C.J.W. wrote:cloudz wrote:I didn't see any fighting - is there a time stamp for it? So how can you say what they look like. Where's the fight, I saw some no/soft touch sparring, which is fine. I reckon we would see an MT flavour and style.
This irrational mindset over looking like boxers and kickboxers has to be overcome and left behind. There are different issues to overcome, not being able to accept what certain striking looks like in a high pressure fight is just utter nonsense in the end. No TCMA guy will ever get to a higher level of fighting without ditching that mindset and embracing all martial art and pugalistic realities.. Only then is there a chance of any kind of transcendence by someone who may rise to the challenges.
There are plenty of clips on Youtube of traditional Muay Thai guys fighting in the ring or engage in heavy sparring. Feel free to check them out if you have any doubts.
The point I was trying to make is how these Chaiya guys do NOT look like your typical boxers or kickboxers when they spar. They are able to apply the techniques taught in their style against fast incoming strikes and still exhibit the style's characteristics and flavor. That is obviously a cut above many TCMAists who do not practice free-sparring or learn how to handle realistic attacks.
In the second clip I posted, two guys from the audience were invited on stage to spar with the Chaiya fighter. While it's only sparring, it nonetheless shows the Chaiya guy's skill in defending against free punches and kicks. Even if the sparring session was to escalate, chances are he'd still dominate.
cloudz wrote:I think this idea of "typical boxers and kickboxers" is just a nice figment of peoples imaginations. You saw some basic defenses like covering the head and parries and deflections etc. and you think these aren't taught in those systems. Of course they are. I saw lot's in the clips you posted and the one marvin did that covers plenty that;s in boxing and kickboxing, MT, Sanda and yes TCMA too !
There are TCMA schools that train, spar and even fight, they use a mix of traditional and modern training, not so different to all this. All this discriminatiing against some kinds of combat because it sometimes doesn't look like some ideal is irrational and counter productive.
As I said in another thread it's all relative; where you sit is what you'll see and any engagemnent is dictated by relative factors like who is better, trained longer, perhaps who is stronger, combined with intensity and you can go on and on. This can all dictate the stylistic factors that arise.
All you can really do is train in good ways; the training in these clips IS all well and good but it's nothing new fangled or revolutionary. Taken to it's conclusion these guys would end up no different than Muay Thai guys, because MT came from Muay traditional arts, just like boxing came from Western traditional arts. These had all similar content, you see here for defending the head, it doesn't all dissapear in a puff of smoke in the way you seem to think with your concept of "typical boxing and kickboxing".
cloudz wrote:Have you come across any of these guys fighting an MT guy. Let's see it if it's so different.
I mean it's Thailand, these guys fight and there's every opportunity to. Plenty of them should have competed out there.
Can we see this different style of fighting in a proper match up then, then we can properly ascertain how different it really is ?
I don't want the inconclusive research and opinion pieces I want the smoking gun please.
Systems do have differences of course, I've never denied that. Buy not so much that they overcome the similarities inherent in the fighting and formats being discussed; to the extent they no longer look like "this" or "that"... Individuals have stylistic differences, as do systems but they'll be outweighed by similarities the more someone fights (and trains for fights) and the higher levels they go - IOW the better they become at fighting other people from whatever backgrounds they have. Take Machida, some nice "bits" recognisable from Karate, but there's as much if not much more that looks like other styles and systems we can cite.
everything wrote:Not promoting a style or disparaging CMA. But. Within boxing, which someone pointed out doesn't actually consist of only one style, there are fascinating sub styles. I don't really know them but a quick search brought up a few:
- There is the peek-a-boo that Tyson used in a genius way.
- Mayweather is a defensive genius.
- Pacquiao is aggressive and according to Mayweather has a style of setting traps other fighters get caught in.
Tyson was very specifically trained in his approach/style, but I'm not sure about some of the other famous guys.
So many students come and learn for six months, then they claim they learned from me. I will not allow that. I only certify certain people. They don't have the aspect of wude (martial ethics武德). No respect. A student learns halfway somewhere and then they start changing. They make their own style. That's why we end up with so many new styles.
