Simple question, what's the best striking art and why?

MMAIRELANDFAN

Having trained some
KickBoxing
Thai
Different forms of Karateka

I have come to the conclusion that Kyokushin Karate is the best striking Martial art of all and with GSP been a practitioner there is some definite proof.

Opinions welcome and reasons for your choices?

Doug Cartel

Doesn't GSP train muay Thai with Phil Nurse?

Killme00

and boxing....

and gymnastics

paulmclaughlin

...and wrestling

Furious-Dave

MMAIRELANDFAN wrote: »

Having trained some
KickBoxing
Thai
Different forms of Karateka

I have come to the conclusion that Kyokushin Karate is the best striking Martial art of all and with GSP been a practitioner there is some definite proof.

Opinions welcome and reasons for your choices?

Can you give us your reasons for choosing Kyokushin?

ScareGilly

MMAIRELANDFAN wrote: »

Having trained some
KickBoxing
Thai
Different forms of Karateka

I have come to the conclusion that Kyokushin Karate is the best striking Martial art of all and with GSP been was a practitioner there is some definite proof.

Opinions welcome and reasons for your choices?

FYP, He was until he started to train Muay Thai & Boxing at a high level..

_oveless

MMAIRELANDFAN wrote: »

Having trained some
KickBoxing
Thai
Different forms of Karateka

I have come to the conclusion that Kyokushin Karate is the best striking Martial art of all and with GSP been a practitioner there is some definite proof.

Opinions welcome and reasons for your choices?

looking a video of kyokoshin you cant say with any kind of honesty that georges st pierre fights anything like that, I think his karate background is a myth or at least greatly exaggerated.

The Bored One

To be honest I'd say when any fighter is competing successfully at high level in MMA then their striking is going to be an almagation of styles anyway. It needs to be in order to deal with the numerous ways the opponent is going to try and hit them in the face.
Their base style might influence their game in certain directions but if they've been active for as long as GSP has at that level then their striking can't really be labelled as belonging to any one style.

paulmclaughlin

The Bored One wrote: »

To be honest I'd say when any fighter is competing successfully at high level in MMA then their striking is going to be an almagation of styles anyway. It needs to be in order to deal with the numerous ways the opponent is going to try and hit them in the face.
Their base style might influence their game in certain directions but if they've been active for as long as GSP has at that level then their striking can't really be labelled as belonging to any one style.

100% correct.

but if you're looking for a bit of self defense in a striking art, you can't go too wrong with muai thai.

Unpossible

Don't underestimate boxing.

yomchi

All the striking arts give something and everyone is going to have different opinions, therefore there is no 'best' - my opinion though is boxing.

HammerHeadGym

I'd have to say Muay Thai. It gives you the most options at every range, and doesn't stop in the clinch. A very close second would be western boxing. Kyokushin doesn't really do it for me in terms of striking arts. I don't really see the point in doing such a restrictive form of striking; No head punches, no knee kicks, no clinch, no elbows, no throwing. Seems like a very restrictive rule set, meaning that out side of the kyokushin community it wouldn't have nearly as much practical application as Muay Thai or Marquis of Queensbury boxing.

antybots

Hi,

Muay Thai is no 1 for me because the use of arms, legs, knees, elbows and clinch gives you the most options at various ranges and you are training to deliver full power 100% of the time. Top it off with the extreme endurance and fitness training that is par for the course and nothing beats it.

A close No 2 for me is Boxing because the footwork, head movement, conditioning and the effective striking from different ranges and angles makes it very potent. Anyone who fights has to learn some boxing or they are at nothing which is a pretty big endorsement of the art IMO.

ryoishin

The best for what?

Under specific circumstances I would say coaching is more important than the style.

Unpossible

No one is thinking outside the box, whats better than hitting someone with your fist or leg etc?
Hitting him with the whole planet

IPPON!!!

Furious-Dave

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

I'd have to say Muay Thai. It gives you the most options at every range, and doesn't stop in the clinch. A very close second would be western boxing. Kyokushin doesn't really do it for me in terms of striking arts. I don't really see the point in doing such a restrictive form of striking; No head punches, no knee kicks, no clinch, no elbows, no throwing. Seems like a very restrictive rule set, meaning that out side of the kyokushin community it wouldn't have nearly as much practical application as Muay Thai or Marquis of Queensbury boxing.

There are knees in Kyokushin, and elbows are taught in training, just not used in competition. Also, what throws are there in Muay Thai?

When it comes down to it I have to say MMA is best for striking. It isn't restricted by the cumbersome boxing gloves but also isn't restricted by the lack of safety when going bare knuckle. Yet contains the best principles from many striking arts.

In terms of pure striking arts I would put Boxing after Muay Thai and Kyokushin due to the distinct disadvantage of having no kicks or any defences against them.
Even then it really comes down to training methods and strategies/tactics used in fighting.

