Jump to content

Muay Lertrit Diaries - Coming to Thailand To Train in Traditional Military Muay Thai


Recommended Posts

The General is a very busy man, with a lot on his plate. It’s quite impressive. Being said, we did not have him teaching us today. Rather, the assistants working with him at the WMA (World Muay Thai Alliance) told Tyler and I to practice with each other in a separate room from the community class. This gave Tyler and I time to compare notes and elaborate on our learning processes.

What came out today while Tyler and I were comparing our notes, was how similar so many aspects of Lertrit feel to my style of Kung Fu (San Soo). This comes back to an earlier point I tried to make about things being similar, but different. A saying that has become popular between the General and I. In the past I’ve used language as an analogy for learning martial arts. In the early stages of learning an art, one learns the alphabet. Latter, they learn words. So enough how to put together sentences. And before long, conversation is possible. In some instances some martial arts are as different as Thai and English. Other times, martial art styles feel like the same language, but spoken in a different dialect.

San Soo and Lertrit feel how I’ve heard others compare Portuguese and Spanish. Please keep in mind I speak neither of these language, only bad California English and am going of what I’ve heard from those who do speak these languages. Both San Soo and Lertrit are true martial styles. There is no sporting application to them. They are meant to incapacitate someone. Also, they flow from once strike to the next. Similar to dancing, once you know how each move can lead to another, there is no break between any two motions. You can simply move from one strike or manipulation to the next from any position you find yourself in. 

While there are time when my San Soo habits are not helpful in Lertrit, what is helpful is understanding how to flow. The General uses both the word flow and natural. The move should be natural, is what the General will say, it should flow. It's like learning to speak a fluently, rather than in a broken sentence structure. In San Soo and Jiujitsu we talk about flow. Flowing from one move to the next as seamlessly as possible. If you mess up, you just keep going, flow to the next thing you know. The General will talk about a missed punch flowing into an elbow. In jiujitsu, a failed arm lock can flow into a choke. Similar, but different. 

  • Like 4
  • Cool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tim Macias said:

While there are time when my San Soo habits are not helpful in Lertrit

I'm watching the day 6 videos and wishing someone would beat the Western boxing out of me lol. Things that were great for that style are totally tripping me up with Muay Lertrit. We'll get there though, we'll get there. 

I feel like a lot came out of our discussions today, it was nice to be able to break things down a bit on a conceptual level. Kind of feeling our way around in the dark a bit. Hoping this will lead to some more "ah hah" moments next week during training. Wooooo go me for finally figuring out that elbow block at around 39:30ish lol. Only took me 8 days 🤣 Now I just gotta add back in the details like tucking my chin so I can put it to use.

Edited by Tyler Byers
  • Like 1
  • Gamma 1
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case anyone is curious what this should sort of look like in practice (in a ring setting), this session with Yodkhunpon reflects the consistent violation of your opponents space and the constant stance switching this style uses. When done effectively it will keep your opponent from being able to regain their base as you batter them with different attacks which come from unconventional angles and sides. 

The overarching idea is to initially utilize defense to see an opening and then counter, continuing to flow through attacks which will in turn create new openings until you have neutralized/shutdown your opponent. The stance switching really changes the relationship to range because you cover so much more space by being able to step or attack off either side with no reset period. 

 

Edited by Tyler Byers
  • Like 2
  • Nak Muay 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tyler Byers said:

In case anyone is curious what this should sort of look like in practice (in a ring setting), this session with Yodkhunpon reflects the consistent violation of your opponents space and the constant stance switching this style uses. When done effectively it will keep your opponent from being able to regain their base as you batter them with different attacks which come from unconventional angles and sides. 

It would be really interesting if after you get some time in with the General's style if you came and spent an hour with Yodkunpon here in Pattaya, and see if the connection you intuit would become a real one. Almost nobody fought like him (he has been looked down upon in some ways for it), but it would be very cool if they informed each other. If somehow Yodkhunpon's very fight-specific style helped helped create some of the connective tissue between the General's Muay Lertrit and sport Muay Thai. Something that does not really exist at this point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tim Macias said:

While there are time when my San Soo habits are not helpful in Lertrit, what is helpful is understanding how to flow. The General uses both the word flow and natural. The move should be natural, is what the General will say, it should flow. It's like learning to speak a fluently, rather than in a broken sentence structure.

This is one of the great challenges of combat sport arts, especially in western teaching. Everything becomes broken into modular moves, that can be taught in short time increments, or to large groups of people (in assisted practice). And then the modular moves or strikes are thought to be combined in various orders. It's a very fragmented knowledge and relationship. Very fight steeped cultures like the Muay Thai of Thailand (in real kaimuay that raise Thais) or some boxing traditions avoid this problem through developmental play and experimentation, but it is very cool that you are discovering this as a deep piece between your Kung Fu and Muay Lertrit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu said:

It would be really interesting if after you get some time in with the General's style if you came and spent an hour with Yodkunpon here in Pattaya, and see if the connection you intuit would become a real one.