"Are they really making anything that much different compared to other old styles? Maybe not. Kung fu, after all, is just two hands, two feet and the body. That's it. Different styles specialize on different techniques and usually these people don't pick them up. They don't know how to use them. For example, tongbei is different than regular kung fu.
It's the way they use the power, the way they deliver momentum and striking force. That's what makes it outstanding.
I don't say that these new styles are bad kung fu or anything like that. I always say 'Whatever you do, I don't want. Whatever I do and you don't know - that's how we win.'"
Whatever you do, I don't want. Whatever I do and you don't know - that's how we win.
C.J.W. wrote:cloudz wrote:Have you come across any of these guys fighting an MT guy. Let's see it if it's so different.
I mean it's Thailand, these guys fight and there's every opportunity to. Plenty of them should have competed out there.
Can we see this different style of fighting in a proper match up then, then we can properly ascertain how different it really is ?
I don't want the inconclusive research and opinion pieces I want the smoking gun please.
Systems do have differences of course, I've never denied that. Buy not so much that they overcome the similarities inherent in the fighting and formats being discussed; to the extent they no longer look like "this" or "that"... Individuals have stylistic differences, as do systems but they'll be outweighed by similarities the more someone fights (and trains for fights) and the higher levels they go - IOW the better they become at fighting other people from whatever backgrounds they have. Take Machida, some nice "bits" recognisable from Karate, but there's as much if not much more that looks like other styles and systems we can cite.
Again, you are missing my point, Mr. Cloudz.
You remind me of those MMA guys who believe they've figured out the ultimate reality of fighting and come to the matter-of-fact conclusion that all real fighting looks the same, and it happens to be they way they fight. I only wish it were that simple...
Since all average human beings are anatomically the same, there's no doubt that there will be movements universally found in various systems that APPEAR similar. Take a simple roundhouse kick for example, the taekwondo version will look similar to those done in MT, Sanda, kickboxing, and any other art that includes the kick in its repetoire -- to the untrained eye, that is.
While a common move found in different styles may all look alike to the layman, to a well-trained fighter or martial artist, they should be able to tell the difference by observing the subtleties, which is what we as MAists should strive for if we wish to improve and refine our skills.
Too many MAists choose to focus on the similarities these days rather than the differences -- too much comparing, but little contrasting.
It's just like in CIMA where there are practitioners who believe that Xingyi, Bagua, and Taiji are all the same. While I'm not saying that they are necessarily wrong, but these days I'm much more impressed by the small number of "specialists" who can show me the subtle differences between them as opposed to the garden-variety "general practitioners" who've only managed to get the rough idea but missed out on the details.
C.J.W. wrote:You remind me of those MMA guys who believe they've figured out the ultimate reality of fighting and come to the matter-of-fact conclusion that all real fighting looks the same, and it happens to be they way they fight. I only wish it were that simple...
C.J.W. wrote:Take a simple roundhouse kick for example, the taekwondo version will look similar to those done in MT, Sanda, kickboxing, and any other art that includes the kick in its repetoire -- to the untrained eye, that is.
C.J.W. wrote:While a common move found in different styles may all look alike to the layman, to a well-trained fighter or martial artist, they should be able to tell the difference by observing the subtleties, which is what we as MAists should strive for if we wish to improve and refine our skills.
C.J.W. wrote:Too many MAists choose to focus on the similarities these days rather than the differences -- too much comparing, but little contrasting.
Strange wrote:不招不架 只有一下
if you keep covering up, you can protect yourself
but it also means that you are in the backfoot, at the weaker position
if you go deeper, it also mean that you are slower than your opponent
so please do not misunderstand to mean that it is correct practice/instruction
to keep blocking and covering under a barrage of punches.
if like this, you always give the upperhand to your opponent.
Overlord wrote:俗雲 : 【拳打不知】,是迅雷不及掩耳。
所謂 : 【不招不架,只是一下,犯了招架,就有十下】。」
This passage actually involves three contexts:
1, You are lighting fast, so the other person does not know how you win.
2, No parry, no block, you enter and KO the opponent.
3, You have better angle and position, enter and excute a good combo.
Only covering up and taking punches on the arms is not showing a lot of skill.
Users browsing this forum: charles and 34 guests