FruitLover

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

Kyokushin doesn't really do it for me in terms of striking arts. I don't really see the point in doing such a restrictive form of striking; No head punches, no knee kicks, no clinch, no elbows, no throwing

To be fair, that describes kyokushin competition sparring only. Actual kyokushin training includes everything you've listed.

Oops, beaten by Furious-Dave above...

Pride Fighter

I'm of the belief there is no better style, only better people. Look at the likes of GSP with Kyokushin Karate. That does not make Kyokushin the best martial art. What makes GSP is his hard work ethic, excellent technique, strength, power, flexibility and experience. Its the same with everyone else IMO.

cowzerp

Furious-Dave wrote: »

When it comes down to it I have to say MMA is best for striking. It isn't restricted by the cumbersome boxing gloves but also isn't restricted by the lack of safety when going bare knuckle. Yet contains the best principles from many striking arts. .

MMA striking is usually low standard Muay thai and Boxing so that makes no sense-the gear worn is irrelevant as in real fight it would be without Boxing gloves etc..

Furious-Dave wrote: »

In terms of pure striking arts I would put Boxing after Muay Thai and Kyokushin due to the distinct disadvantage of having no kicks or any defences against them.
Even then it really comes down to training methods and strategies/tactics used in fighting.

Again in a street fight there would be little standing off and just going in for the finish, Kicking would not come into a street fight if your smart, even some clown throwing a wild windmill punch could ruin your fight if you start throwing roundhouses etc...Boxing would easily be best in 1 on 1 brawl, add in Muay Thai clinch in case of them managing to grab you and you would be safest.

SanoVitae

I'd definitely go with boxing.

Not a very popular answer simply because it's their no mystique involved.

Martial arts with techniques like Flying Monkey Punches sound so much more exciting!

Doug Cartel

Pride Fighter wrote: »

I'm of the belief there is no better style, only better people. Look at the likes of GSP with Kyokushin Karate. That does not make Kyokushin the best martial art. What makes GSP is his hard work ethic, excellent technique, strength, power, flexibility and experience. Its the same with everyone else IMO.

I think you can say that some styles are better than others, but you have to look at it using averages. You can't compare them based on their best fighters any more than you can compare them using their worst fighters. You have to drop the outliers and compare what they do for the average Joe.

Dyr

baseball bat/hurley type striking would probably be best for the ould street fighting

Furious-Dave

Sorry, I was a bit drunk last night when I made that post. Now that I'm sober I'll make another attempt.

I don't know where that bit about MMA being best came from.
For sparring I'd agree with Pride Fighter in that it depends on the person. Muay Thai and Kyokushin have advantages in using their kicks to keep a boxer away or clinch if he gets too close but a good boxer can quickly close the gap and tear the other guys apart.

As for the street I can only talk about what I think would be best based on my own experiences. All of the fights I've been in had a stand off stage and I did use kicks effectively. But honestly, I don't think it would have made any difference if I had just used Boxing. For me street fighting is more about strategy and tactics than it is about style. So, Muay Thai, Kyokushin, Boxing, Kickboxing, MMA...take your pick, they're all full contact and that's all that really matters.

I'd still like to hear MMAIRELANDFAN's reasons for choosing Kyokushin.

And to finish off this post I'll use the old Boards.ie adage:

"There is no best style, only what's best for you."

Khannie

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Also, what throws are there in Muay Thai?

There are lots of throws in Thai.

The Bored One

In terms of training for self defence the different striking arts all have pro's going for them. I'd rate Muay Thai quite highly for it. It gets you used to taking hits, and comfortable using elbows and knees. Kyokushin has similar benefits as well as covering open handed strikes. In an oddly recurring theme boxing also gets you used to taking hits, as well helping you learn to deal with the most common type of striking you'll encounter.

Personally my advice if someone asked me what art to do for self-defence, I'd advised them to train regularly in MMA for about two years so they're comfortable with the different ranges and then start doing some self defence sessions on top of it to cover the gaps and differences they'd need to look at. This could take the form of classes or courses, or even just tailoring some regular training sessions to focus on self-defence.

Some folks will not like the idea of doing MMA or hae less interest in that, in that case I'd recommend they do Muay Thai/Boxing/Kyokushin and Judo for a similar period, possible a basic look at BJJ, and then likewise do some self-defence focus.

I wouldn't really mind which of the striking styles they decide to do so long as they look the grappling angle as well, and then a geunine overview of whats required for self defence.

Pride Fighter

Doug Cartel wrote: »

I think you can say that some styles are better than others, but you have to look at it using averages. You can't compare them based on their best fighters any more than you can compare them using their worst fighters. You have to drop the outliers and compare what they do for the average Joe.