There is another video you guys have posted in the past talking about how his footwork is almost more like a trot/shuffle (I forget the exact wording), and at the time I thought about how similar it was to my old footwork. I kind of dismissed it as random coincidence at the time because as you mentioned it is very unique and not many people move like that. Namsaknoi is another one who I have always really paid attention to because his footwork is so well balanced and he has a similar kind of shuffling when he circles out. Watching General Tunkawom move you can see how it would translate to a ring setting. I think it's not popular because it does take a little longer to check kicks or throw your own kicks, but it is incredibly easy to walk people down and keep them moving backwards. It's also incredibly easy to throw elbows while moving like that. I don't think it's a coincidence that Yodkhunpon is known for his elbows and that Muay Lertit has 24 unique elbows. There is absolutely some overlap there. 

If I can ever get some money together I would love to come work with Yodkhunpon. I've actually wanted to come work with him for a couple of years because he was the only one I saw with that similar footwork style. I've really struggled to get my movement back after trainers tried to change my style to something "prettier" and more stadium friendly. No one seems to understand what I am trying to do and will continually insist it is wrong (which I am almost 100% sure is because of the kicking/checking aspect). Korat kind of got it, but still insisted on me having a deeper stance traditional stance than I was comfortable with. I will say that the stance change definitely helped develop power in my kicks, but I want my movement back.

Edited by Tyler Byers
  • Like 1
  • Gamma 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tyler Byers said:

If I can ever get some money together I would love to come work with Yodkhunpon.

His privates are 1,000 baht an hour, and he is a really cool instructor. What he really wants to do is just move with you, get relaxation going. We are going to try and film another session with him this week and put it up in the Library.

  • Like 1
  • Cool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little out of order in terms of date, but Tim's documentary footage from Day 5, shot July 4th. You can see Day 6's footage here earlier in this thread. It's not easy to film everything and upload it all, a huge thank you to Tim for carrying out the invaluable process of archiving this.

Day 5:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very, very interesting!
I find myself reminded of learning Kali from a lot of your descriptions, especially when it comes to movements coming from the hip or core of the body. And interestingly enough Kali (at least the style I practiced) also prides itself to be not a sport martial art but a practical system for real live application (the Filipinos actually train their marines in this style).

The part about flow and natural movement, recovering from failed moves and just flowing to the next thing VERY much reminded me of how it felt to practice this art!

Actually when someone asked my trainer about something they were "doing wrong" he'd often be like: "Did it work anyways? Then it wasn't 'wrong'! Maybe it's not what we're trying to practice right now or there is a better way of doing it but it's not 'wrong' per se."

Kali has a different style of teaching this stuff though. We used to train stuff in "drills" a whole lot. A drill in Kali is a sequence of moves you practice with a partner where the whole sequence ends in the same position you started in so you can just continue on. It's kind of like a continuous flow or dance with your partner and lets you get a lot of repetitions in short time while constantly calibrating because you have to adjust for your partner all the time.

As you advance more you learn how different drills flow into each other seamlessly until it gets more and more freestyle and you just flow because you learned how to feel how you can continue out of pretty much any position you find yourself in, all based in the same basics. At least thats a short, rough description of the process and of course not the whole of how training looks.

Also as Kali is a weapons-based art (the drill-approach works for all the different weapon types including empty hands), weapons, especially the stick, are used as a tool to help develop body-mechanics and teach you how to use your body to generate speed, power and flow, especially how to use your hips or core as the part that drives all of this.

We would actually sometimes swing a baseball-bat instead of a stick because the much heavier weapon FORCES you to use your body in an efficient way in order to be able to swing it. It MAKES you feel how it works. That feeling can then be carried over into using sticks again and by extension all other kinds of weapons including empty hands/elbows/knees/kicks/whatever.

The word for working with 2 sticks (or swords or actually any kind of 2 weapons, mostly referring to sticks though) is "Sinawali" which actually means "to weave" like in weaving a basket. It's used to develop ambidexterity and again, flow. Its something that can be very beautiful to watch from someone who is good with it and it's also seen as a form of expression of the individual fighter. And that's in a style that is very practical in nature and not at all about fancy moves or high body-flexibility.

 

EDIT: here is a nice video that explains and shows Sinawali very well. Its old and some of the editing is a bit weird but I think it shows very well how this relates to continuous flow and empty hands application. Not to hijack anything here but with all of what you guys wrote about Lertrit I think it might be relevant in a way or at least interesting to see in this context.

 

Edited by Xestaro
added video
  • Like 4
  • Gamma 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The General say Muay Thai is very, very difficult; unless you know and understand the basics. I love when the General talks about basics. This is because it’s how I was raised in Kung Fu. My  San Soo instructor is often criticized for his emphasis on basics. Such criticisms often come in the form of, “His Kung Fu is great, but he only shows the basics”. Sad for these individuals though, because their schools and/ or their students are rarely as successful and well trained as those who are focusing on the basics. For the General, basics come down to what we have already talked about in earlier post: Breathing; Waist; and Weight transfer. But also three more considerations he emphasized in tonight training: Precision; Speed; Power.

 

Precision - The General discusses this in a matter of how you strike finishes. Go straight to the target, he says. No past, or through, go straight to it. This is by no means a new idea to me. I very much pride myself on being able to throw a strike exactly where I want to and have it land exactly how hard I want it to. Where the General often corrects me, is in my tendency to recoil from the strike. I will throw my punch as hard as I can, but to avoid hitting my partner with a full blow, I stop and pull my strike back just as hard and fast as I threw it. Rather, the General has us go straight to the target and not recoil. Practices hitting exactly where your target is, the General says.

