front kicks, or any other fancy kick) to the knee are notoriously difficult to pull off. Too many instructors push it off on students as a "fight-ender", and that's just crap. The angles have to be right, the amount of force precise, and the timing perfect. Since you never practice it, except maybe in some esoteric form, it's useless.
-if you can't throw a proper punch, I'm not really worried about what you think you can do to my eyes. Really, I'm not. I'm guessing that your school doesn't eye gouge on a regular basis, so that goes right up there with nutgrabs, bone breaks, and other useless crap you'll never use properly in the real world since you never practice it.
-All that other "deadly" stuff? Good luck trying it on someone fighting back.

Thai boxing is superior. No question about it. They train harder, fight harder.

Yes, anything you learn in MMA can be used on the street. Anything with good, alive training is helpful in a sd situation, whther it be a solid armlock from chin na, a good punch from my kickboxing days, or the ability to mount and choke from BJJ. It isn't the style, it's how you practice. I practice realistic techniques with real world applications which can be practiced regularly. I practice these techniques against resisting opponents trying to choke me out and who outweigh me by 30 pounds (and more). Yeah, I'm satisfied that anything I learned in kickboxing or bjj is just as useful, if not moreso, than anything I learned in kung fu.

Never said any of these arts weren't any good. They follow the philosophy I outlined above. As for the rest of this paragraph, well, I disagree completely. And I disagree because most people who take that view can't even throw a goddamn punch right.

EDIT: I missed this gem...

There is exactly ONE pro fighter running the circuit right now who has WC as his base art, and he has a mediocre record at best and has made it very clear that although he loves WC and TCC, he needs more instruction in boxing and BJJ to be competitive. I like Sami Berik, he's one of my myspace friends and we've chatted. But he's also a realist. You, little boy, are delusional.

 

This is exactly why the JKD area needs a MOD!

I've been trying to stay out of this thread because I've wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, KickinIt. But after observing this thread closely, I can only conclude that you are either a troll, or someone who is very misguided in his training. Probably a bit of both, actually.

With all due respect to Vunak, this is a bad situation in which to quote him. JKD, PFS, etc is not very effective in the ring. And whilst being effective in the streets, so many people take a trip to heaven on Bruce Lee's nuts that they completely misinterperet his entire system. From what I have seen of you in other threads, this is the case.

As for you boxing and Muay thai background, I can only imagine that you are either lying, or you had your eyes and ears closed throughout all the classes.

That is dependant on the individual. Yes, in theaory, maybe it is easier for wing chun to stay off the ground. But we all know that theory is not always transferable to practicality, don't we?

Are you suggesting that anybody who doesn't jab with the power side forward has a weak jab?!?! Seriously, go in a ring and report back to us

You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.

See, this is the problem with a lot of JKD guys out there. Some don't learn enough. A lot of concepts guys learn a little bit of something else and think that they can go in the ring and destroy a pro MMA guy. A lot of core guys, on the other hand, don't learn other arts that were not explored by Bruce because they see them as ineffectual. NEWSFLASH!!!!! They're not. They just were not explored as it was the 60's/70's, and a lot of those arts weren't in great circulation in the west then (the exception of course being boxing, but I have seen so many **** poor JKD boxers in my time it isn't even funny). The thruth is, both guys are wrong.

Individuality. 9.99999 times out of ten, a wing chun guy will not beat a well trained MMA guy. Not only in theory, but in practice.

I find it ironic that you earlier criticised Domino's english, yet your english is terrible. I seriousl have trouble interpretting what you are saying sometimes.

Agreed. Centerline attacks should have a place in everybody's aresenal. But that dopesn't mean that non-centerline attacks should be thrown away. They too have a place.

As for the challenge match, I think it's pathetic that you'd challenge somebody to a match over such trivialities. In any case, if you're challenging slip, you'd better make sure you're ready/ there is a reason why slip is regarded on the foremost authorities on Muay thai/Boxing on MAP.

