Which is more effective style muay thai or boxing
- Thread starter ironkhan57
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
- Messages
- 7,813
- Reaction score
- 1,428
Sure he is a boxer then. In muay thai there are plenty of national amateur boxing champions, although theyre not really seen as boxers.
I posted 2 more videos after that. Yeah it doesnt prove anything, it was just an example. However, if boxing is so superior why did Jomthong Chuwattana get dominated against Pakorn, despite having a longer reach, better hands, just having beat boxer Daiki Kaneko AND being a top muay thai fighter with excellent clinching, kicks, knees elbows etc? Now imagine a boxer without the kicking/clinching skills of Jomthong facing a top muay thai fighter.
Mike tyson is a whole other story since there basicly is NO heavyweight muay thai scene.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
- Messages
- 7,813
- Reaction score
- 1,428
LoL what? So suddenly its a savate vs kickboxing thread? Name some savate fighters who have consistently beat top competition. 1 or 2 wins doesnt really mean anything as these guys fight several times every year.
Connor has long time trained western boxing. I dont see why you claim he isn't a boxer but just a puncher. Explain your point.
Pakorn vs Jomthong wasnt such a domination, it was a pretty competitive fight, with a great display of clinch fighting by Pakorn, although he took some good cleand hands too. You could also imagine how would fare Pakorn against Takashi Uchiyama under boxing rules...
Now, going on topic that is which is most effective striking style for mma, I think that if your striking prowess rely too much on clinching, it won't work as good in MMA against judo and greco-roman guys, as if you rely on boxing skills that also allow you to manage the distance without losing your balance or expose you to a takedown as, for example, a Thai front kick could cause you.
I also talked before about Muay Thai kicks (more than Karate or Savate kicks), being more powerful, expose you too much for a takedown, regardless of the takedown defense you can train
So, my point is that two of the main weapons in which a traditional Muay Thai fighter rely don't fit that well in mma, in comparison to boxing.
I agree though, that Muay Thai could be the most effective style for standing fighting under no restricting rules, which seems that is what you have been trying to prove in this discussion.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 2,779
- Reaction score
- 92
What sets McGregor apart is his TKD training and his movement training. Boxers and Thai fighters will both lack elite movement because they fight in a small square ring. In a real fight you dont get trapped in corners, you can always circle away and strike from the outside.
It was a reply to you saying, if I understood correctly, that kickfighting is not much about style, but about the fighter. Well, I dont agree, and concretely in Savate vs Muay Thai its where the differences are more visible. Totaly different actually, conceptually.
The video is a good example. Again, this is not a prove of one style being better than the other. Just an example where the differences in style are clear.
I agree, that doesnt exclude that Mcregor is a pretty good boxer, more so by mma standards, and has trained western boxing for long time. You can't call him just a puncher as if we were talking about Dan Henderson.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
- Messages
- 7,813
- Reaction score
- 1,428
I couldnt find anything about Conor winning anything significant in boxing, thats why. He may be a boxer but not an elite one. In the same way Aldo is no elite muay thai/kick boxer. I think muay thai is superior just due to the fact that there are more weapons. There are very few high level muay thai guys in mma but for example Dejdamrong hasnt had any trouble with his kick. And there is so much more muay talent out there that would probably do much better if they tried, than Dejdamrong who is 37 years old. And of course pakorn would stand no chance against uchiyama in boxing, but thats irrelevant
Of course the styles are different but the outcome depends mostly on the fighter. Most top fighters have different striking backgrounds.
W
WarKO
Guest
What else is it about then? Your cheeseburger addiction??
There's been some boxing in MMA but mostly guys who can use their legs, arms and grappling are most successful. Most champions have had a plethora of skill. JDS doesn't even box in a classical sense, he just uses arms more than legs.
Back in the day I also thought that Muay Thai would be a more effective style for mma for the same logic you have sayd. Then, as I watched and practiced more mma and undertood better its intrincacies, I do think boxing is more effective because of what I've exposed above. Anyways is debatable, and standing fighting in mma is something that is still evolving. Which is sure is that the best its to take those tecniques from the different striking styles that fits better for mma and for each fighter in concrete, not just one single style.