Speed - The idea is of speed is only difficult as I learn. I am a very, VERY slow learner. And I’d rather go very, very slow in throwing my strikes, as to make sure I am addressing every nuance from the Generals instruction I can. I want to turn my waist, transfer my weight, and be sure I am breathing as he has instructed. However, the General can only tolerate it this pace for one or two reps. Then he will tell me faster, or to GO. While he is very forgiving of me only having been under his instruction for less than two weeks, he explains that if I am turning my waist correctly and transferring my weight, the speed will take care of itself. 

Power - Power is the most difficult, because power comes from technique. This is a point I stress to my class and students very frequently: to not try and throw hard, but to let the technique do the work, and power will follow. However, here in Thailand, with the General, I am practicing a very different technique than I am used to, and because I have not begun to perfect the General’s way, I have very little power. Much like speed, power is the product of flawless technique. With the waist turn for example, if I do not turn my waist properly, I end up punching with me arm and not my body - no power, the General says. But if my waist turn, like a rubber band stretched to tension, my arm whips out for my body, and BOOM, power.

 

You can see all of the these basics come together in the Buffalo killing strike. There is a more proper name for this strike (I’m sure Kevin and/ or Sylvie will help me here), but it is a strike that moves somewhere between a hook and a swing punch. But instead of making contact with the knuckles, the General emphasis making impact with the back of the hand. The knuckles, and consequently the hand, are very fragile. Breaking ones hand is often the result of poor punching technique, or someones face being much too strong. In order to avoid breaking the hand, the General (we too in San Soo) will instead hit with more more resilient parts of the hand and/ or body. Kevin has documented this punch before, and when the footage goes live, you’ll be able to see it. But the Buffalo killer is a prime example of the basics of Muay Lertrit coming together.

  • Like 2
  • Gamma 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Kali has a different style of teaching this stuff though. We used to train stuff in "drills" a whole lot. A drill in Kali is a sequence of moves you practice with a partner where the whole sequence ends in the same position you started in so you can just continue on.

I have the feeling we'll get to drills at some point. It kind of seems like they are still trying to figure out how to teach this on an individual level as well as being under a bit of a time crunch to show Tim as much as possible before he leaves. 

I'm curious, as someone who has studied both Kali and Muay Thai, do you feel that the non-weapon portions of Kali are indeed practical? Also would you consider it be practical in a ring setting? 

Edited by Tyler Byers
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Tim Macias said:

You can see all of the these basics come together in the Buffalo killing strike.

He showed me this the first weekend I went up there and I only today felt like I was kind of getting it. I'm still a little bit uncertain if there should be a bit of a whip motion/feeling to it or not. While I was playing around on the bag I was really trying to focus on the tension in my shoulder (he has mentioned a few times that it is easy to hurt your shoulder doing that punch). I seemed to get the most power and least amount of tension when the punch was a little whippy, but I'm just not sure if that's what he wants from it or not. I still feel strange in general about striking with the back of my hand instead of my knuckles. It might be necessary though to maintain speed/power if you aren't shifting weight the way we would traditionally with Western boxing or Muay Thai. I dunno, it's just a weird one to me lol. That other downward strike had me totally lost. Not only have I never done anything like that before, but it also feels very against my natural style. I'm curious if as he shows more there will be a bit of lightbulb that goes off similar to when we were confused about the heel kick today.

  • Like 1
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tyler Byers said:

I have the feeling we'll get to drills at some point. It kind of seems like they are still trying to figure out how to teach this on an individual level as well as being under a bit of a time crunch to show Tim as much as possible before he leaves. 

I'm curious, as someone who has studied both Kali and Muay Thai, do you feel that the non-weapon portions of Kali are indeed practical? Also would you consider it be practical in a ring setting? 

That would be interesting! If they do use drills I'd like to see what they are and how they compare to what we did in Kali!

 

On the second part: I would not really say that I've studied Muay Thai. I'm just a beginner actually who hasn't been training consistently and probably will never take it further than the sparring ring. I'm just the kind of guy who likes to obsess about his hobbies 😉 I used to practice Kali for some 8 years or so but that's also like 6 years or so ago so not everything is fresh to say the least.

I would have gone back to kali when I wanted to do martial arts again but somehow I just felt like going more into the sports direction this time and thats where muay thai came in.

When I saw Sylvie's session with the general it made me happy because I saw so many things and concepts that seemed familiar from Kali. 

I do think the non-weapon portions of Kali are practical (even though they are fundamentally connected to the weapon portions). Also you have to take into account that Kali/Escrima/Arnis describe a general art that's split into hundreds of different systems (styles if you will) that have different focuses. Some are more geared towards actual combat or self defence while others are more sportified if you know what I mean.

Practical in a ring setting.... I'd probably say to a degree. What parts you could use of course would depend a lot on the rules but its definitely not meant as an art for sport competition (at least the style I practiced). We did full contact stick sparring (with protective gear) and that works fine, also a bit of knives sparing, rolling on the ground trying to submit each other (a jiu jitsu practitioner would of course be more expert in this aspect) and other empty hand practice in varying degrees of freedom and contact.

How does it translate to a ring setting? Well it's kind of difficult to translate. We did a lot of open hand slaps for example which dont really work well when gloves are used. A lot of the stuff is also geared towards specifically attacking joints and other vulnerable parts like you wouldn't do in a ring setting. Ring martial arts usually seem more based on... an exchange of being hit (of course avoiding as much damage as possible), finding holes in your opponents game and hitting them back. In Kali you typically dont want that. You mostly want to end things quickly and dont give your opponent any chance if possible. IF you even have to be there in the first place. You dont want to get hit AT ALL really, which gets priority over landing shots yourself because you're taught that an opponent could always carry/use a weapon even if you dont see it (there is this saying that "knives are meant to be felt, not seen") and every hit could be dangerous.

That being said though, we did practice stuff like lowkicks, elbows, knees, also some punches (though that's the part I'm lacking in the most when it comes to Muay Thai I think). As far as I know my Kali trainer actually has Muay Thai experience of his own from before his Kali days so that might be another factor in finding parallels.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. I wonder if I'll be one of the first Western's to take this style into the ring then. My plan is to try and use parts of Muay Lertit (the footwork, waist rotation, and some of the defense) and put it together with the bit of Thai boxing I have learned. I want to keep it mostly defensive as that is the base of the style and try to counter attack instead of being offensive. I probably won't kick hardly at all unless it is one of these short front kicks the General has taught us, or the heel thrust. Hahaha should be interesting as I am pretty much guaranteed to lose on points if I can't get a stoppage. Maybe I'll see what they think about doing a Kard Cheuk fight instead of a Thai boxing match. That might allows me to represent the style a bit better (hahaha they are worried how it will look if I lose and since I'm 35 there is already a lot of pushback).

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tyler Byers said:

Hahaha should be interesting as I am pretty much guaranteed to lose on points if I can't get a stoppage.

Why would you think that his Muay Lertrit would score lightly in Thailand's sport Muay Thai? It seems the opposite. It seems like fighting in the pocket with a very strong defensive core would ensure not only entertaining (action-oriented) fighting, but due to it's strong defensive principles would shut out the opponent's scoring opportunities. I think the bread and butter of Thailand's Muay Thai, the mid-kick, would not last very long vs the General (ideally speaking). It really reads like Muay Khao fighting, but without knees, like as you say, maybe how Yodkhunpon or maybe Samson Isaan fought in terms of temp and spacing. Just with interceptive defensive pressure. It seems like it would score well vs contemporary Muay Thai.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Xestaro said:


I find myself reminded of learning Kali from a lot of your descriptions, especially when it comes to movements coming from the hip or core of the body. And interestingly enough Kali (at least the style I practiced) also prides itself to be not a sport martial art but a practical system for real live application 

The part about flow and natural movement, recovering from failed moves and just flowing to the next thing VERY much reminded me of how it felt to practice this art!

. . . I think it shows very well how this relates to continuous flow and empty hands application. Not to hijack anything here but with all of what you guys wrote about Lertrit I think it might be relevant in a way or at least interesting to see in this context.

 

I love that you brought Kali into this conversation! I have been exposed to Kali on a number of occasions while training San Soo and while training with some in Humboldt. Both my Master San Soo instructor and our Humboldt self-defense instructor have trained in Kali and with Danny Inosanto, as well as some of his students, now teachers. I was happy to watch the video you included, as many of those patters look familiar. Dare I say, I can replicate one or two of them.

I really relate to you observation concerning drills. This is how I learned much of the martial art I know - San Soo, BJJ, Western Boxing - as well as many of the sports I grew up playing. The drill teaches you all of the prerequisite muscle control one will need to execute a technique properly. The General does have some drills, although I don't think he imagines them this way, also, we haven't quite gotten to the point of understanding the basics to be able to move forward into drilling. If you look at some of the padded work Tyler and I do on Day 5, I think you'll see how the General likes to drill. 

Thank you for bringing this up and showing support!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Most Recent Topics

