Recent fights/results/news from Japan II
- Thread starter Shadess
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2015
- Messages
- 6,350
- Reaction score
- 746
watched the whole event now, a lot of very good fights, Takeru vs Koji fight of the year contender, toughest fight that Takeru had, i underestimated Koji after he got that gift decision against Stauros and tought it was going to be a slaughter after the 1st round, Koji gave takeru a lot of work
Rematch on K-1 Festa 2 please!!!
Rematch on K-1 Festa 2 please!!!
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 2,779
- Reaction score
- 92
Random Japanese girl with better kicks than most UFC fighters:
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2014
- Messages
- 6,089
- Reaction score
- 1,689
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 1,656
- Reaction score
- 785
Takeru vs. Koji is a kickboxing FOTY contender.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2014
- Messages
- 6,089
- Reaction score
- 1,689
D
Deleted member 363827
Guest
Well, took K-1 long enough to get a reigining Thai champion to fight Takeru.But I doubt Yodkitsada could do much considering the K-1 rule set is so anti Muay Thai that it would take a few fights for any muay thai fighters to get used to.
But Noiri VS Pikeu? That puts a smile on my face.
But Noiri VS Pikeu? That puts a smile on my face.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2016
- Messages
- 509
- Reaction score
- 10
''Anti Muay Thai''? The rules are just different than Muay Thai, but it's not ''anti'' anything lol. Would be like saying that MMA is ''Anti Muay Thai''.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
- Messages
- 7,813
- Reaction score
- 1,428
" MMA vs K-1" you're comparing apples to oranges though. If you mean UFC then yeah, i don't think UFC is anti muay thai. I wouldn't consider Kunlun Fight which is (mainly) a kickboxing organization anti muay thai.
I believe K-1 on the other hand has actively designed the rulesets to protect their home fighters, and the refs are also biased to protect the home fighters and the judges sometimes are biased. I mean if a thai grabs the opponents head with two hands he will probably get a warning or a point deduction. It happened to Kaew a couple of times and he was also robbed against Masaaki Noiri. Massaro Glunder who is not even thai got disqualified in a fight in which both guys were clinching. In fact when Glunder got a yellow card, KIDO was the one who initiated the clinch by wrapping his arm arround Glunder's neck. There is no denying K-1 is heavily based, protecting their own fighters. I think they can be considered anti any style that is not japanese but probably mostly against thais because of history and rivalry in martial arts.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2016
- Messages
- 509
- Reaction score
- 10
Being biased is different than a set of rules being ''Anti Thai''. All your example are biased judges and refereeing. That means K-1 is anti (put in all countries except Japan).
Coming back to the actual being ''Anti Thai'' is just almost not possible.The Thai fighters know damn well which rules are being held and if you do not like those rules, just don't fight there.
In short: Rules can not possibly be ''Anti-Thai'' just because they are (much) different than the rule set of Muay Thai. That would be saying that MMA rules are só freaking ''Anti Thai'' due to the groundwork. How dare they. I think you meant biased, which is a valid argument.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 25,469
- Reaction score
- 10,724
You can make the arguement that incremental rules changes that had happened in K-1 greatly inhibited Muay Thai offense (full clinch reduced to single knee reduced to single collar, also inhibited kick catching and sweeps). Doesn't just inhibit MT however as the causes were Semmy, Buakaw, and Overeem. I think Yuta Kubo abused sweeps too much and got them eliminated.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
- Messages
- 7,813
- Reaction score
- 1,428
I wouldn't say "anti thai" either, but i certainly believe it's in many japanese promoters agenda to prove that they are better than thais. I think that's an significant contributing factor to why the rulesets have changed throughout the years to the disadvantage of thais.
Do they know the rules and scoring criteria? I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't given the language barrier. Additionally, kickboxing, in regards to the clinch, doesn't have universal rules and has esoteric and inconsistent officiating.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,889
- Reaction score
- 241
I complain about most thais getting signed by K-1. Not happy with Yodbuadaeng, Yodsaenchai and not really happy with Yodkitsada but that's a made up point to fit the "japanese hate muay thai" narrative. some people are reaching in here.
Last edited:
I remember watching Petpanomrung's trainer talking about his thoughts on kickboxing. He was bewildered by kickboxing and didn't even focus on the restrictions on clinch as a major difference. Both he and Petpanomrung in his Glory interviews harp on a singular point: that kickboxing judges want him to move forward more. That's a horrible misunderstanding of kickboxing.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
- Messages
- 7,813
- Reaction score
- 1,428
Not really or at least not a bigger misunderstanding than some of the Glory judges. When a guy like Robin Van Roosmalen can win against Sittichai and Petpanomrung just by walking forward, landing some low kicks and punching the air, it makes sense to believe that is what Glory judges look at. Of course, that’s not how it SHOULD be according to Glorys own scoring criteria, but experience shows otherwise. It especially make
