[K-1Dork]

Originally Posted by Gregster

Even in the ring, I understand quite a few homegrown Thai fighters started having trouble when more and more Western-schooled fighters who were as adept with their hands as they were with their feet and knees competed with them since the Thai were not as concerned about working lots of fist strikes into their game and preferred relying on heavy shin and kneee strikes (MT guys, correct me if I'm wrong on this).

Youre wrong. Ramon Dekkers is probably the best known westerner to fight muay thai at Lumpini stadium. He had great hands, and beat some thais with his hands, but he couldnt beat the top thai fighters.

[K-1Dork]

Originally Posted by Sambo234

no style is effective against multiple attackers

Youre wrong, and the guy you replied to is wrong. No style is effective against multiple attackers? Bull. Look, a person who trains everyday vs. 3 dumbass wanna be tough guys. Ill take the person who trains everyday every time. I have personally beat up 2 guys that tried to jump me, and im not even the best fighter. I have a friend who knocked out at least 4 guys who tried to jump him in a club.

[Rudy Richter]

Originally Posted by K-1Dork

Youre wrong. Ramon Dekkers is probably the best known westerner to fight muay thai at Lumpini stadium. He had great hands, and beat some thais with his hands, but he couldnt beat the top thai fighters.

Dude... I think I think that was Gregsters point.

[klser]

Originally Posted by Gregster

Even in the ring, I understand quite a few homegrown Thai fighters started having trouble when more and more Western-schooled fighters who were as adept with their hands as they were with their feet and knees competed with them since the Thai were not as concerned about working lots of fist strikes into their game and preferred relying on heavy shin and kneee strikes (MT guys, correct me if I'm wrong on this).

Utterly wrong... It is just because, in Dekker time, there were a few Thai fighters with good hands but, just a few years before his first fight in Thailand, there were a lot of top puching-based guys like Samransak, Samart, Weraphol and more. The most popular technique on Dekker days was "Plowing" (baaned already) imo and I think that is one of the reasons why a few fighters with good hands were not ranked highly.

When they emphasise on kneeing or kicking it is not because they ignore puching but due to that they are not good at puching at all. So why wasting your time? Find you best weapons and emphasise on that (and also practice and realise all possible strikes). That is what muaythai offers you.

As for the Japanese, yes they did copy muaythai and propagate it as their art (called kickboxing) throughout the world during 70's and 80's. I don't want to give more comments on this but if someone needs more info, go to Sidyordthong or some old camps. They will tell you the story.

I agree that there are no guarantees by any art when facing multiple attackers but what is proven in the ring would have better chance. There is no prove or whatsoever but it is likely to be that way. Also agree with K-1 dork.

[klser]

Moreover, the best thai fighters during Dekker time were much lighter and smaller than him. He is great but most skillful? No

[Harajuku]

Originally Posted by klser

Utterly wrong... It is just because, in Dekker time, there were a few Thai fighters with good hands but, just a few years before his first fight in Thailand, there were a lot of top puching-based guys like Samransak, Samart, Weraphol and more. The most popular technique on Dekker days was "Plowing" (baaned already) imo and I think that is one of the reasons why a few fighters with good hands were not ranked highly.

When they emphasise on kneeing or kicking it is not because they ignore puching but due to that they are not good at puching at all. So why wasting your time? Find you best weapons and emphasise on that (and also practice and realise all possible strikes). That is what muaythai offers you.

As for the Japanese, yes they did copy muaythai and propagate it as their art (called kickboxing) throughout the world during 70's and 80's. I don't want to give more comments on this but if someone needs more info, go to Sidyordthong or some old camps. They will tell you the story.

I agree that there are no guarantees by any art when facing multiple attackers but what is proven in the ring would have better chance. There is no prove or whatsoever but it is likely to be that way. Also agree with K-1 dork.

I have never heard kickboxing called Japanese kickboxing here in Japan. They just call it "kick". Whether it be Muay Thai or whatever. I also do not know any instructors or fighters who call it Japanese kickboxing.

[Bas Rutten Gear]

I like some of the rule changes. If you've ever been to a MT fight, you see like 60 Ram Muays. I could do with less of those

[Bas Rutten Gear]

Originally Posted by Harajuku

I have never heard kickboxing called Japanese kickboxing here in Japan. They just call it "kick". Whether it be Muay Thai or whatever. I also do not know any instructors or fighters who call it Japanese kickboxing.

That makes sense. Just like in America boxing is just boxing, not American boxing.

[KingBee]

double post.

[KingBee]

Yea, it's probably just kickboxing, not a specific Japanese version of kickboxing. I had a person ask me what is the Korean style of Kwon Bub. I said it's not a specific style, it means like punching technique; like boxing is a style of Kwon Bub. I bet it's the same thing. Or maybe it's Kickboxing with a set of rules that Japanese people made.

lol in Wikipedia they listed Gumsool as a Korean style of sword fighting. Its just a word for sword fighting styles in general, not an actual style.