question on Kickboxing/Thai Boxing

Michael O Leary

Hi all,

Just a quick question and I am not trying to go anywhere with this.

I know that in some kickboxing there is a minimum amount of times that you have to kick in a round. I assume that it was brought in as the fighters would not prefer to just punch when under real pressure.

Is there a similar rule in Thai Boxing?

Regards,

Michael

cowzerp

No as far as i know, but punching is not scored well in thai boxing..they prefer clinched knee's and kicks, especially ones that visibly rock the opponent..in kickboxing to many boxers or kickboxers with good hands where beating the kickboxers who relied on kicking and not bothering with kicks, that rule makes this illegal but it still goes on as the kicks dont have to be good or anything!!

Michael O Leary

cowzerp wrote: »

No as far as i know, but punching is not scored well in thai boxing..they prefer clinched knee's and kicks, especially ones that visibly rock the opponent..in kickboxing to many boxers or kickboxers with good hands where beating the kickboxers who relied on kicking and not bothering with kicks, that rule makes this illegal but it still goes on as the kicks dont have to be good or anything!!

Ok, that makes sense.

So in the event that a fighter is unable to obtain a KO, as a strategic backup they will try and gather points? And because of how different arts distribute points, kickboxers will try to get points by punching and thaiboxers more so by kicking?

Michael

cowzerp

Kickboxers will score points fairly evenly but thai's heavily favour kicks, so kicking will score more points, muay thai is more a battle of attrition in my opinion.

Michael O Leary

cowzerp wrote: »

Kickboxers will score points fairly evenly but thai's heavily favour kicks, so kicking will score more points, muay thai is more a battle of attrition in my opinion.

Could you expand on 'attrition' and why it is more so with the kicks/knees in Thai rather than punches in Kickboxing?

Regards,

Michael

cowzerp

Attrition-in thai boxing they generally stand toe to toe kicking the legs of each other till 1 gives in or gets knocked out,icompared to boxing where there's more footwork and defensive side to the game(hit and dont be hit) , more variety in styles, fighter, boxer etc.., kickboxing comes from western boxing and muay thai is totally seperate and the thai's dont value punching to highly, thats the traditions of muay thai!

Michael O Leary

cowzerp wrote: »

kickboxing comes from western boxing and muay thai is totally seperate and the thai's dont value punching to highly, thats the traditions of muay thai!

Thanks Paul,

Just another question/observation for everyone. The punching in Muay Thai was taken from western boxing and so was the punching in Kickboxing. So apart from clinchwork, elbows/knees and the allocation of points, is there really that much difference between full contact kickboxing and Muay Thai?

Regards,

Michael

cowzerp

Michael O Leary wrote: »

Thanks Paul,

Just another question/observation for everyone. The punching in Muay Thai was taken from western boxing and so was the punching in Kickboxing. So apart from clinchwork, elbows/knees and the allocation of points, is there really that much difference between full contact kickboxing and Muay Thai?

Regards,

Michael

Micheal i'd like to hear other peoples opinions on this but from my point of view they are worlds apart, you might aswell compare kung fu and kickboxing, there are similaritys but thats mainly the fact there both fought in the ring, muay thai is still a tma (a realistic 1 all be it) where i'd say kickboxing is just an adaptation of boxing, maybe getting ideas from thai boxing!

Roper

Oh my.

I'll just duck down here while the Thaiboxers unload on you here Michael!

Michael O Leary

cowzerp wrote: »

Micheal i'd like to hear other peoples opinions on this but from my point of view they are worlds apart, you might aswell compare kung fu and kickboxing, there are similaritys but thats mainly the fact there both fought in the ring, muay thai is still a tma (a realistic 1 all be it) where i'd say kickboxing is just an adaptation of boxing, maybe getting ideas from thai boxing!

Just want to reiterate again that I am not leading anywhere with this and this is to everyone. If anyone feels that there is a big difference between Thai Boxing and Kickboxing apart from points, clinch, elbows/knees, what would these differences be?

Quick question for Mark Leonard. You mentioned that there was a big difference between the sparring you did in Taeqwondo and how you performed when you faced a Kickboxer. What made the difference?

Thanks all,

Michael

Michael O Leary

Roper wrote: »

Oh my.

I'll just duck down here while the Thaiboxers unload on you here Michael!

RedRaven

Hi Micheal,
I will give you what I know on this.

With Thai the objective is simple knock your opponent out or damage him so he cannot carry on.

True Thaiboxers do stand toe to toe and bang away..but with Siamese fighters they dont kick to the legs as much as the western taught Thai boxers- this is because their defence with blocks are very good and some times if you low kick a good blocker you may damage your own shin as opposed to your opponent.

Body kicks and head kicks score very well- as do punches that rock the head-

grappling and knees score well, but delivery of the knee and manipulation of your opponents body during the grapple also scores highly.

Judging a Thai fight can be complex because of the speed of the various weapon changes. They happen very fast and you need to know what scores well and award the points according to the boxers skill,heart and fitness and aggression.

mark.leonard

Michael O Leary wrote: »

Quick question for Mark Leonard. You mentioned that there was a big difference between the sparring you did in Taeqwondo and how you performed when you faced a Kickboxer. What made the difference?

The difference is that in Taekwondo there is an understanding that if a guy hits you in the head he is not going to hit you as hard as he can and try and knock you out, the reverse is true in FC Kickboxing. So I had trained in a discipline where you could compromise on defence to improve your attacks as the risk if you were hit was far lower. Turns out when you do that full contact folk, who aren't playing with the same deck as you, keep it tight and don't let any of your tap tappy Taekwondo kicks hit you, then when they hit you they mean it.

I presume at some point you are going to trot out the idea that because Thai, KB and MMA have rules that they are purely the product of those rules. That it is the scoring that takes punches in Kickboxing being the main means of attrition and turns them into leg kicks in Thai. You are right, I wouldn't dispute it. I am pretty sure that whatever conclusion you build on that may differ from the one I would draw at an angle of 180 degrees however
So all profession of not leading anywhere aside, make your point so we can get into the real debate

Michael O Leary

mark.leonard wrote: »

I presume at some point you are going to trot out the idea that because Thai, KB and MMA have rules that they are purely the product of those rules. So all profession of not leading anywhere aside, make your point so we can get into the real debate

Mark, I profess in all that is good and holy that I am not leading anywhere and I promise that I am not trying or am going to make any point.

Really.

I promise.

Michael

Michael O Leary

RedRaven wrote: »

Hi Micheal,
I will give you what I know on this.

With Thai the objective is simple knock your opponent out or damage him so he cannot carry on.

True Thaiboxers do stand toe to toe and bang away..but with Siamese fighters they dont kick to the legs as much as the western taught Thai boxers- this is because their defence with blocks are very good and some times if you low kick a good blocker you may damage your own shin as opposed to your opponent.

Body kicks and head kicks score very well- as do punches that rock the head-

grappling and knees score well, but delivery of the knee and manipulation of your opponents body during the grapple also scores highly.

Judging a Thai fight can be complex because of the speed of the various weapon changes. They happen very fast and you need to know what scores well and award the points according to the boxers skill,heart and fitness and aggression.

Hi Wayne,

Many thanks for the info. It was very interesting especially regarding the leg blocks

The main question for everyone however is the difference between full contact Kickboxing and Thai Boxing. Are there any other main differences apart from the allocation of points, clinch, elbows/knees?

Regards,

Michael

RedRaven

Here are some more

Fighting stance is different ie arched back ,hips forward...feet slightly raised left foot at 11 and right at 5... ..style of kicking the teps(front kick) are 50% power 50% speed and the toes are curled inward ....the kick is not flicked up and forward ...more knee raised and foot pushed out and driven by the hips for power(the kick is not flicked because of the blocking style of the opponent, flick a tep into an opponent and you will break you toes.

Round kicks are delivered with the hip incorporated in the delivery this is for added weight and power plus the shin is driven in and the foot is not used to strike it is pointed foot long...


...style of defence the weight in evenly distributed on either foot and the stomach in drawn back inward to reduce the chance of the tep landing and the knee also..

The shoulders are raised and the chin is dipped in between to reduce the chance of an elbow, punch or round kick...

Michael O Leary

RedRaven wrote: »

Here are some more

Fighting stance is different ie arched back ,hips forward...feet slightly raised left foot at 11 and right at 5... ..style of kicking the teps(front kick) are 50% power 50% speed and the toes are curled inward ....the kick is not flicked up and forward ...more knee raised and foot pushed out and driven by the hips for power(the kick is not flicked because of the blocking style of the opponent, flick a tep into an opponent and you will break you toes.

Round kicks are delivered with the hip incorporated in the delivery this is for added weight and power plus the shin is driven in and the foot is not used to strike it is pointed foot long...


...style of defence the weight in evenly distributed on either foot and the stomach in drawn back inward to reduce the chance of the tep landing and the knee also..

The shoulders are raised and the chin is dipped in between to reduce the chance of an elbow, punch or round kick...

Hi Wayne,

That is perfect, just what I was look for. Thanks.

So even if a Thai Boxer is fighting in a competition/sparring without elbows/knees, his stance, etc would be the same as if his opponent 'might' fire in elbows/knees?

I am sure there are many other differences but that just gives me a sample of some of them.

For everyone. Now I know these differences matter ‘with’ the inclusion of clinch/elbows/knees but without them and if there were no points allocated would there be much of a difference in performance between the two?

Regards,

Michael

mark.leonard

Low kicks are not allowed in the standard FC Kickboxing rule set.

RedRaven

Micheal

I still think there would because of the two styles mainly because of the targets and weapons used the Thai boxer would target the muslces and joints of the legs and the kicks would differ also Thai boxer would use the shin for kicks and the teps to the face and stomach..also in close combat the Thai boxer would have an advatage in turning the kick boxer on the ropes without grappling but using the body..

The methods used in Thai are basically stand and trade blows always going forward..where in kickboxing points are awarded for evading blows..this is also the case in Thai but only after delivery of a blow or advancing straight after evading a strike.

Michael O Leary

RedRaven wrote: »

Micheal

I still think there would because of the two styles mainly because of the targets and weapons used the Thai boxer would target the muslces and joints of the legs and the kicks would differ also Thai boxer would use the shin for kicks and the teps to the face and stomach..also in close combat the Thai boxer would have an advatage in turning the kick boxer on the ropes without grappling but using the body..

The methods used in Thai are basically stand and trade blows always going forward..where in kickboxing points are awarded for evading blows..this is also the case in Thai but only after delivery of a blow or advancing straight after evading a strike.

Again Wayne, many thanks.

Also thanks Mark on your info on low kicks being banned in some FC kickboxing.

Here is another question. Some MMA guys have said that Thai Boxing needs to be modified for MMA. Can anyone tell me what these modifications would be?

Regards,

Michael

RedRaven

Having trained MMA fighters and watched MMA guys the modifications required are typically Thai fighters hold a high guard but when facing an MMA opponent the high guard leaves you open to shooting...now this may also work as a advantage because a well timed knee can seriously damage the shootee....

Also when grappling much the same as fighting a san shou or sanda opponent the stance in grapple position needs to be adjusted in a lower settled position and not hips locked together as in Thai,this is so throwing is harder because shoulder and hip toss throws are not permitted in Thai..

These would be the main two in my opinion.

Michael O Leary

RedRaven wrote: »

Having trained MMA fighters and watched MMA guys the modifications required are typically Thai fighters hold a high guard but when facing an MMA opponent the high guard leaves you open to shooting...now this may also work as a advantage because a well timed knee can seriously damage the shootee....

Also when grappling much the same as fighting a san shou or sanda opponent the stance in grapple position needs to be adjusted in a lower settled position and not hips locked together as in Thai,this is so throwing is harder because shoulder and hip toss throws are not permitted in Thai..

These would be the main two in my opinion.

Thanks Wayne,

I have run out of questions.

Regards,

Michael

RedRaven

Anytime..your most welcome.

Khannie

Well....Wayne covered it all I think. Nice thread though Michael.

Michael O Leary

RedRaven wrote: »

Also when grappling much the same as fighting a san shou or sanda opponent the stance in grapple position needs to be adjusted in a lower settled position and not hips locked together as in Thai,this is so throwing is harder because shoulder and hip toss throws are not permitted in Thai..

The point about the hips locked together in the Thai Boxing clinch and not in the MMA clinch due to the presence/absence of throws is interesting. When I was at the Matt Thornton seminar 2 years ago I found the MMA clinch much more like the Wing Tsun clinch where there is greater distance between the hips than the Thai clinch.

Regards,

Michael

RedRaven

Yes it is an interesting one but in Thai the higher the head the less likely you are to get a knee in the head...

The short distance and hip lock is to press forward to avoid the knee bone being driven into the ribs or kidneys...

the greater the distance between the hips means the head and body are directely in line for a full thrust knee incorporated with pulling the head into the void created because of the distance resuting in a heavy blows with the knee.

Michael O Leary

To all the Thai guys,

Have any of you much interest in learning Krabi Krabong? I know you are all rightly proud of your unarmed Thai martial art and thought training with Thai weapons would be a nice compliment to your training. However as far as I know only Craig Flynn or Anthony Corkery studies it.

Michael

RedRaven

Yes both Craig and Anthony have studied it in the past, Paddy done a bit from our old Thai teacher Nidt Caweewat...

I would like to do it some day but you as I are locked in the same constraints of time!!

As I have to constantly tell the guys I was teaching in UCD my time is no longer my own..!!;)

I will be starting up the Thai classes in UCD soon enough...maybe sometime after XMAS

I think Bobby needs a bit of help in learning to block those legs kicks!!

john kavanagh

Michael O Leary wrote: »

When I was at the Matt Thornton seminar 2 years ago I found the MMA clinch much more like the Wing Tsun clinch

can you point to any online videos that shows WT 'clinch' resembling MMA style clinch. thanks.

RedRaven

Michael does the WT style incorporated ground work..the reason I ask is that an all round MMA clinch would be configured to cater for all formats of combat..this is because an attack can come from so many angles...an MMA fighter can adjust their stance very quickly to suit the attack that is pushed on them hence the all round grappling position.

john kavanagh

searched it myself and found this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryu5gt4macs

would this be typical WT clinch work?

cletus

john kavanagh wrote: »

searched it myself and found this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryu5gt4macs

would this be typical WT clinch work?

I was just looking at the clip above, and I was pretty confused. i know it hasn't been established whether this is "good" or "bad" yet but:

I train, when i have the chance, with Ger Healy and Fergal Quinlan. I would say from simply watching the above clip that it would be close to impossible to prevent the guys I've trained with in both those places gaining the thai clinch with the techniques being demonstrated above. Is it simply a drill, or is this considered the anti-clinch (much like the dreaded anti-grapple). also, wat is the instructor maintaining he will do to the neck at the end of the video, when he says "if I get this deep, why would i go for the clinch"

One last thing I noted, at about 6:54, the student has a (poor) clinch, and the instructor is talking about pushing and pulling the elbows to where the weakness is (my words), but in the end resorts to throwing a right hook to the body (I thought al Wing Chun punches were straight) to break the hold

Michael O Leary

john kavanagh wrote: »

can you point to any online videos that shows WT 'clinch' resembling MMA style clinch. thanks.

Hi John,

Not offhand. I would have to have a look. I don't actually spend much time on the internet.;)

Re the link you posted, I cannot access it in work. I will have a look at it when home.

The main principles of the WT clinch are to control the back of the head and from there apply elbows, knees while keeping your own elbows close to your body. If the opponent has good control of your head then control his elbows while trying to come on the inside of his grip to gain control of his head. We did a drill at the seminar which was 90% the same as what we do ourselves in WT and Matt said that what we did at the seminar was 90% of what he teaches in class.

Regards,

Michael

john kavanagh

Michael O Leary wrote: »

We did a drill at the seminar which was 90% the same as what we do ourselves in WT and Matt said that what we did at the seminar was 90% of what he teaches in class

...and that would be true for probably 90% of clinch work training at most mma gyms.

its just that when i did the 5min round with you it seemed very new to you so i was surprised that you actually had done something that was '90% similar' before.

i'll have to wait for you to comment on the video i posted but i was under the impression that was 'typical' WT clinch work from what i've seen.....and that type of clinch work is worlds apart from the clinch drill you did at SBG.

Michael O Leary

[QUOTE=john kavanagh;54676372
its just that when i did the 5min round with you it seemed very new to you so i was surprised that you actually had done something that was '90% similar' before.
[/QUOTE]

Hi John,

There were certain aspects that I was unfamiliar with. One thing during our 5 min round was that Matt would call out the moves to be performed and we would do them instead of us just doing our own thing. Thats why I was a bit surprised when out of the blue and with no instruction from Matt, you yanked my neck forward at one stage to knee me in the face.

My head would normally be more upright in the Wing Tsun clinch so in the MMA clinch my head was in an unfamilar position which made it easier for you to yank down.

I also found it hard to understand Matt's accent and when I did it took me a few seconds to remember the name of the move to be performed as I was unfamilar with MMA terms.

I also found the method of changing from the outside of the opponent arms to the inside to the head had a greater amount of moves. Apart from that I found it pretty familar. The thing is that when I go to a seminar I tend to concentrate on what I am being taught and rather than training the stuff that I am familar with, instead I go a little slower and try to incorporate the new stuff being taught.

Regards,

Michael

BobbyOLeary

RedRaven wrote: »

I think Bobby needs a bit of help in learning to block those legs kicks!!

Hey! Its a legitimate defense. Much like blocking punches with your face and the tap-out escape

RedRaven

Ha Ha....fair play lad...decent sense of humour..nice one??!!

Hows the training going Bobby??

Dave Joyce

Hey Mick, how ya keepin, haven't spoke with ya in a while. Just give ya some perspectives from my point of view. Although its a BIG misconception, Muaythai bouts CAN be won by boxing, (good example Anuwat http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlWxYN-IFG4 AND along with countless other Thais that have made the transition from MT to Western Boxing!!) alone BUT the shots must show effect and you must NOT be sustaining kicks that (again) are showing effect in the process. Knees in the clinch DO NOT score that highly surprisinglly enough. Another huge difference would be footwork, where KB is more like WB, whereas MT would place BIG emphasis on stability, so if you are hit, a weak shot doesn't unbalence you, therefore scoring for your opponent. Also, a LOT of camps don't believe in "wars of attrition" and teach different styles of fighting. Finally, the "BOXING" in Muaythai DID NOT come from Western Boxing, and was a complete part of the Science of Eight Limbs from way before any Western influences.

Finally, having trained with him a coule of times and with respect to Craig and Anthony, Frankie McConville is one of the best and most applicable Krabi teachers out there and yes I would love to do more of it, but for now 3 systems is MORE than enough for me LOL!!

john kavanagh

Michael O Leary wrote: »

Thats why I was a bit surprised when out of the blue and with no instruction from Matt, you yanked my neck forward at one stage to knee me in the face.

you've some memory! i dont remember that particular occurance but in the clinch surfing drill when we say 'double neck tie' you can knee from there or perform a snap down to front headlock for example. im sure matt explained that but i will concede to your far superiour memory if u remember otherwise.