Emily

 

The Empress,

9.9999 times out of 10 a Wing Chiun fighter will ose to a MMA guy? And eh who have you trained with in Wing Chun thats any good? Go train with Emin Boztepe he does seminars in England , bring some MMA guys with you , get them to spar or fight with him & see how they get on, Boztepe doesn't do MMA & thinks MMA is BS for the street by the way. I've seen him all out with MMA guys using nothing & I mean nothing but straight blast/chainpunching and he has knocked them around badly. Who have you trained with in Wing Chun/Wing Tsun that is any good? If nobody , then stop talking nonsense with your theories.

As for JKD who have you trained with seriously? Trained with Rick Young (JKD Concepts)? he would play with many of your MMA guys. If yuou've never trained with Rick Young or other good JKD guys, or any good Wing Chun guys - which I suspect is the case bt go on list them if I'm wrong, then you train mainly on your pc computer & like to theorize , there are many like you around. I've trained with Boztepe, Rick Young, and many others.....and you - just to show you have a clue what you are talking about in practical terms?

 

Please tell us your not dusting off that old chesnut.

Who exactly from the MMA world has Boztepe fought? Seriously.
Come on... you were there... so who has he actually fought? Who?
William Cheung?!?!
BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Please follow this ancient link to see you exact line of thought being covered years before you were actually even a member here:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16741

even better yet...

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12731&highlight=emin

Do you really think what you're on about hasn't been done to death here at MAP and just about every other martial arts forum in the fricken world?!

Search the Bullshido site and you can probably find a half dozen more on Emin.

 

Kickinit-

The first thing that needs to be addressed is your misunderstanding of the rules of the UFC.

The most obvious error is the presumption that kicks to the knee are not allowed. Check out this link and you'll see that, under the list of fouls, no where does it list kicks to the knee. It's perfectly legal. Oddly, this seems to be a common misconception with those who don't think MMA represents "real fighting".

It was actually tried in the early UFC events. Most notably, in UFC 3, Keith Hackney tried to use them against Emmanuel Yarborough. Though Hackney would go on to win the fight, the ol' side kick to the knee, though tried more than once, didn't appear to have any effect. Of course, Yarborough was three times the size of Hackney, so that probably came into play.

Nobody does them 'cause it's hard to damage the knee with a kick, unless the leg is out completely straight and you hit it at just the right angle. The risk/return value is unappealing.

Another thing to note is that for years, the UFC and other NHB events didn't have weight classes. Go and watch the early UFC's, or Vale Tudo events. They're quite informative, but in this case nothing new was really learned. If two opponents have equal skill level, the bigger one usually wins. And I don't mean 51% of the time, I mean more like 90% of the time. On the other hand, if the smaller man is able to utilize a skill that he outmatches the other fellow by, he can win.

In the early UFC's, groin attacks were legal, as well as headbutts. Biting and gouging were not grounds for halting a fight, but simply were fined. Read my above posts for more details.

The fact is that practically everything was legal in early events. Even the things that were "illegal" were often met with a smack on the wrist. If biting, gouging, groin attacks and kicking the knee were as effective as people claim, they would have been used more in these events. The fact is that these techniques are either over-rated (kicking the knee rarely results in major damage, biting isn't very useful except as a distraction) or difficult to pull off (hard to gouge someone who's sitting up in the mount, most guys have had years of experience reflexively protecting their groin).

There is also a third possibility: few situations warrant maiming techniques. Let's face it, maiming someone is often considered "lethal force", which is legally only acceptable if your own life is in danger. In most confrontations, far less is at stake. Now I usually do a good job of avoiding violence, but when it's presented itself, a good restraining technique is usually all I need, and I'm not a big guy. Do you want to go to jail, get sued, and/or risk your reputation and financial security by scooping out someone's eye just 'cause they pushed you in the ATM line? Even barfights involve little more than punches, tackles, and clinching. Unless the guy reaches for a weapon, there's no reason to start chewing on his face.

Modern MMA is basically what a very technical barfight would look like.

A knockout punch is, for practical purposes, just as good as a "lethal" or disabling technique, without the legal ramifications. Training in boxing or MT replaces the need to stick your thumb in the guy's eye or crush his throat, in many cases.