The outcome depends always on the fighter, but I thing styles make a big difference in the way you fight and, therefore, the outcome. In savate, the training is different than in Muay Thai from day one. Blocking kicks is forbidden in the first place, so you need to focus on dodge and anticipate for countering, by using movement and angles since the first rule in savate is that you should not stand in front of your opponent, so starting for this, is very different from Muay Thai. In general, savate gives up power for movement and accuracy. Because of this, I do think Savate is a very good counter to a Muay Thai fighter because the Savate fighter will always be outside of the Muay Thai fighters comfortable range. The different fights that have featured a savate vs muay thai fighter seem to prove this point.
On the other hand, I think Muay Thai is a much more effective style against boxing than savate is, since a boxer could walk down the savateur and is much more effective in the inside fighting, while there is where a Muay Thai fighter would be in his comfort zone.
I have gone a little of topic but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.
Last edited:
Just check the discussion that have been through this thread.
To state that a guy that moves, punches, kicks, and takes punches and kicks better than anyone else will be the most effective fighter you don't need to make a thread
W
WarKO
Guest
Uh then why did you make this post in the first place ? You like to ask questions that are really obvious? And most posters on this thread agree w me and find your question silly.
I just dont get you, sorry.
I had an interesting dicussion with some posters in this thread. It's not the case with you, since I dont even understand what you mean :/
And no, the question in the OP is not that obvious as you think, thats why there are almost 4 pages of discussion
W
WarKO
Guest
Wow 4 pages, most my threads get a dozen+. I think its time for you to stop watching MMA and go back to WWE.
Puaf. Okey kid.
If you think this discussion is useless, I don't know why you keep entering here.
By the way, In not American, and I havent seen WWE in my life.
W
WarKO
Guest
Right, you seem to have pretty good English slang for a non-American. I'm not US actually, I'm a female Japanese supermodel and Physician on the side and I can tell WWE fans. Just admit you watch it and stop all this boxing in MMA nonsense. A few of my ex's were actually pro fighter and I've also gone trainings so I know what Im talking about and youd better quit while your ahead.
You are 15. Im physician as well.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2011
- Messages
- 438
- Reaction score
- 4
Obviously anyone training for MMA will work on using all those weapons. However, what is a better base for MMA is debateable. For one thing I think the classical boxing stance fits more naturally with a wrestling stance. In the classic stance of a Ray Robinson or joe Louis for example, the back is sort of curved like a wrestler. The knees are bent. A Muay Thai stance is more upright. The classic boxer is very hunched in, with the arms held in tight to the body. Just like a wrestling stance. In classic Muay Thai the arms are extended.
Boxers, at least the very good ones, are constantly changing level. Just like wrestlers. This is aided by their stance also. In Muay Thai level changing is far less common. Boxers also utilise much more head movement. This head movement is a great tool for getting past punches for takedowns.
Kenny Florian spoke about having to adapt his stance during his career. He originally was trained in Muay Thai and had a Muay Thai stance. After his loss to Penn he switched to a more boxing type stance with a lower level. He felt this worked better for MMA. He also developed his jab a lot. A focus in boxing. You can see him use it to control the fight against Guida and Gomi.
Movement is utilised far more in boxing than traditionally in Muay Thai. Muay Thai is described as a "strong style". Emphasis is on blocking strikes and coming back with your own. In MMA, where one has to worry about takedowns and so, movement can be very valuable. For example Holm vs Rousey. Her ability to move around Rousey and to fight on the outside was arguably the key to victory.
The advantages to Muay Thai are obvious. More weapons. But I don't think that's the whole story.
W
WarKO
Guest
Oh really, what's your specialty? Because I'm a neurologist and have been practicing medicine for 5 years@ MIT.
Between experiments I like to go on Sherdog to kill time while waiting on neurological results about the brain.
W
WarKO
Guest
Now this is some great insight thanks. I always though boxing were more upright but you seem to be correct. It's odd you'd think you'd want to be lower 4 kicks.
I can see in this classic MMA example. Sagat as you well know was a famous Thai Kickboxer while Barlog who for some reason is named M. Thisusa here was a famous boxer and clearly crouches lower.
JDS seems very upright tho as does Stipe both boxing heavy.
Last edited by a moderator:
