Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/12/2019 in all areas

  1. Exactly why training is so important, I reckon. No abuse on my behalf but kinda left to my own devices and just angry at the world. Training was I think what gave me a compass, I watch a lot of mates get in way more trouble than I did. I've lost a mates to drugs and violence. But the one constant was training, I got a trade, I got a wife, I got a couple of kids. I've ran a couple of successful businesses and I truly believe being able to train and have positive people around me has made all the difference. I'm not saying I haven't made some really fucking stupid mistakes in my years on this earth, but without the release of hard physical training and discovering through that what you're really made of and who you truly are deep inside, those mistakes would have been far more damaging.
    3 points
  2. This post grows out of a really excellent thread started by James Poidog on training fighter aggression, especially for those uncomfortable with aggression themselves (that thread is linked at the bottom here). I started answering James and then just realized that this probably deserves a thread of it's own. This was the beginning of my answer: I hope she hops on here to discuss, but I'm just giving my view. I've seen female fighters go this way. Roxy Richardson advocated for it in some blog posts, Michelle Waterson talks this way. For Sylvie the creation of an alter never was super effective. She wasn't at peace with the values in that alter, and Muay Thai is so much of her soul I think it all was a little jarring, and in a way "not believable" to her, so it didn't quite stick. You definitely see this in male fighters too. The whole "persona" which works well with marketing, etc. But what Sylvie seems to have discovered for herself is the mantra: "The way you do one thing is the way you do all things." which means that if you want to fight differently, you have to bring those values and habits into your life, the way you do other things. An interesting example for instance is that as a Muay Khao fighter you need to constantly be taking up space. More and more space. Sylvie's physically small, often shy or reclusive person. She has been moving out of the way of people for a very long time, sometimes just out of the reality of what happens on sidewalks. So...when you are moving through supermarket aisles, who is the one who moves out of the way first? You don't have to be an asshole about it, but always one person makes the gesture to move first. Who is that person? If you really want to naturally be a certain way in the ring. for instance somehow who takes up space, yes, you can make up the "Space Eating Monster" alter who just gobbles space, or...you can become someone who increasingly takes up space more often, in all things, in all ways. What I find really interesting about this is that the reason why people are drawn to certain personas, or let's say certain fighting styles, like literally drawn like a moth, is that they speak to something deep inside, something that they might not be reconciled with. Training toward something in technique, or in style, or even persona, in the gym, is a way of working toward that expression, that thing. Alters are way of approaching that, but it seems much cooler, much more rich and transformative to literally take that thing, that desire onto yourself, and start to shape your life with it. I think that's much closer to the arc that fighters are spiritually aiming for in the first place. There is also always a suspicion for me that when people put on alters that those masks can break, if you push on them hard enough, that the fighter, or even the person in life, doesn't really, really, really believe that that is who they are. And that there can be a kind of fragility to that path. Yes, you can put on masks to grow into them, to give permissions, that's a tool, but what is is stronger, like a slowly growing oak tree, to really become what you dream. The original thread conversation spin off:
    2 points
  3. I think I see where you are going with this... (I hope you don't mind my humor! I just couldn't help it, just love the Hulk too much...)
    2 points
  4. Oh and side note on language. I had a professor that was really known for his theories on language. He believed, and could back it up with research, that to really learn a language you had to think in it. So how do you do that if you dont understand it? He realised that people living in other countries picked up the language faster than those that were at home. He deduced that it was the immersion in the culture that really got them to be so responsive. It wasnt just that you had to learn because thats all they spoke, it was that culture shapes the brain and language is tied to culture. In essence it was really the immersion to the culture that got you thinking the right way to be able to think in the language, like a prep or lol pre workout. You became primed to learn. It really made me become more receptive to idea that culture (basically ideas) is the root of everything.
    2 points
  5. This is definitely true, but I do think people do crave structure, if only subconsciously. To be clear, I mean westerners when I say people too. I cant speak to other countries and cultures, but I do believe western culture wants it to various levels. In teaching kids, I see it. Without structure to what we do they get bored and chaotic. The trick for me is to avoid the pitfalls of structure, the routine. So like I said above, I outline loosely to have an idea of what I want to teach, I plot time loosely so I know how much I have to get ideas across, then I go and see what will happen. Im not using structure as control for the uncontrollable. Im using it just to be more efficient with the time I have. And I think thats maybe where we westerners get our "crave" from. Its super time oriented here, right? Its part if why we have that rush culture, especially in LA. So, my hour class might be plotted like this: 5 min warm up, 15 mins bag work (if I have a plan for it itll be something like work jabs add movement), 15 mins partner drill (with the lesson, usually tied to bag work lesson), 15 mins spar/clinch work. Thats just an outline though. If they are vibing on the bag, we could stay there as long as they want. Just depends on the organic components you cant plan for. I think that crave of structure is just a hope of control in the uncontrollable. We like it not because we necessarily need it so much as are conditioned to it and maybe wish for more of it in lives that can be chaotic. Hopefully that explains my thoughts better. Trying not to ramble, so I might not always explain myself fully.