Now on to your critisizm of the techniques of MMA:

When has a jab EVER been used to produce a KO? I've seen damage, in the form of bruises, welts, or cuts, and though it's not as visible, the way the head snaps back after a strong jab lets you know that some nerve/brain damage was done.

Did you ever think that maybe it's just not that good? Let's face it, the roundhouse is far more utilitarian. Look at Muay Thai, FC kickboxing, FC karate, point karate, sport TKD, savate, and practically any sport that allows kicking and I think you'll find that the roundhouse severely outnumbers all other kicks, no matter the medium.

As I've pointed out, this is simply wrong. Don't make me play the Dr. Cox clip again. The techs aren't illegal, just not as utilitarian as a roundhouse kick, a knee, or practically any punch in the boxing arsenal.

One: again, maybe the straight blast just isn't that great against someone who knows how to defend against a punch. That said, I think you're wrong, to a certain degree, that it's not used. Maybe not in the strict definition, but a flurry of straight punches has been used, most notably Vitor Belfort's win over Wanderlei Silva at Ultimate Brazil.

Two: Liddell doesn't chase people. He's a counter-puncher. OK, sure, if he's got them dazed, but he spends most of the fight patiently backpeddaling. Check out his four-rounder against Jeremy Horn.

Perhaps not, but you can get the same effect by putting your fist in someone's eye. Or opening up a cut that bleeds into the eye. At any rate, I've done touch-sparring where I've been eye-jabed to death, figuratively, and while it sucks it was more annoying than damaging.

At any rate, eye gouges, usually unintentional, still happen in MMA. In UFC 58, Georges St-Pierre was gouged by BJ Penn, and had double-vision for most of the fight... but still won.

Nope, sorry. I don't think you've seen these Chunners paired up with a legit MMA fighter. I've learned more practical stuff in six hours of MMA training than in three months of Wing Chun. And before you ask for my creditials, one of the MMA guys I train with is Mark Hatmaker. The other? Sifu Allan Baker, who's certified in CSW (Combat Submission Wrestling) under former Shooto champ and uber-coach Erik Paulson, AND also a Wing Chun instructor under Francis Fong. In addition, he's also a BJJ brown belt under Pedro Sauer, and certified in Kali and JKD Concepts from Inosanto, and PFS under Vunak.

Here's how various arts that are included in MMA deal with the straight blast-

Boxing: slip and counterpunch

Muay Thai: Parry the attack, clinch, knees of DOOOM!

Grappling/wrestling: level change, shoot

Someone coming forward throwing a barrage of linear punches is very, very predictible.

Look, I like Wing Chun, but at best it augments my existing knowledge. As commonly taught, it assumes a very limited fight scenario. MMA training allows for defense against a greater variety of attacks, and provides more tools for the toolbox.

I realize this wasn't addressed at me, but I feel the need to point out that simply taking siminars with some well-known names is hardly "practical terms". I train under some very knowledgable folks, but that's not really what makes my knowledge practical. What makes it practical is questioning everything they've taught me, taking things out of the classroom, and doing some limited-rules sparring. And yeah, some times we allow biting to submission, or similated gouging. Not often, just 'cause of the safety risks involved. But ya know what? Nothing much changes, because it doesn't need to. Now do you go to MMA clubs and try your theories against them?

Also the lead Thai kick, stiff jabs and tight hooks, clinched knees, elbows... seriously, if you think that MMA is nothing but wild swings, watch a Tim Sylvia match. Not particularly exciting, but straight-arrow punching. Or boxers like Spencer Fisher or Marcus Davis. BJ Penn. Georges St-Pierre. The Nogiera brothers. Crocop. Rampage. Pulver. Anderson Silva. That's not a complete list, but it's enough to get you started. In short, your characterization of MMA striking is only partially accurate. There are quite a few sloppy strikers, but they're usually the ones that employ a lot of grappling. Likewise, some guys with great striking couldn't wrestle their way out of a paper bag.