  • Latest Comments

    • Hi guys! I was thinking about creating setups. What's your single biggest problem when it comes to using your hands (or boxing) to create setups and openings to land your knees, elbows or kicks?
    • #deleuze #muaythai #warfare #philosophy #chess #sociology #thailand TLTR: discussing the unique historical and cultural influences on Thailand's Muay Thai as a traditional martial art and sport. Highlighting the deep-rooted history of Muay Thai, its ties to state warfare, influences from various cultures, including its unwritten provincial history, a comparison between Muay Thai, the games of Chess and Go is drawn as to the different philosophies and strategies inherent in each form of gamed combat. Additionally, it delves into the concept of warfare, power dynamics, spiritual aspects, and societal hierarchies reflected in the practices of Muay Thai as they relate to the Deleuze and Guattari's theories of nomadology, smooth space and war. Overall, a contrast between centralized, advance-forward, territory capture and more fluid edge-control, labor-capture warfare provides insight into what has shaped Thailand's Muay Thai into a distinct and formidable fighting art. (if it's TLTR, you get this summation) This is an on-going draft that will be edited over time   As internationalizing pressures push Muay Thai toward Western-friendly viewership, its worth considering the fundamental ways in which Thai and Western perceptions of conflict differ, and the manor in which this difference is preserved and expressed as Thai, in Thailand's traditional Muay Thai, a sport which achieved its acme-form in it's Golden Age (1980-1994). It's the contention of this article that there are governing, different and possibly quite opposed Martial Logics that structure many Western combat sport perceptions and the art of Thailand's Muay Thai, and these can be seen in the two graphics above, showing the games of Chess and Go. Now combat sports are quite diverse, even in the West, and each has its own history and audience. Each is shaped by its rules. The discussion here is more about the dominant image of thought as might be traced in Western and Southeast Asian regions of the world, despite rich variance, and even cross-influences. Thailand's Muay Thai, despite its violence, more maybe even because of it, is noted for its defensive excellence. It historically has been a close-fought sport that unlike some Western ring aesthetics, actually gravitates toward the ropes and corners, which are notoriously more difficult topographic ground. Because fighting is draw to this edge and corner emphasis, it requires even higher levels of defensive prowess to thrive at these edges. While the dominant image of Western ring fighting is much more clash-conscious, force meeting force in the middle of the ring (like two knight champions meeting at the center of a battlefield), in Thailand's Muay Thai it is the dextrousness along the ropes, the escapability, which wins the highest esteem. This piece offers explanations for what that is so and points to other studies of Muay Thai that underpin this. Largely though, it likely relates to the way in which violence and aggression is thought of in a traditionally Buddhist society, and Thailand's long history of a warfare of encirclement and capture. Examples of Thailand's Muay Thai Most Praised Edge Fighting Thailand is not alone in esteeming edge mastery. Western Boxing has very famous rope work, much of which constitutes the highest forms of fighting of its greatest fighters. But it does have a differing dominant image of thought than in the West, one which elevates rope and corner work into its own purposeful artform. Some of this can be read as a direct result of nearly opposite generalized scoring criteria. In the West, being very broad about it, forward aggression is a positive signature. All things being equal the forward fighter is seen as imposing themselves on their opponent. In Thailand's Muay Thai it is the opposite. This fundamental criteria reversal leads to a lot of Western viewers being confused over how fights are scored. Just being very broad about it, when a Thai fighter takes the lead in a fight - something that they know because audience gambling odds have changed in their favor - they begin to retreat. The retreating, defensive fighter is seen as protecting their lead. Their defense becomes their path to victory, which is why historically Thai fighters became the best defensive fighters in the world. Defense takes the spotlight in almost any lead, all other things being equal. A fighter going to the ropes in the broad Western conception is a fighter who has been forced there. A fighter who goes to the ropes in Muay Thai is in the dominant picture of thought signalling that they are in the lead. It's an upside down world for the Westerner and leads to a lot of miscomprehension. It's best to continually return to the note that these are broad, image-of-thought pictures of aggression and ring space. Judging a fight is much more complex than this. Over the years there are pendulum swings in how aggressive or active the retreating fighter has to be, and this is something that has differed even between the National Stadia of the sport, each with their own scoring aesthetics. Broadly though, the way that the edges and corners are semiotically coded, what they signify, is areas of control where fights are won and lost. And, because fighters in the lead retreat and defend, a lot of fights head to the edges, especially in the traditional, high-scoring later rounds. If you want to see the highest levels of this edge-excellence, I recommend this fight between two legends of the sport. Somrak in red, Boonlai in blue. Noteworthy in this fight is that Somrak at this time was one of the best Western Boxers all of Thailand. In a few years he would go onto win Gold at the 1996 Olympics in Mayweather's division. In this fight he hardly throws a punch until the fight is well in hand. It's footwork, interception, movement and countering, a great deal of it at the edge. At the edge because he is winning, and he is signalling his superiority. watch Boonlai vs Somrak here Another classic example is this study of Samart Payakaroon, widely thought to be the GOAT of Muay Thai, fighting the forward knee-fighter Namphon Nongkipahayuth (below). Watch the entire fight, but also look at the study of how Samart, almost always on the ropes, command and controls Namphon's knee and clinch attack through interception and movement. In a manner different than much of Western symbology, Samart is signaling his dominance through rope work, interception and evasion. watch this study of Samart's defense along the ropes in his Golden Age rematch vs Namphon   In a general way, just at the level of style, watch this highlight compilation of the switching footwork of possibly the most artful fighter of Thailand's Golden Age, the great Karuhat Sor Supawan (below). You will see his deft switching in both attack and defense at the ropes featured here, but when in the lead and he performs his best magic, his back is to the rope. Back to the rope signals dominance. watch Muay Thai Scholar's study of the legend Karuhat's switching footwork   Dipping into Thai History and the Games of Go and Chess Thailand's Muay Thai is a fighting art and combat sport of extraordinary uniqueness. Fashioned as it has been from at least 100+ years of continuous provincial fighting deep in its countryside custom - something that may stretch back multiple centuries - fortified and shaped by Royal and State warfare, itself composed of worldwide mercenary influences, from Japanese & Javanese merchant pirates to Persian & Portuguese regimented manpower, it stands as both a cosmopolitan fighting art, and still one which has been richly woven together as wholly Buddhistic Siamese and then Thai continuity. Channeled and informed by British Boxing's colonialist, pressuring example in its modernizing period (1920-1950s), what remains most valuable in Muay Thai are the ways it is like no other fighting art. It's a purity of difference. Both lab-tested in 100,000s of full-contact ring fights multiplied by generations, and expressive of wool-dyed Buddhistic principles, this is a synergy of provincial and the Capital fight knowledge, both martial and sport, like no other in the world. They just fight differently...and have arguably been the best ring fighters in the world. The at-top diagram juxtaposing two combat inspired board games, Chess and the game of Go, aims to draw out some of the deeper philosophical and conceptual differences between Thailand's Southeast Asian fighting art and many of Western