    2 points
  6. I do wonder why I have such an aversion to this Alter-Ego thing. An immediate thought that comes to mind is a comparison to acting. I'm a good actor, I enjoy it, I like impersonating people - I do a very good Karuhat strut. But I'm being Karuhat; it still belongs to him in a way. So I'm "performing," not identifying. I can't remember what actor it was, but someone famous enough to be profiled in a magazine I would read said that s/he liked acting because it allows one to experience very different life choices, without any of the consequences of actually having chosen those things for yourself. I find that kind of bullshit, honestly. I find actors who say they "lose themselves in the role" to be full of shit, too. You're either taking yourself into different silhouettes or you're keeping parts of those characters in yourself; or both. But in my mind, there's no such thing as without consequence. Which I think is what the whole idea of an Alter-Ego is. I understand the notion that your fighter-persona has permissions that you, in your everyday life, don't. I don't go around trying to knee people's guts out at the supermarket. But I can't conceive of having a different set of values for in the fight and out of it. I'm all unified theory, I guess. If I need to be more merciless in the ring, then I need to be more merciless in my life. I can't hold a value in one context and not in another. There is no escaping the consequences of actions just because of context. You either live a value or you don't. And maybe because it's something that I can't quite wrap my own heart around, I am tending to assume a much larger divide than is real for those of you who do feel these alters... like, it's not so much Jekyll and Hyde as it is Big Alice and Small Alice. Big Alice can pick up the deck of cards and toss them around, Small Alice can't. I get that. But they're not separate identities to me.
    2 points
  7. My real analogy, the one I always turn to, is the learning of language. Do we really crave structure in learning a language? I kind of think not. I guess I can only speak for my own experience, but structure when learning a language always feels like something getting in the way. Just a bunch of stuff to be memorized, tested on and then filed away. When learning a language you immediate, more or less, want to know how to use it. Right away. How do I say "cat"? How do I swear? And, as everyone knows, the most direct path to fluency is immersion. Which means using it, using it, using (for a very long time wrong). Muay Thai, at its real level, is like a language. Which is why it's pretty much taught like a language in Thailand. You learn a couple of words, and then you just start using them. Then you learn some more, and you use them. You are not taught structurally. Now, I understand that teaching a class of 30 people, of differing levels, in an unstructured way is not easy. And indeed for many it might be impossible. But it does happen in Thailand, only it's not a class. I think the real reason why something like Muay Thai is taught in a structured way, so much, is because of the demands on teaching itself, which is not easy. Not really because people crave structure. I was always struck by watching Andy Thomson teach beginners (a westerner who taught in Thailand for 2 decades). He would start them out with. Stand naturally. Now take one step forward. There, that's your stance. And he would proceed like that, and in 30 minutes - I swear - you were "doing" Muay Thai. Like...pretty damn good Muay Thai, considering. He put them on the bike immediately, and he was like: pedal. I don't think this kind of training or teaching style is easy. It takes a certain perspective. But one of the coolest things about Muay Thai is just how simple it is, at the bottom of it all.
    2 points
  8. It truly means a lot to hear that others are sparked by my thoughts and my words. As you can tell my mind is ever expanding in its search for implication, and I truly believe that Muay Thai is the great arts in the world, period. And I mean any art. The plastic arts, the literary arts, all of the performed arts. There is nothing that pulls on so many strings, and has the potential to reconcile the traditional and (hyper)modern worlds as much as Muay Thai, that is, the Muay Thai of Thailand.