I suppose you have a point, Kyokushin had the likes of Andy Hug, Masaaki Satake and currently GSP being elite level, whereas Dutch style Muay Thai provides many more K-1 champions.

HammerHeadGym

Furious-Dave wrote: »

There are knees in Kyokushin, and elbows are taught in training, just not used in competition. Also, what throws are there in Muay Thai?

I worded that wrong I guess, I meant there are no kicks to the knee allowed. With regards to the elbows, I find that unless it's for use in a fight, there's little point in learning it, surely it just detracts from the time you have available to learn 'legal' techniques. Or have I missed something?
As for throws;
this is basic enough, and more advanced. There's a couple of dozen throws in Muay Thai if you include trips and leg sweeps. I'll try and record some with my trainers this week and post it up.

Furious-Dave wrote: »

When it comes down to it I have to say MMA is best for striking. It isn't restricted by the cumbersome boxing gloves but also isn't restricted by the lack of safety when going bare knuckle. Yet contains the best principles from many striking arts.

I'm going to disagree here. I find that any decent striker in MMA comes from a striking background. I would also doubt the chances of any MMA fighter going into a boxing or muay thai match.

Furious-Dave wrote: »

In terms of pure striking arts I would put Boxing after Muay Thai and Kyokushin due to the distinct disadvantage of having no kicks or any defences against them.

Very valid point about kicks and their defence. Not sure I would put boxing beneath kyokushin because of it though.

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Even then it really comes down to training methods and strategies/tactics used in fighting.

While it plays a large part, I can't imagine any amount of training in say kung fu, for example, would prepare you for a fight in the ring against even an average boxer.

edit*- Boll!X, I'm just after reading your second post FD, lol

OLDMAN1

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

While it plays a large part, I can't imagine any amount of training in say kung fu, for example, would prepare you for a fight in the ring against even an average boxer.

That would depend on who you train with and the way they train!!!

Doug Cartel

On paper at least, san shou should be one of the best striking styles for MMA. (That is, of course if you consider it to be a "style", and even then if you consider it to be a striking style.)

It covers pretty much everything except ground fighting, and does so in a full contact, alive manner. I wouldn't say there's much about it you'd need to change to start using it in MMA.

garrybergin

In my opinion, its not the art or style that is important, its the practitioner of the art that counts - so forget about all that "on paper" cr&p!! and the circumstances the practitioner is put in -

e.g. you could be the best judoka in the world, but your snookered if a fight breaks out in a phone box coz you have no room to throw him/her - same with taekwondo - you can do a back spinning side kick in a phone box either !!

The success of every fighting system is relative to the unique situation you are placed into!

Doug Cartel

garrybergin wrote: »

In my opinion, its not the art or style that is important, its the practitioner of the art that counts - so forget about all that "on paper" cr&p!!

First up, I used the phrase "on paper" as to acknowledge that it's not really possible to make up a list and say for definite that one style must be better than another. These arguments come up all the time and though they can sometimes be annoying, they can also be fun, provided people give reasons for their choices. I was just trying to move the conversation along.

Secondly, saying it's all down to the practitioner is just as bad as saying that somebody doing art X would automatically beat somebody doing art Y. There are a number of factors that are going to affect the outcome, and the individual is only one of them. You think it's a complete coincidence that BJJ, wrestling and MT is the most common combination found in MMA?

e.g. you could be the best judoka in the world, but your snookered if a fight breaks out in a phone box coz you have no room to throw him/her - same with taekwondo - you can do a back spinning side kick in a phone box either !!

This is a fairly ridiculous situation though, isn't it?

Burnt

garrybergin wrote: »

...e.g. you could be the best judoka in the world, but your snookered if a fight breaks out in a phone box coz you have no room to throw him/her...

Strangle ftw

Sid_Justice

Doug Cartel wrote: »

This is a fairly ridiculous situation though, isn't it?

Doug Cartel

I stand corrected, this must be a much more pressing issue for the martial arts community than I first thought.

garrybergin

Burnt wrote: »

Strangle ftw

Coz strangles form part of a striking art ??? - THINK!!!

Doug Cartel

Garry, you said judo. Judo has strangles.

garrybergin

Secondly, saying it's all down to the practitioner is just as bad as saying that somebody doing art X would automatically beat somebody doing art Y. There are a number of factors that are going to affect the outcome, and the individual is only one of them. You think it's a complete coincidence that BJJ, wrestling and MT is the most common combination found in MMA?


??? - its not the same thing at all - what i'm saying is that its the fight in the dog, not the dog in the fight

- furthermore why even bring up BJJ or wrestling, this is a thread about striking arts !!:rolleyes::rolleyes:

garrybergin

Doug Cartel wrote: »

Garry, you said judo. Judo has strangles.