Michael O Leary wrote: »

Matt would call out the moves to be performed and we would do them instead of us just doing our own thing.

well if you'd ever like to call out again on a thurs evening we do plenty of rounds of 'freestyle' vertical grappling

for me MMA clinch is the combination of

1. Thai clinch and
2. Wrestling clinch

i teach to use a thai style of clinch (with some modifications as wayne has pointed out) if you want to hit someone and use wrestling style (under/over hooks etc) if you want to throw them. these are the ranges that occurs naturally in a fight.

you ask two 'day 1' beginners to throw/hit each other while attached - they will naturally fall into neck ties and under/over positions. i've performed this experiment many many times with always the same results. i've never had them suddenly go into 'chi sao' style of clinch.

imho the range displayed in the WT clip above will only happen if both agree to stay at that range. it would never naturally occur, you'll never find a clip showing 2 guys fighting (not demo'ing) with their forearms pressed together exchanging movements while 'agreeing' to stay at range.

even in the infamous clip of 2 of the best WT guys havin a 'fight' all that trainin went out the window and they immediately crashed into a more natural mma style clinch fight - albeit very briefly as they quickly went to the ground.

but maybe i've been lookin at the wrong clips? if you find any ones that better represent what you do i'd like to see them

thanks

Michael O Leary

john kavanagh wrote: »

searched it myself and found this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryu5gt4macs

would this be typical WT clinch work?

No, that is very embarrassing. I will write more about this later.

Michael

Michael O Leary

john kavanagh wrote: »

you've some memory! i dont remember that particular occurance but in the clinch surfing drill when we say 'double neck tie' you can knee from there or perform a snap down to front headlock for example. im sure matt explained that but i will concede to your far superiour memory if u remember otherwise.

The fact that my neck was in bits for a few days helped my memory. When we put everything together at the end of the seminar, Matt only called out the moves that we had done in isolation during the seminar. We never snapped people's head down and kneed them in the face during the seminar and Matt did not call out for us to do this at the end. Matt did not explain anything about a "double neck tie" but I gave you the benefit of the doubt at the time.

Anyway, I cannot really say too much about the clip you mentioned. It is crap and embarrassing. The clinch that I have been taught in WT is like the Thai element of the MMA clinch that you mentioned and that I did at the seminar and the "Collar and elbow" clinch that I have done in BJJ and the Muay Thai clinch that I did in Bridgestone.

Chi-Sau is not meant to stay at a particular range. The reactions gained in chi-sau are to last a split second in a fight. We just isolate the range and work on it. However in my view, because Chi-Sau is unique to Wing Tsun/Chun, WT/WC practitioners spend an inappropriate amount of time on it. (Like a child with a new toy) Chi-Sau should be taught on top of more tangible elements such as pad work/sparring and not instead of them.

So for example the WT clinch is taught in the 5th student programme but a lot of people forget about it as soon as they start working on what they percieve to be more advanced WT. Instead they should work the clinch to death (and I say this to WT people all the time) and anything more 'advanced' should be taught on a drip basis and superimposed on top of the fundamentals.

However we receive a lot of criticism from other WT/WC people for holding back material in order to "draw out the process and make more money". The guys in the crap video clip are members of an organisation who broke away from us and whose goal is teach "advanced" Wing Tsun sooner.

The results speak for themselves.

Michael

john kavanagh

Michael O Leary wrote: »

The guys in the crap video clip

are there any good video clips?