    2 points
  9. Kero, mate. I really like your openness. This comment is in no way advice. I'm definitely not anyone to have the temerity or arrogance to advise someone on how live. But there is so much truth in what Kevin wrote. I'd kill to be half as good a wordsmith as he is. He is so correct in as I understand his statement, people who develop alter personas all ways come apart eventually. Occupying your own space doesn't entail being an arsehole about it, if it's genuine. My Kru, I first met him when I was 19, I'm 48 now. I was at a gym and he was visiting and the aura he gave off was just incredible. And he has to be one of the most approachable people if ever met, but you were very aware his space was his space. He's nearly 70 now and the same way. So I guess what I'm saying is be true to who you are.
    2 points
  10. I firmly believe in what you just said. If you push someone with an alter persona, they eventually "drop their nuts", as we say here. I love your reference to Sylvie's discomfort with adopting such an approach and her stock (which is already very high in my value) has risen exponentially. I regard myself as Muay Matt, this fits with my psyche and the way I am in general, that's not say I'm a pugnacious type, I'm just confident in who I am. I'm a firm believer in being true, if you aren't the only person you're truly hurting is yourself. One has to be able to look in the mirror, so to speak, and like what they see. I keep forgetting to let you guys know what an impact you have had on me. I was always convinced that I was the only one who intellectualised on martial theories, most of my friends don't grasp the concepts I come up with, my kru does, but he's a rarity and I have the utmost respect for him and the impact he has had on my life. As a rule, I have shied away from the internet and discussing things in such an open format. Shit, I don't even facebook. I discovered Sylvie on YouTube after several years absence, and I really can't verbalize how much I was impressed. I enjoy your writing, Kevin. The obvious thought, research and knowledge you put across is truly amazing. Watching the evolution of Sylvie, of course as a fighter, but more importantly as a woman has been amazing.
    2 points
  11. 100%. You and I are the same age. I'd surmise even though we are from different countries our schooling and formative educational experience would be similar. I.E. everything by rote. So I truly believe structured learning like you said (a better term,), is what we crave as it's what we respond too. However, thanks to Sylvie and something she said, I've adopted a try not to try sort of approach and just let it flow. In how I conduct a class eg. Instead of trying to plan a class down to the minute, last detail, I just let it happen as it plays out, if that makes sense,my own personal training and the way I encourage my students. As it stands at the moment, I know I teach better, I know I train better and the students are performing better. All because the aspect of self criticism has almost totally disappeared. And one thing most people are really good at is being over critical of themselves.
    2 points
  12. I am something more like this, except I had almost over-trained my functional self in years of sobriety, such that the “crazy” kept leaking out around the edges. Fight training has been a godsend, restored me to sanity not least because I don’t have to pretend I’m something else. Violence for fun was normal in my family.
    2 points
  13. This is a great point and something I think about with former fighters who've retired, those that stay retired and move onto other ventures and those that cant seem to stay retired even if the majority of fandom thinks they should. I feel like its part of the reason some cant retire to save their lives and others end up with major personality problems that end up on the news (like domestic disputes, etc). Its a tough subject one has to individually address. If your only outlet for certain emotions is fighting then what do you do when you cant? Personally, Ive had to deal with this aggressively. I know now that Im not completely made up of rage and aggression, but it took years of learning to deal with these emotions when they werent appropriate to the situation. Finding other outlets (like exercise) and learning dealing tools (like meditation, psychology, etc.) became invaluable. It became about finding a balance between the things that have become who I am. Not an alter so much as a blend, or a mix that has more of a percentage at the surface during specific situations. Its a work in progress, one I think Ill always be working on, but its always better the longer I live and deal with it.
    2 points
  14. For me, its more that the persona I have when I train or fight is more the real one the one I cant let fully out in normal life. Ive had emotional issues as a kid from past abuse that left me with an unhealthy anger and no real way to deal with it...until I started training. Training let me use it and let it out to a degree that made it manageable in regular day life. If I have an alter its more the good and kind person I trained myself to become. The killer mentality has been there so long, its a part of me no matter what but it has so many detractors in regular dealings I had to learn to manage it and training helped me. Specifically in learning when and where to unleash it in training and fighting. Btw Kevin, this post is exactly why I posted earlier. I love to see how an idea expressed leads to other ideas and thoughts.