conceptions of combat, especially at the dominant image of thought level. Chess is a game of some disputed origin approximately 1,500 years ago. It was not a Western game. It's largely believed to have come from India by way of Persia. The Western Chess vocabulary is etymologically Persian, and the Persian version of the game is closest to the one adopted in Europe. Interestingly enough, the birth of Chess and its dissemination throughout the world across tradewinds corresponds roughly to the period, 3rd-6th century AD, during which Southeast Asia underwent Indianization. Indian culture became powerfully adopted throughout mainland Southeast Asia, and importantly in the history of Siam significantly informed Khmer Empire (today's Cambodia) royalty warfare and statecraft, much of which would be adopted by Siamese kings to the West. Royal, court and State culture was Indianized, bearing qualities (language, social forms, knowledges) which were not shared by the common populace. The Indianization of Southeast Asia has been culturally compared to the Roman Empire's Romanization in of Europe. And to this day Thai Royalty, its Brahmin customs and practices, the common worship of Hindu gods within a Buddhist context reflects this 1,500 years of influence of Indian culture. This is to say, when comparing Thailand's Muay Thai to the West via the game of Chess, we are speaking of a game that was of Indian and Persian origin, something quite closely braided within Siamese history. For instance, King Narai of Ayutthaya in 17th century had 200 Persian warriors as his personal guard. The influence of India and Persia is profound. What I want you to see is that Muay Thai's historical past is likely quite imbricated. There are layers upon layers of historical segmentation. Within this history the Royal form in particular had a distinctly Indianized history, and Thailand's Muay Thai has had a robust Royal history surrounding the raising of armies, large scale wars at times with armies (perhaps fancifully) rumored to approach 1,000,000 men. This Statecraft heritage is likely something we can see reflected in the game of Chess itself, the game of Kings, castles and queens. And, the history that we have of Thailand's Muay Thai is almost entirely composed of this Royal-State story, as royal record and foreign visitors to Siam's kingdoms comprises our written history. The possible story of Muay Thai that involves provincial, rural, village, regional martial and sport practices has vanished seemingly just as much as houses of wood or bamboo will not be preserved. Yet, in the nature of Southeast Asian and Siamese fighting arts we very well may see the martial contrastive martial logic of the Siamese people, especially when compared to the visions of the West. Chess, Go, Striated and Smooth Spaces In this we turn to the 4,000 year old Chinese and then Japanese game of Go (the game of surrounding). wikipedia: Japanese word igo (囲碁; いご), which derives from earlier wigo (ゐご), in turn from Middle Chinese ɦʉi gi (圍棋, Mandarin: wéiqí, lit. 'encirclement board game' or 'board game of surrounding'). I have written about the historical origins of Thailand's Muay Thai that particularly bring out its logic of surrounding and capture, a martial logic that is quite embodied in the game of Go (The Historical Foundations of Thailand's Retreating Style, or How They Became the Best Defensive Fighters In the World). In short, historians of Southeast Asia point out that unlike in Europe where land was scarce (and therefore the anchor of wealth), and manpower plentiful, conquering land and killing occupying enemies formed a basic martial logic in warfare. In Southeast Asia where fecund land was everywhere, but population sparse (especially in Siam which had been one of the least populated regions of Southasia), warfare was focused on capture and enslavement. Enemy land capture was at a minimum, and even in the case of the famed and ruinous sackings of the Siamese Capital of Ayutthaya by the Burmese, the captured territory was not held. These are just very different spatial and aim-oriented logics, in fact opposite logics. I'm using the game of Go, which expresses a fluid rationality of edge control and reversible enemy capture (captured stones add to your wealth, and don't only subtract from one's enemy), opposed to the more centric, land-control logic of Chess. A Chess of Indian-Persian statecraft which resonated with European political and warfare realities. This juxtaposition between games is not mine, though I'm probably the first to use it to illuminate combat sport perceptions in today's ring fighting. It comes from the sociologically oriented philosophers Deleuze and Guattari in their book A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. A notoriously difficult work due to its heavy reliance on invented vocabularies, and its opaque, keyed-in references to specific philosophical traditions, psychoanalysis and their theoretical problems, it still provides rich analysis of buried trends in Western social organization, and a metaphysics for thinking about the history of the world as a whole. What Deleuze and Guattari want to do in contrasting Go with Chess is to think about the different ways that Space is organized and traversed by political powers and regimes of meaning. They propose that Chess is a striated (divided, segmented, hierarchical) Space, And Go more of a smooth space. This blogged description is a good summary of the two kinds of Space: The much older game of Go is a strategy of surround and capture, wherein you turn an enemy's wealth - by our analogy labor-power - into your own. This is mirrored in Siamese warfare as reported in 1688 by an Iranian vistor, "...the struggle is wholly confined to trickery and deception. They have no intention of killing each other or of inflicting any great slaughter because if a general gained a real conquest, he would be shedding his own blood so to speak" (context, Ibrahim), full quote here. We have at surface a strong homology between foreign reports and the structural nature of the game of Go. More can be understood of my position and the role of evasion, surround-and-capture principles in this extended thread here. Diving down into the more philosophical ramifications I provide the extended Deleuze & Guattari quotation comparing the game of Chess vs the game of Go: Rather, he is like a pure and immeasurable multiplicity, the pack, an irruption of the ephemeral and the power of metamorphosis. He unties the bond just as he betrays the pact. He brings a furor to bear against sovereignty, a celerity against gravity, secrecy against the public, a power (puissance) against sovereignty, a machine against the apparatus. He bears witness to another kind of justice, one of incomprehensible cruelty at times, but at others of unequaled pity as well (because he unties bonds.. .). He bears witness, above all, to other relations with women, with animals, because he sees all things in relations of becoming, rather than implementing binary distributions between "states": a veritable becoming-animal of the warrior, a becoming-woman, which lies outside. Let us take a limited example and compare the war machine and the State apparatus in the context of the theory of games. Let us take chess and Go, from the standpoint of the game pieces, the relations between the pieces and the space involved. Chess is a game of State, or of the court: the emperor of China played it. Chess pieces are coded; they have an internal nature and intrinsic properties from which their movements, situations, and confrontations derive. They have qualities; a knight remains a knight, a pawn a pawn, a bishop a bishop. Each is like a subject of the statement endowed with a relative power, and these relative powers combine in a subject of enunciation, that is, the chess player or the game's form of interiority. Go pieces, in contrast, are pellets, disks, simple arithmetic units, and have only an anonymous, collective, or third-person function: Thus the relations are very different in the two cases. Within their milieu of interiority, chess pieces entertain biunivocal relations with one another, and with the adversary's pieces: their functioning is structural. On the other hand, a Go piece has only a milieu of exteriority, or extrinsic relations with nebulas or constellations, according to which it fulfills functions of insertion or situation, such as bordering, encircling, shattering. All by itself, a Go piece can destroy an entire constellation synchronically; a chess piece cannot (or can do so diachronically only). Chess is indeed a war, but an institutionalized, regulated, coded war, with a