Roper

Just a quick one I did that seminar and that clinch surfing drill. I have a fairly good memory too and on the double and single neck ties the drill called for both guys to strike from there, including with knees. Never got hit in the face meself but I did have a massive "third eye" in the middle of my forehead after that seminar!:D

john kavanagh

Roper wrote: »

I have a fairly good memory too and on the double and single neck ties the drill called for both guys to strike from there, including with knees.

thought so.

and i know i wouldnt have actually kneed to the head, wouldve just brought the knee up to show it was there.

darkman x

Organised dispair! I started off doing escrima and WT, and only through wasted years did i begin to cop on that hubud and chi-sau have NO practical application. In essence its really just hand chasing with cooperative partners which is liable to get you punched in the face in a real fight. Lets face it all the sensitivity drills begin from reference points, which wont exist in a real fight... get to work on your greco and forget all the WT/JKD tom-fool-ery.

Scramble

are there any good video clips?

One of the more frustrating things about martial arts discussions on the web is that often someone will say something to the effect of "If you see ( x training) done properly, authentically, it's really excellent".

If a particular type of training was that impressive, you'd imagine that footage of it would be more widely disseminated on the web. For example, are there any examples of top-notch, world-class vigorous silat (I take it as an example since there's another threading picking this topic over at the moment) or wing-chun grappling which are posted on-line, which all the silat / WC guys will give the thumbs up? It seems like in a lot of debates on the board about stuff like silat, wing chun (anti-)grappling etc. every clip which is posted as fodder for discussion seems to be dismissed as play / just a demonstration / light sparring / done by a beginner or bad practitioner of the art. I can't help but feel like the goalposts are being moved around a little bit.

While I accept that something doesn't necessarily have to be on YouTube to exist, nowadays it does seem increasingly likely that someone somewhere must have posted something approaching 'real' silat or WC grappling? If not, why not?

-too much time on my hands when I'm working nights.

Michael O Leary

Hi John,

I actually owe you an apology. I have a look at my post on my review of the seminar and we “did” apply knees from the clinch. So again, I apologise.

Darkman, where did you train WT/Escrima and for how long?

Scramble et al, I don’t know why there are not many, if any, videos showing the WT clinch. Maybe it is because for the sake of promotion people just want to video their “fancy” chi-sau. All I can ask is, why would I lie about the WT clinch? If we did not teach the clinch then I would not say we did. I would just rationalise saying, “it is not important, etc”. I have done a bit of Thai Boxing and I am doing some BJJ and the clinch in both is very similar to what I have been taught in WT. It is just not emphasised as much as in MT/BJJ/MMA and this is something I personally disagree with.

Regards all,

Michael

Havo

Well Wayne i heard u wer good at the thai but i had no idea u were such a great sumo wrestler;)...... Cheers for the bottle of bacardi:)

RedRaven

Havo wrote: »

Well Wayne i heard u wer good at the thai but i had no idea u were such a great sumo wrestler;)...... Cheers for the bottle of bacardi:)

Ha Ha...its all lies I was never any good at either!!

FiannaGym.com

WT clinch?

I have to say, having attended a couple of European Kung Fu championships, which had Full Contact fights (elbows, knees, punches, kicks and some clinch) had Chi Sou fighting and push hands fighting, I saw no clinch from any Wing Tsun guys.

Well actually, there was a challenge between two "kung fu masters" that fight quickly ended up in the "clinch" then on the ground, with both guys looking like completely untrained idiots.

This competition had about 200 competitors.





http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4kbz_wing-tsun-ko

Peace

EDIT: I just want to ask the WT guys, given that you defend the centre line, shouldnt it be impossible, at least in theory, to clinch given that you would walk into straight punches on your way in?

cowzerp

FiannaGym.com wrote: »

WT clinch?
EDIT: I just want to ask the WT guys, given that you defend the centre line, shouldnt it be impossible, at least in theory, to clinch given that you would walk into straight punches on your way in?

Very good!!

attacking in straight lines is ridiculus, imagine walking straight at a boxer or thai boxer, game over!
and how easy would they be took down?