    2 points
  15. I need to keep that very much in mind. I have been trying for years to stop being the one who moves out of the way of people when walking in the street. Sometimes I succeed, but most of the time i fail. I'm not the confrontational type. I hate contact and I hate conflict. I've only very recently told people I don't do cheek-kissing (this is the French way of greeting people - I fucking hate it) and sometimes i still do it: when people are too insisting or when I care too much about their feelings or when I'm just caught off guard, and the conditioning takes over. Yet I love the contact in a Muay Thai context. I enjoy the violence and I actually do enjoy hurting people - and being hurt too, just as much, maybe more. I find it so much easier to take space in this context. But I don't want my personality/mind to be fractured and dispersed. I think it may be a lot easier to have different personas than to build yourself as a whole person. Having Alter Egos sounds very cool, appealing and romantic. It's a popular trope in pop culture. You see it all the time in super heroes. I was drawn to it for a while - as a sort of trendy thing to aspire to. But when I think about it and after reading your take on it, it does sound way more badass to simply be whole, just completely yourself all the time. Also to be accountable to everything that you do, and not just be like "well, can't help it, that's my other persona / the demon inside me / the addiction / bla bla bla". Like Eminem with his Slim Shady. "I can be an asshole, and a monster and a psycho because that's not really me actually. That's my other darker me." -> it sounds a bit like escapism. The ring can be a place where you escape. You think you're dealing with whatever troubles you deep inside that created that fracture in yourself by being a monster in the ring, and maybe it does help a little. But if you're ONLY "dealing" with it in the ring and never outside of it, what happens when you can't be in the ring anymore? When you don't have your mean to escape, to let off some steam, what then? I guess that's what happen then. You're more likely to break at some point. It's too fragile to be split. Look at what happened to Voldemort and his horcruxes. Lol.
    2 points
  16. There's a couple of good articles here about the early days of Muay Thai in the UK: http://fightland.vice.com/blog/when-manchester-was-mecca-for-muay-thai http://fightland.vice.com/blog/the-gym-above-the-restaurant-master-woody-the-other-thai-in-manchester
    2 points
  17. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  18. Gotta admit, most of this sounds like fairly dark and scary shit to me. Not be squeemish or anything but....shit, thinking too much about this stuff reminds me of those fucked up Tumblrs. But anyway. Actually, someone on another thread talked about Hannibal, dunno if you guys meant the old movies, the books or the tv show. But in the new series, the main guy kept saying his real fantasy wasn't killing people, but watching a teacup drop and break apart on the ground. In that moment when it smashed, he wished time would stop and reverse, and all the pieces of the teacup would gather up together and be a teacup again. That's basically what it feels like when you're losing a fight and somehow come back and win. He's stronger, better, faster, nothing's working and you feel like you're drowning and there's no way out. But then all of a sudden something works and you can't believe it. That's the teacup gathering up again.
    1 point
  19. Yes. 100%, but it is also that you have to use the language - albeit full of errors and inexactness - all the time, you fumble your way through, often without any correction, but just through living use, you somehow find a way, you find correct. If it was just being IN the culture, a lot more long term westerners in Thailand would speak Thai. A large number of them do not. In fact, I don't at all, I've been here 7 years. Sylvie is almost fluent, or at least getting there pretty quickly. The difference between us is that she fumbled and bumbled through uses of it, to do real things, to interact, shape things, get things done. I didn't. Andy Thomson, the amazing coach I mentioned above, didn't really speak Thai after 25 years here. But, I totally agree that if you have the opportunity to USE the language repeatedly in the culture you get all kinds of rich clues about the uses of it. This is one of the beautiful, kind of amazing things about real Thai gyms like the one Sylvie finds herself in, there is just a tapestry of Thai "Muay Thai" culture everywhere, and that whole culture of behavior and values - how you hold your body, how you hold aggression, or exhaustion, or respect...- molds all the techniques you are trying to use. That's the super difficult thing about teaching Muay Thai in western contexts, the "culture" of Muay Thai (in the Thai sense) is missing, all the rich, tiny stuff. You can try and duplicate certain aspects. You can wai when you come in, you can adopt Thai attitudes in techniques, but it's just really an absolute shadow of a Thai gym, and kind of feel just like imitation and in some cases caricature...so, maybe that's why instead you need structure, for the absence of "culture".
    1 point
  20. 1 point
  21. This is why Ive been against it 100%. That sense of it being fake. For me because being "normal" vs my anger self (or whatever you wanna call it, hulk or something like that) felt so fake I had trouble seeing aspects that I could learn and become. Now I see it differently. I realise for me that these are things I can learn amd absorb to make my own. In doing so they become my version and 100% real. Theres this theory that everything we eat and love to eat is an acquired taste. As adults we can eat something and immediately like it, but the thought is its because we already acquired the taste as a child. As children we learned to like some things. Remember coffee the first time? Or beer? The idea then becomes that we dont really have set things in place as to who we are really and as we age and grow we collect the things we become. In that sense we can continue to become, to grow. For me to become better, I had to accept that my perspective of things being fake was limited. Now Im a different person and very much not the angry kid. I became more my "alter" than what I thought was who I was truly. And to be clear I dont mean fake it til you make it, but to really learn to walk in those shoes, to learn to become something else.