Another one !! thought this was about striking arts ???

- well aware Judo has strangles my friend, have a 2nd Dan in the Art :rolleyes:

Doug Cartel

garrybergin wrote: »

Another one !! thought this was about striking arts ???

- well aware Judo has strangles my friend, have a 2nd Dan in the Art :rolleyes:

Look, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but please don't start this kind of trolling.

NB. If you have issue with this PM me.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Doug Cartel wrote: »

Look, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but please don't start this kind of trolling.

NB. If you have issue with this PM me.

Just for the record Doug.

Garry is a mate of mine, a 2nd dan Judoka and he's not trolling.

Burnt

garrybergin wrote: »

Coz strangles form part of a striking art ??? - THINK!!!

What about, "Judo Chop!"?

Seriously though; it was a light hearted post to a fanciful situation,
hence the smilies, there isn't really need for stress and aggro.

FTA69

You can teach someone how to fight but you can't make someone a fighter so to speak; there's plenty of lethal scrappers out there who've never trained in anything in their lives.

However, if you wanted to teach someone how to fight and see a dramatic improvement in their ability to handle themselves (better than they would have before) I'd say boxing would be tops. After six months of regular training they would know how to throw a punch, how to take one, how to move off after hitting (footwork) and how to keep the head busy. That's the fundamentals you're going to need like.

chprt

right what about 8 men from any striking art, all of roughly the same standard meeting up. €125 each have an 8 man tournie and the winner takes the grand...

do it some sunday afternoon, failing that make a proper show out of it...

... karate vs thai

... tkd vs kung fu

... like the good old days

paddy

Bujinkan

chprt wrote: »

... karate vs thai

... tkd vs kung fu

... like the good old days

paddy

Ahhhhh...flashbacks to the early days of the UFC!!!

arybvtcw0eolkf

chprt wrote: »

right what about 8 men from any striking art, all of roughly the same standard meeting up. €125 each have an 8 man tournie and the winner takes the grand...

do it some sunday afternoon, failing that make a proper show out of it...

... karate vs thai

... tkd vs kung fu

... like the good old days

paddy

I'll fight any of the above, and beat them with my Judo

IN A TELEPHONE BOX

HammerHeadGym

OLDMAN1 wrote: »

That would depend on who you train with and the way they train!!!

No. No it wouldn't. As earlier UFC demonstrated, Most karate forms, Kung fu, Tae kwon do, got bashed and never came back. Same for K-1.

I'm not saying their not valid for self defence type scenarios, but they could never be considered among the best striking arts.
Unless you have a link, showcasing correctly trained kung fu, I'm going to remain unmoveable on this one.

Doug Cartel

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

No. No it wouldn't. As earlier UFC demonstrated, Most karate forms, Kung fu, Tae kwon do, got bashed and never came back. Same for K-1.

I think the problem is you're thinking about this kind of kung-fu

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEgzIyuPHsg

and OLDMAN1 is thinking about this kind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4kDlGA_aPI

garrybergin

Ibrahim Alive Sandalwood wrote: »

I'll fight any of the above, and beat them with my Judo

IN A TELEPHONE BOX

Yeah Martin, you would definately win with the spolier off your car mate !!! you'd do some damage with that !!!:D:D

OLDMAN1

chprt wrote: »

right what about 8 men from any striking art, all of roughly the same standard meeting up. €125 each have an 8 man tournie and the winner takes the grand...

do it some sunday afternoon, failing that make a proper show out of it...

... karate vs thai

... tkd vs kung fu

... like the good old days

paddy

I think that would be a great idea, but i would have a few suggestions
(1) only instructors so there is no arguement that one guy has more experience that another, if your teaching you should know it all(in your style).
(2) no gloves,no rules(all strikes standing and on the ground)
(3) 1 round, no time limit
(4) more money, 300 at 25 euros is 7500 euros plus 2500 profit from the bar= 10,000 euros , less expenses, venue,insurance. winner takes all...

garrybergin

OLDMAN1 wrote: »

I think that would be a great idea, but i would have a few suggestions
(1) only instructors so there is no arguement that one guy has more experience that another, if your teaching you should know it all(in your style).
(2) no gloves,no rules(all strikes standing and on the ground)
(3) 1 round, no time limit
(4) more money, 300 at 25 euros is 7500 euros plus 2500 profit from the bar= 10,000 euros , less expenses, venue,insurance. winner takes all...

my money would definately be on Andy Ryan !!!

failing that "Makikomi" with his car spolier !!!:D:D

OLDMAN1

garrybergin wrote: »

my money would definately be on Andy Ryan !!!

failing that "Makikomi" with his car spolier !!!:D:D

I didn't know Andy Ryan did striking, even so he could throw, get mount and then strike away...