front, a rear, battles. But what is proper to Go is war without battle lines, with neither confrontation nor retreat, without battles even: pure strategy, whereas chess is a semiology. Finally, the space is not at all the same: in chess, it is a question of arranging a closed space for oneself, thus of going from one point to another, of occupying the maximum number of squares with the minimum number of pieces. In Go, it is a question of arraying oneself in an open space, of holding space, of maintaining the possibility of springing up at any point: the movement is not from one point to another, but becomes perpetual, without aim or destination, with out departure or arrival. The "smooth" space of Go, as against the "striated" space of chess. The nomos of Go against the State of chess, nomos against polis. The difference is that chess codes and decodes space, whereas Go proceeds altogether differently, territorializing or deterritorializing it (make the outside a territory in space; consolidate that territory by the construction of a second, adjacent territory; deterritorialize the enemy by shattering his territory from within; deterritorialize oneself by renouncing, by going elsewhere . ..). Another justice, another movement, another space-time. Deleuze & Guattari, "1227: TREATISE ON NOMADOLOGY—THE WAR MACHINE", A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism & Schizophrenia   Becoming and A Warfare of Capture What Deleuze and Guattari are invoking is a conception of warfare which is much more fully potentiated. Not locked into rigid hierarchies and roles of figures of power, it is a much more metaphysical battle that reflects aspects of what I have argued is the spiritual foundation of Thailand's Muay Thai, an animism of powers within the history of the culture that predates the arrival of Buddhism (Toward a Theory of the Spirituality of Thailand's Muay Thai). This logic of an animism of powers contains an essential aspect of captured power, the incorporated power of a captured enemy, founded on what historians of Southeast Asia have called "Soul Stuff", roughly equivalent of Hindu shakti (strength). This can be manifested in captured slave labor, or perhaps even in the prehistoric rites of cannibalism through which one consumed the soul stuff of an enemy. You can find a logic of Soul Stuff here, this graphic below helps represent the animism of contest. A primary source on soul stuff and a fusion of military and spiritual prowess can be found with historian O.W. Walters here. Thus, within the cultural origins of Siamese culture, even that which pre-dates the Indianization of the region, we have essential aspects of a smooth, tactical space in a Deleuze & Guattari sense, which potentially maps quite well into the game of Go, especially as it is contrasted to Chess.   Further in concordance with Deleuze & Guattari's philosophical concept of liberty is the way in which Thailand's Muay Thai can be understood as revolutionary in their terms. Deleuze & Guattari write of becoming-animal, becoming-child, becoming-woman, deterritorializing flights inimitable to human freedom. Thailand's Muay Thai (& broader Thai agonism) de-privileges these categories, along a continuous spectrum of thymotic struggle, which runs thru the social hierarchies of low to high, sewing them together. One could say a smooth thymotic space of trajectories. Thailand known for its (ethically criticized) child fighting, women have fought for 100+ yrs, and beetle fighting embodies much of the Muay Thai gambled form. In many important ways Thailand's Muay Thai avoids the stacked arboreal structure of Western Man (& its contrastive Others), favoring a continuity agonistic spectrum within its (Indianized) hierarchies. It has strongly weighted traditional hierarchies, but within this a thymotic line-of-becoming that runs between divinity and animality. see Beetle Fighting, Muay Thai and the Health of the Culture of Thailand - The Ecology of Fighting more on the division of divinity and animality by wicha here: Muay Thai Seen as a Rite: Sacrifice, Combat Sports, Loser as Sacred Victim Knowing-as-doing, the wicha of technical knowledge of how to do, runs between the axes of divinity and animality in a way that supports a mutuality of any figure's becoming, from the insect up to the heightened champion fighter, in a line of flight shared by others. Most Deleuzian becoming-animal, -child, -woman examples come from the arts (sometimes the bedroom), but instead in Thai, gambled agonism we have the becoming of actual animals, children, women & the projective affects of an equally agonistic audience undergoing its own becoming-as. When I say revolutionary, I say "Thailand's Muay Thai has something to teach the world about the nature of violence and its meaning." Learning From Chess in How to See Thailand's Muay Thai Keep in mind, this isn't an direct one-for-one comparison of the contemporary game of Chess (and Chess Theory) and the ring sport of Muay Thai. It compares the dominant image of thought in the conceptual trend. Some have pointed out that my gross picture of Chess leaves out its post-1920s modern Chess Theory development, which often eschews central forward advancement. What is important in the Chess example isn't how Chess was played in 1960s, say, but rather that Chess over the sweep of its history allows us to see how it expressed the martial logic from which it came, ie, how some battles were fought in the field, with advancing lines, and a central capture of territory focus. Chess I would argue contains a martial logic fingerprint in its organizational structure, just as the real life political powers of Kings, Queens, knights and bishops made their impact on its rules & formation, the increased power of the Queen on the board said to be a fine example of this (see: A Queen in Any Other Language). Even in the Hypermodernism of Chess one might say that the center still holds importance, as there are just other ways of controlling or managing it.  Hypermodernism for instance may have reflected the increased use of cannon & then WW1 artillery. Between the two games of Chess and Go are differing Martial Logics. It doesn't mean that there is zero fighting for the center in Muay Thai (or in Southeast Asian warfare...siege warfare is prominent in Ayutthaya history for instance, though with influence from the Portuguese, etc), or that there is zero edge or flank control in Western European warfare or Chess (flank maneuvers are numerous in European warfare). The contrast is really meant to exposed how we perceive conflict spatially, and that these are things we've culturally inherited. You see these inherited concepts, for instance the centrality of territory capture in common Western scoring criteria like "ring control". Centralized conflict is part of our past and informs how we judge fighting styles, just as edge conflict is part of Southeast Asia's past. And importantly this also informs our ideas of violence, with a European tendency toward "kill" (to control land, ie the center) and a SEA tendency toward "capture"(to control labor, ie the edge).  
    • Hey so im an ammateur fighting in europe mostly at DIY events. The thing is even though every fight I improve I am never able to win and its starting to get to me.  I have 5 fights in total 2 k1 and 3 muay thai and iv never won a muay thai, won 1 k1 cos my cardio was better than the other girl and I just out brawld her.  People say wow your technique is so much better than the fight I saw you in last year etc but it still feels bitter to constantly lose. I know i am improving but feel that I always just get tougher and tougher matches, the last 3 fights I lost have all been very close fights. One I lost cos my opponent got injured and broke her ankle when I bloked with a knee but she was able to hide it, another one I lost cos she was using more clean techniques and I was brawling (this one I agree with 100% cos I was landing but it was sloppy.)  The last one I lost cos my cardio was bad which is also fine. I am fine with losing, its just starting to get to me that I never win. It also kinda annoys me that the only fight I ever won was one that I just outbrawled the other girl. Feels like my improvements havnt really helped me cos I just get matched with tougher and tougher opponents each time.  Im wondering if I should give up on decision fights for a while and just do non decisions to get my condifence back up or whether I will eventually break through and be able to win. I am also kinda old at 32 so even though my technique is improving my strength, reflexes and reactions will begin to fade soon. 
  • The Latest From Open Topics Forum