    1 point
  22. Yeah please dont misunderstand, the structure is loose lol. Its there in outline only. There still has to be an organic element to the class I believe. So I plan what I want to teach then see how it goes. Structure as in direction, not criticism or limitation.
    1 point
  23. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  24. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  25. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  26. My spinoff thoughts on this!
    1 point
  27. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  28. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  29. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  30. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  31. Ah ok they are using it in a physics sense. Definitely needed to read that. Never took physics, but get that it describes an aspect of movement in connection with time.
    1 point
  32. This is ongoing for me. Ive had success and failure with this, which is why I pose the question to fish and see if theres anything I can use to be more succesful with it. Kevin gave gold in what he said above which will definitely help me with people that dont necessarily like the agression aspects of fighting (negative connotations to their past, etc). Being able to teach them how to be dominant (positive) without the aggression (negative) is an excellent skill set I can develop further because of the things you guys have said.
    1 point
  33. No, thats the point of these actually. Just let it spill out lol. Its like round table discussions. The idea is to pose something and see what comes out. Thanks for being such a good interactive person. I for one appreciate it.
    1 point
  34. I ask outve general curiosity because Ive actually had so many different people exhibit different responses to this. Yes, Ive definitely had people that couldnt (or maybe wouldnt) tap into this and Ive had some that tapped into it too much lol. I was the latter and more conan but had to learn to be more dexter. Im definitely someone that can scale back my aggression and domination depending on the person's needs in front of me. And thats how I see it too. From a coach's perspective, its about the needs of my students. Thats also part of why I ask these things, to be able to use what I find here for them. Currently, I have one fighter that has as close to a perfect mentality when it comes to this as Ive ever encountered. He is just that way as a human. Rarely gets overtly emotional, but can show as needed. Hes easily able to be dominant with clinical detachment. He keeps that detachment even when its not going his way. In his last fight he got his nose broken during the second round. It wasnt until the end after finishing his opponent that he then asked me "Hey coach, can you look at my nose? Is it crooked?". He knew something was wrong but just put it aside til the job was done. I find all of that, all of this psychology fascinating.
    1 point
  35. Real good thoughts, and no I dont necessarily know this either or maybe I do but its not foremost in my brain at the moment, so its great to see it written out. Its just excellent tactical training. Maybe thats it too, tactical is domination without necessarily having aggression.
    1 point
  36. I will quickly comment on this. Maybe the term used by westerners, instead of mechanized, is structured. I truly believe we crave structure. I had a coach teach that mentality to me from the system he used and honestly since I started using it, its been easier to teach people. Ive never taught outside the US but I have taught a lot of people from other countries that move here and they respond just as well to a structured system. I wonder if its a by product of how we a re raised and taught growing up. If it doesnt have something to do with comfort. Similarly to the essay above, we crave structure because its familiar and familiarity breeds comfort.
    1 point
  37. Wow. Wowow. Thank you, this was an excellent essay. You put into words things Ive felt for a while. Ive got to digest before I say more, but this was really great.
    1 point
  38. I am interested to read you understand this as a trainable quality rather than something you have innately or not. I would love to read your experience with bringing it out in people (though I know you are asking for others’ point of view).
    1 point
  39. hahahaha. Sure. This is the better article: Ars Technica Rat brains provide even more evidence our brains operate near tipping point
    1 point
  40. Well I think I was trying to cheat and just read your post since I am trying to get the kids off to school, do chores, chase chickens etc. I'll read it later if there are clear terms.
