Jump to content
LengLeng

Question about scoring/attack strategy

Recommended Posts

Hey a question. How would you handle a shorter, strong opponent with a great kick game (low/body/head kicks, knows how to attack) but not as strong when it comes to using arms/hands/knees, when you yourself is not a great kicker? 

Feel free to mansplain me 😁.

  • hahaha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LengLeng said:

Hey a question. How would you handle a shorter, strong opponent with a great kick game (low/body/head kicks, knows how to attack) but not as strong when it comes to using arms/hands/knees, when you yourself is not a great kicker? 

The biggest question in a match up like this is whether you have a big clinch game advantage or not. If you do, build your attack around that. If it's unknown, or only a slight advantage you can't count on it as the solution. It also sounds like you are fighting a Thai, in Thailand (which makes a difference).

If you are fighting an accomplished Thai female fighter it's generally a big mistake to try and out kick them. And, counter intuitively, it's also a mistake to try to out punch them (because they will just wait on you, and out score you by counter kicking). Everything is about moving them off their post - posting is when they get to set up in their stance and kick on their own timing. The best weapon against posting is the teep. Teep, teep and more teep (if you are comfortable with your teep - if you aren't, don't build an attack around a weapon you "might" use). Any time you see them settle in, teep. Also, as a shorter opponent she will be susceptible to elbows. Without knowing the particulars, a good long range weapon like teeping, and a good short range weapon like elbows makes a formidable combination.

  • Like 3
  • Nak Muay 1
  • Respect 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LengLeng said:

a great kick game (low/body/head kicks, knows how to attack)

If you can count on low kicks, especially early, the Low Kick Destroyer that Sylvie talks about here, can be a fight changer:

 

There are not many things that you can just learn quickly, but this kind of check of the low kick can feel pretty natural to do. Any fighter who has low kick in their arsenal has a good chance of starting out the early rounds with low kicks. It's an intimidation technique. A single check like this can really change the fight. It will not only discourage low kicks, it might even alter how they kick and even check for the rest of the fight.

  • Like 4
  • Respect 1
  • Gamma 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Kevin on all of this, especially teeping and checking the low kicks early.

Edit: Something else I thought about today after watching our training videos with General Tunwakom is using the shove to the neck/upper chest when you opponent goes to knee or kick. @Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu can probably find the video of this (I'm not sure where to look), but I could swear that Sylvie did a video on this specific technique.

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

1 hour ago, Tyler Byers said:

can probably find the video of this (I'm not sure where to look), but I could swear that Sylvie did a video on this specific technique.

This is something Namkabuan teaches, and in fact was a master of. And the Rambaa Patreon session also has a version of it. Both of those fighters use it offensively. But, the next Patreon session, up in a few days, with Kru Gai, teaches this precisely, used to thwart knee and other attacks. Even as a shorter person it works. I"m not sure where Sylvie has covered it in a technique vlog, but I"m sure that she's done so.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love that Lowkick-destroyer "Block"... well actually more "Counter-Attack".

 

It SO reminds me of Kali! We were taught to do something similar where while taking the low-kick in a kind of check you'd drop your knee on the kicking legs ankle. If you don't hit precisely the kick was still blocked, if you did.... lets just say a perfectly executed one with low-intensity execution in training (no padding) can fucking hurt and I guess at force it could actually break the ankle or at least give your opponent a moment of very insecure stance which gives you an opportunity to counter-attack.

 

I've actually non-intentionally used a version of the lowkick-destroyer in sparring when I cross-blocked and hit the guy's shin right with the big, hard part of bone right below the knee. Not what you want to do to your sparring partners all the time but I can attest it is very effective!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Xestaro said:

It SO reminds me of Kali!

Hahaha this is another thing that the General is teaching us that seems to have an overlap with Kali. He has us using the cross block and either hitting their shin, knee, or inner thigh.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tyler Byers said:

Hahaha this is another thing that the General is teaching us that seems to have an overlap with Kali. He has us using the cross block and either hitting their shin, knee, or inner thigh.

The variant I described above is actually same side "block" but as I wrote elsewhere: if it works, it can't be "wrong" 😉

Its a manifestation of a basic principle of Kali as an art: They say its neither offensive nor defensive, but "counter-offensive". You don't really "block" in the traditional sense of the word but rather react to an attack with a direct counter-attack that's designed to at least neutralize the attack but ideally also causes damage to your opponent in the process.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/14/2019 at 9:18 PM, LengLeng said:

Thanks @Kevin von Duuglas-Ittu @Tyler Byers for all these pointers and advice. I'm in absorption mode here hehe. And the low kick destroyer is brilliant how could I have forgotten about it? 

Much appreciated.

 

 

Update. Low kick destroyer was a complete fail for me. It was raining low kicks, but I didnt have enough time before the fight to practice to have the destroyer movement "in my body" enough to use it. I hate low-kicks. I think they such an ugly, low-class movement and during fight I wanted to tell opponent 'you never be a great fighter if low-kicks all you got'. And at that moment she hooked me badly all turned white for a second. Joke on me 😁😭.