    • Don't know if this brand offers shin guards but might as well check them out. I bought a few pairs of shorts from them a while ago and was genuinely impressed. https://siamkickfight.com/
    • Hi all, I have paid a deposit to a gym in Pai near Chiang Mai to train at in January. I am now concerned about the pollution levels at that time of year because of the burning season. Can you recommend a location that is likely to have safer air quality for training in January? I would like to avoid Bangkok and Phuket, if possible. Thank you!
    • Hi, this might be out of the normal topic, but I thought you all might be interested in a book-- Children of the Neon Bamboo-- that has a really cool Martial Arts instructor character who set up an early Muy Thai gym south of Miami in the 1980s. He's a really cool character who drives the plot, and there historically accurate allusions to 1980s martial arts culture. However, the main thrust is more about nostalgia and friendships.    Can we do links? Childrenoftheneonbamboo.com Children of the Neon Bamboo: B. Glynn Kimmey: 9798988054115: Amazon.com: Movies & TV      
    • Davince Resolve is a great place to start. 
    • I see that this thread is from three years ago, and I hope your journey with Muay Thai and mental health has evolved positively during this time. It's fascinating to revisit these discussions and reflect on how our understanding of such topics can grow. The connection between training and mental health is intricate, as you've pointed out. Finding the right balance between pushing yourself and self-care is a continuous learning process. If you've been exploring various avenues for managing mood-related issues over these years, you might want to revisit the topic of mental health resources. One such resource is The UK Medical Cannabis Card, which can provide insights into alternative treatments.
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      1.3k
    • Total Posts
      11k
×
×
  • Create New...