    1 point
  41. What is at stake here is pretty much the mechanistic world view which we have inherited from the industrial age. Models of the world call our attention to certain features, and suppress our attention to other features, and let's just grant that there is no one "all features" model of the world. A great deal of what we do in the west in terms of Martial Art or combat training comes out of our gearworks mentality. We largely see the world in terms of interconnected cogs or forces that behave in practical ways. And if something predictable fails to occur we lift up the hood and check for where the connection is broken. We do this with ourselves as well, often trying to fix or replace "broken" parts, like our beliefs (that may be holding us back), or habits. We imagine that if the parts line up the machine of the world will work as it should be. And you can see this kind of mechanistic thinking in fight training. Especially in Dutch Kickboxing (taking its cue from Karate's katas, fused with boxing combo thinking), we practice set patterns that are imagined to work like a mechanism unfolding. In fact people partner up and exchange set patterns in simulated "sparring" just to make sure the well-oiled machine of responses is properly geared. You jab, I slip. You cross, I lowkick. Etc. One reason why this patterned teaching proliferates is that it fits in well with our mechanistic world, another reason is that just like in the world of commerce, making widgets (discrete units), and selling and moving them quickly, is a very keen business model for the production of knowledge. You can just stamp them out and put them in a relative assembly line. I'm not saying that all patterned instruction is like this, but we should understand that there is a certain cultural, commercial and paradigm-based balast to all of this practice,. What the complexity systems theory does to this mechanistic world view is change up our expectations, and revise our concept of "error" (or non-response, null value). Error is not necessarily a feedback of a broken part. It may simply be a criticality building system under development.
    1 point
  42. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a password protected forum. Enter Password
  43. this is the craziest thing, Isaan seems like it's the bread-basket of amazing techniques, but it is saddled with rural stereotypes.
    1 point
  44. We have noticed that the Long Clinch, as Sylvie studied from Tanadet - in the Muay Thai Library here - seems like a Northern technique, at least at this point in time. You can see the Long Clinch in the first part of this video: But, we are just guessing that this is a Northern technique, based on where we've seen it used more often. As to regions, back when Muay Boran was codified in the early 1900s, sure there were regional styles, but today styles and the adoptions of techniques seem much less in terms of region, than in terms of krus or padmen, who disseminate their own tool box in a particular gym. Because Krus and padmen move all over the place, they take their tool box everywhere they go.
    1 point
  45. I don't think this is the case. It might be that the way Muay Thai is watched and scored in the provinces allows for more clinch, so the fighters rely more on clinch, whereas fighting in Bangkok the clinch is broken more quickly, so fighters need to make adjustments to that, etc. But it's not divided by style in any way that a casual, or even familiar eye would detect. A few of the men I've talked to who are of the Golden Age age (meaning now they're in their mid-40s and older), talk about how Central Thailand (Bangkok, Chachoengsao, Chonburi and maybe stretching into Ayuthaya area) the fighters are both skilled and strong (i.e. the best), with a nod to the South for being the same; but they complained that Northeastern fighters are strong but not skilled, and Northern fighters are skilled but not strong. I honestly always register these assessments as being bias toward one's regional identity. No Northerner would say the same, nobody ever says nice things about Isaan and yet, tons of the best fighters come from Khon Khaen (Karuhat, Pudpadnoi, Somrak) who are very skilled and yet there's no credit given.
    1 point
  46. Hello everyone, Lately I've been on a seemingly never ending cycle of injuries and my most recent one is a messed up knee - was clinching with a bigger guy about a week ago, he tried throwing me over the knee, but because of our considerable size difference it felt like my leg was still stuck on the inside of his stance so when he threw me, my leg was still firmly planted and it felt like I twisted around my knee cap as I fell...pretty nasty. Anyways, I never had such a bad knee injury before and just wanted to hear from anyone else about your experience with knee injuries and how long does it typically take to get back to normal training, assuming if the surgery is not required and also if it was needed. I'm still waiting the results of the ultrasound to find out what exactly inside my knee is messed up (my physio suspects MCL and meniscus damage), but it's now day 6 and I have no pain in the knee when I walk (with a serious knee brace though), however the knee feels rather stiff and it's hard to bend it past 90 degree angle (there's too much tightness at the front of the knee to be able to bend it further) and today I tried picking up a heavy grocery bag and I definitely felt some discomfort in that knee...I'm pretty dissapointed right now as I really wanted to get more ring experience before going back to Thailand in December for 1 month (already had my ticket booked before this injury happened) and also get a fight there, but now I am not sure if it will be possible. Does 4 months seem like a reasonable enough time to recover from a knee injury (assuming surgery is not needed) and get back to fighting shape? Did you continue to train/workout around your knee injury (and if so, what kind of training were you doing) or did you take a complete rest? Thank you
    1 point
  47. Hiya Sorry to hear about your knee injury - sound like it had been a nasty one! Knee injuries can be tricky - recovery time and rehab strategy depends on what has actually happened. When do you find out the results of the scan and what did the physio suggest in the mean time?
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...