I add my improvised weapons to the mix if at all possible, tho.
It's the only way for my old thang to hit maximum effectiveness levels.
Erm... TC, Muay Thai doesn't use the actual knee or the actual elbow.
So you're hitting your opponent with the meat and bone a few inches below your elbows and knees.
You hit damn near close to it with enough trembling shock to still damage very sensitive areas (and they do use the knees actually, a lot), and as I'd mentioned earlier... if you don't land those hits just so, it will be the sensitive parts that take a direct hit. Someone blocking at an inopportune angle could bust the attacker, for good (and consequently the blocker as well... but it still operates as a double-edged sword gambit).
I only know a little of the technique, but what I did use was alarmingly effective. I did far more damage than I meant to when I used what I had recently been taught.
It's great for that, but it's not a very self-sustaining style if you don't otherwise compensate against tradition.
You use the shins and the back of your forearm.
Don't most kicking styles use the shin? 😏
Women's bones are less dense and easier to break. My stupid wrists broke in that fall on the ice I had last winter, and they never healed properly. They're weak af, now.
Bone in general is surprisingly fragile.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
Yes. The guy who taught me self defense was an army brat.
He taught me what are commonly referred to as "ripping school moves."
And I have to be extremely angry to use them.
Hahaha what?
Why can't you do them when you're chill?
I believe they were a combination of wrestling, muay thai, aikido and krav maga.
Mostly aikido.
lol
Please tell me your instructor had you training more than one side of your body.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
oh just checked my email
that's something at least
No questions. Just terminated. Maybe he did do it, but it's still sad that all a guy needs is to be accused and he's toast.
Inviting strangers you've met on dating apps over to a private setting for a drink is dangerous for both parties. We never go on dating apps to make friends, just partners and buddies.
In any case you should work with Tinder, cause if that guy was smart and recorded the encounter, and your drunk self who can barely remember anything seemed fine in the heat of the moment, the situation can do a 180 on you.
oh just checked my email
that's something at least
No questions. Just terminated. Maybe he did do it, but it's still sad that all a guy needs is to be accused and he's toast.
Inviting strangers you've met on dating apps over to a private setting for a drink is dangerous for both parties. We never go on dating apps to make friends, just partners and buddies.
In any case you should work with Tinder, cause if that guy was smart and recorded the encounter, and your drunk self who can barely remember anything seemed fine in the heat of the moment, the situation can do a 180 on you.
I can always count on tony to immediately pity the male. Thanks bro
Girl Meat said:I can always count on tony to immediately pity the male. Thanks bro
While I do think it's good to not just assume the victim of every story must be correct, his response about it did seem a bit more like the modern male-pitying script rather than taking a skeptically neutral stance.
It does say something about Tinder that they'd remove him no questions asked, but to me it says that they must deal with so much of this shit on the daily to the point of this being the more time-efficient answer.
Ę̵̚x̸͎̾i̴͚̽s̵̻͐t̷͐ͅe̷̯͠n̴̤̚t̵̻̅i̵͉̿a̴̮͊l̵͍̂ ̴̹̕D̵̤̀e̸͓͂t̵̢͂e̴͕̓c̸̗̄t̴̗̿ï̶̪v̷̲̍é̵͔
last edit on
11/11/2020 9:12:54 PM
I can always count on tony to immediately pity the male. Thanks bro
The Beautiful Ones.
They'd need to be in a fucking rage, and even then you heavily underestimate the pain of a swift hit to the groin (especially if they're trying to be a sexual predator).
From experience, it's knee buckling-ly awful, the stomach tightens, vision goes white... and that wasn't even from a full power hit.
Fair enough.
You highly underestimate kicks, but I guess that's to be expected from a boxer.
A kick is stronger but slower, which is why TKD aims for kicks as fast as punches while punch-pure aim for punches as powerful as kicks. Combining them allows punches to grant openings for kicks, and if they try to backstep a kick has just enough reach to catch them at their moment of irresolution.
I don't underestimate kicks at all, as a tall person that's teeps and round house kicks were my bread a butter given the distance they provide. I am not good at boxing, I suck with my hands. I am above average with my legs and elbows however given the leverage created through the length of my limbs.
I am merely stating that a man who seriously wants to do do you harm can power through a females kick as they probably have 50-100 pounds on the female.
Until you aim for their knees, neck, temple, elbows, nose, etc. The Protector had an interesting handle on this argument:
Part 1 (the humbling):
Part 2 (compensating):
Raw strength overcomes style as far as the fight being fair, but martial arts is also about deception and the milling of your opponent, and the ring doesn't lend to a knack for situational awareness.
Perhaps but IDK many females who have the situational awareness and confidence to deal with a man larger and stronger than themselves out in the streets.
Hands to hand is always risky and that risk amplifies when you are dealing with a male larger than you, even if you are trained.