The percieved "lack" of linear attacks is kinda wrong. They mix up linear with circular. As well, keeping the guy "off" isn't always the goal. MMA basically has four strategies-

Sprawl and Brawl: kickboxing with strong takedown defense. Liddell, Crocop or Sylvia.

Clinch fighting: close-ranged upright striking using a clinch for control. Couture, Rampage, A. Silva, W. Silva.

Ground and Pound: strong takedowns and control, emphasis on ground strikes. Hughes, Sanchez, Fedor, Sherk.

Submissions: emphasis on finishing with holds. Sakuraba, Horn, Barnett, practically anyone named Gracie.

Of those four strategies, only "Sprawl and Brawl" requires that you keep the opponent at a distance. Why would someone like Matt Hughes, who's looking to take a guy down, want to keep the fight at a distance?

I can't speak for Systema, but my experience with JKD and KM contradict what you're saying. There's the basic boxing arsenal, basic kicks, close-in weapons such as knees and elbows, some sweeps and takedowns, all of which can be used in MMA. What exactly are you refering to?

I'm starting to suspect that you haven't watched enough MMA to make a logical conclusion about what they are or aren't doing.

 

Calsignfuzzy,

Jun Fan JKD is NOT MMA , go ask Tommy Carruthers if he does MMA or the differences between what he does & MMA, you can email him or look at his forum if it is up, ask Ted Wong & many others also. The Bruce Lee Foundation teaching JFJKD states it is not MMA, nor a collection or elements of 26 arts as Dan claims. If those good at JFJKD are stating it is not MMA & has little in common with it, your opinions mean very little on the subject.

Your experience appears limited, and no I've not just trained at seminars with those people, but at seminars have seen them the most with other people. Guys like Emin Boztepe thinks MMA is BS , and not realistic for the street, go to a seminar of his & see his level, be warned your MMA won't last long against him, try your grappling takedowns, Muay Thai stand up , etc see how you get on. You've never trained with anyone any that good in Wing Chun so how do you know their level & how they would deal with MMA guys? A list of known names in MMA that Boztepe has dealt with? He doesn't go around fighting for the fun of it, many in his group and his former group competed in MMA, Full Contact, Muay Thai, etc - none of them would be stupid enough to face him after training with him.

It's the usual nonsense with people like Boztepe he's not fought under MMA rules so he can't be that good. His former group had few hundred thousand members, around 2000 schools in Germany alone, amongst them were very tough fighters Special Forces, people that competed in MMA/Muay Thai(incl. World No.2), etc - he could handle them all easily and they all knew it.

Take Gene Lebell 'The Godfather of Grappling' / 'Toughest Man Alive' - who has he fought compared to modern MMA guys? He fought in fixed wrestling matches the (WWE of its day), Judo matches never at Olympic or World level, and thats about it (& when he got a legit challenge from the Gracies he made excuses about his age). His top student Gokor's fight record compared to say Rickson or Royce Gracie is a great big joke, but he has competed & won in MMA. You think either of them cannot fight just because they don't have amazing fight records? Ask those that have rolled with Gene they will tell you he has genetically superhuman strength, or his top student Gokor amazing skill & would play with many a MMA competitor. There are many like that, Boztepe too - who has fought a lot of people in the street as well as exchanges with high level martial artists.

These MMA guys with the MMA can beat anything , nobody could handle a top MMA guy & anyone without a long MMA fight record can't be that great a fighter or could never handle a good MMA guy in real fight type BS. If Emin Boztepe comes near you and does seminar, go to it or anyone here and tell me he can't fight? Tell him you think he can't fight & see how you get on. The person you mentioned from Francis Fong lineage, no disrespect but Fong's Wing Chun/Tsun compared to Boztepe's in terms of being combat effective is like the difference between Japanese traditional Ju-Jitsu and BJJ, a vast difference!

Go read 'Anatomy of a Streetfight' by Paul Vunak Chapter 1 titled 'No Holds Barred Fights Are Not Streetfights'. In it he states 'unfortunately many people are confusing NHB tournaments with streetfights............' and that unfortunately includes yourself & many people here. Many other experts have said the same, but what does Vunak , etc know compared to the 'Geniuses' we have on MAP?