Most trainers feel this way too, if your a female they advise you to disengage and get away as quickly as possible because your chances against a male are slim. Men are just stronger and can take more damage, you have to hit them hard to take them out and they don't have to hit you hard to take you out. Very simple.
It's as true as the limitations of the ring.
Put a middle weight against a heavyweight in a bar brawl or street fight and it becomes anyone's game.
Same rules apply in my opinion, that's what makes MMA great.
The only difference is you can't elbow to the back of the head, attack the goin, and you wear gloves.
So your best change is to attack a sensitive area, but the heavy weight is trained to protect those area (for instance protecting the groin is no different than protecting teeps to the thigh, knee stomps, and inner leg kicks) and depending on the system the means of defense is universal.
Most don't, but you also seem to reflect the modern MMA idea of sports combat; that raw power can be better than strategy.
I think strategy and raw power > then strategy and style.
Heavyweights are competent fighters and they have strategy, the difference is they are a lot harder to knock out and they can hit a lot harder then lower weight classes.
Israel Adesanya is my favorite fighter atm because of style and movement but i wouldn't bet on him against a heavy weight fighter.
What if this fight weren't in the ring though?
I see no difference given what MMA is.
If it's Thai Chi or some shit maybe, but a kick's more powerful than a punch and pressure points can fuck someone up on par with jiu jitsu.
I saw a martial artist a while back (on old tapes) who apparently trained to be able to throw people with just two fingers. Finesse can overcome power, it just becomes less straight forward.lol
Loling in general, or are you somehow under the impression that a punch is stronger than a kick?
Lol in general, kicks are superior imo.
It's a style that uses form and movement to disable your opponents instead of just breaking them with your fists, and they often talk about how to optimize it towards nonlethal takedowns.
It's a sophisticated style, you aren't just punching wood for hours.
Grappling and locking systems are not that complicated imo.
Some stand up systems are more complicated then grapaling and lock systems yet they only utilize punching kicking etc.
The best grapaling is simple the best stand up is simple.
BJJ without the point system uses simple take downs and simple locks, which is kind of the point of it.
Reduce complexity and rely on a number of principals and positions that if used and obtained give you all the leverage and opens up possibility for submission. It's like playing Chess, it may seem complicated but once you learn a number of principals like the potentiality of the center of the board your playing vastly improves.
So is punching a brick of metal every single day until you have a gnarled up death fist, but that doesn't make it strong enough to do the job on it's own.
"Effective and practical" is the Krav Maga slogan, and it's the gateway to shitty martial arts, and again Muay Thai leaves you horribly, career endingly, exposed to breaks from thinking elbows and knees can take it. They can even end up breaking themselves on their opponent as a matter of bad luck over how reckless the practices are.
Yes when put up against other systems is has proven itself as more effective again and again.
Once again, there's a reason why everyone in the profesional fighting world uses it as their base...everyone who used other systems as a base didn't far well.
There's a reason everyone who is trying to become a professional fighter practices it...because when put up against other stand up styles it has proven itself again and again.
They're just following the current canon, one that lends towards the rules of engagement more than a real fight.
A cannon established on systems clashing, look into the history of early MMA.
It doesn't if you aim for their knees, and many styles, even as baseline as TKD and Karate, have the perfect downwards stomp to ruin them.
They hit like lumber, but their telegraph is longer and they put themselves at needless risk. It's powerful, but reckless.
Muay Thai has knee stomps etc.
The difference between in and modern tae kwon doe and Karate is that its practicality comes out of experince where a match is built around actually taking your opponent out vs merely earning points and disengaging.
Tae kwon Doe and Karate are now seen collectively as inferior and impractical, not because they are but because the standard of training as degraded since the late 80's as it became more geared towards soft competition. This is not universal, but in general people find a hard time finding good instructors who are of the old guard. I'd argue something similar is happening to BJJ.
In the end it comes down to the individual and their resources, muay thai can be very fluid despite having a simple set of tools.
Lerdsila my favorite fighter is an example of this, he uses simple techniques yet is so fluid with his movements and he often dismantles more complicated systems with fancy moves.
Later moved on to do Muay Thai and BJJ.Oh, you're pretty into martial arts then?
Yes, it's the only sport I seriously watch and enjoy.
Mostly UFC, K1, and JJ and Judo tournaments.
They are effective as they are simple, but your chances are infinitely better if you own a gun.
Not going to argue with that :P
Yes.Started out learning Jeet Kune Do, Kali, and Silat.
Later moved on to do Muay Thai and BJJ.
Silat? Isn't that, like, an Indonesian martial art or something? You've been doing like everything. Did you do MMA as well?
Yes and Kali is Filipino, both cut from the same clothe and equally horrifying.
I would describe them as arst that are primarily concerned with killing your opponent as quickly as possible.
The emphasis is on uses edged weapons to attack vital areas like arteries and tendons.