So, me and my left multicolored thigh look forward to learn how to block these efficiently. But I find it so hard to find the right angle of the knee? Especially when opponent shorter?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, LengLeng said:

So, me and my left multicolored thigh look forward to learn how to block these efficiently. But I find it so hard to find the right angle of the knee? Especially when opponent shorter?

Cross checking might be easier (this gives you much more surface area to work with instead of only the point of the knee), especially with a shorter opponent. Just make sure your guard is tight and you balance is good. I'm in the same boat as you, I get low kicked a lot 😭

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tyler Byers said:

Cross checking might be easier (this gives you much more surface area to work with instead of only the point of the knee), especially with a shorter opponent. Just make sure your guard is tight and you balance is good. I'm in the same boat as you, I get low kicked a lot 😭

Yeah that is good advice, that movement comes a bit more natural for me anyways.

Either way, back to learning lab...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another option (surely this won't work EVERY time but its another thing to probably practice and add to the arsenal) I've seen my trainer advise to just take a step back on a low kick (bringing your left leg back if you're in orthodox stance) since they can't kick what isn't there anymore of course.

Also a "counter-offensive" option like the lowkick destroyer seems to work well when you use the large bony part of your upper shin right below the knee. Gives you some more surface to work with.

  • Like 2
  • Nak Muay 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teep always works nicely against "short range" and short stature opponents. I'm a shorty and I feckin' hate the teep. It also sets up for almost anything else, like the jab does.

But, honestly your approach to this opponent in your fight was very good anyway. She landed some heavy punches that could have been complicated by a teep, but a good guard is just as good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2019 at 4:02 PM, Xestaro said:

As another option (surely this won't work EVERY time but its another thing to probably practice and add to the arsenal) I've seen my trainer advise to just take a step back on a low kick (bringing your left leg back if you're in orthodox stance) since they can't kick what isn't there anymore of course.

I like this because it makes your opponent look a bit stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sylvie von Duuglas-Ittu said:

Teep always works nicely against "short range" and short stature opponents. I'm a shorty and I feckin' hate the teep. It also sets up for almost anything else, like the jab does.

But, honestly your approach to this opponent in your fight was very good anyway. She landed some heavy punches that could have been complicated by a teep, but a good guard is just as good.

Oh yes, teep is probably best counter, but I feel it takes a lot of experience and practice and balance to react like this if the opponent is very fast. But I guess being tall I really would benefit from focused teep practising. Funnily enough my first session back at the gym I had to do a never ending teep session.

I heard your comment in your fight video that apparently you were teeped out of breath, but I really saw nothing of it didn't seem to bother you.

And thanks a lot 🙏. I've been picked apart by one of my trainers for the way I reacted to lowkicks (and everything else) and although a good thing for someone to care, it's hard. 

  • Like 3
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

    • Great Step Taken. I would always admire Lumpinee as an inspiration!!!
    • I wanted to comment on this theme of MMA in regards also to what Kevin said on your last Muay-Thai Bones Podcast ep 26. Kevin spoke that he felt a red line had been crossed by allowing MMA in Lumpinee. He said He didnt want inferior MMA being shown there as one reason. He spoke of the inferior MMA of One Championship as compared to the UFC. Though the pool of fighters in One is smaller, it has for instance Team Lakay from the Philippines, and the Lee family of Hawaii:  Angela, Christian and now Victoria who could be champions in the UFC too, The UFC is best at exploiting and ruining the lives of its fighters who are subject to terrible contracts and endless bullying by this massive corporation.  Thank God One Championship exists, and many thanks to Chatri Sidyodtong for bringing Muay-Thai and Kickboxing into the program in 2018. The real problem of having MMA in Lumpinee is the problem of MMA itself. MMA usurped MuayThai years ago as the premier fighting art. In the early 90s when they had the first cage fights, it was also a contest of which style would prevail. Unfortunately BJJ 🤢 was the winner in those early years. Muay-Thai was only useful in standup, and striking could only prevail on the feet. If the fight went to the ground grapplers would prevail. Wrestlers, judokas jui jitsu, and sambo fighters could easily take down a stand-up fighter and submit or choke him out.  A third point which makes MMA the most attractive art is the streetfighting aspect which makes it more "realistic" to the bored average Western viewer. So MuayThai is seen as only one part, -and a less important aspect of MMA😢. What I am getting at basically is that from a Muay-Thai standpoint it would be better if MMA:                                         A) Never existed, or                                         B) Would just go away!😈
    • Seeing the Ungendered Body As Lines of Force quoting to begin... The above are the concluding thoughts of the excellent short article: Fight like a girl! An investigation into female martial practices in European Fight Books from the 14th to the 20th century by Daniel Jaquet. It presents in brief the basis of a coherent argument that though there are physiological differences between the sexes, distributed over a population, martial arts are about developing the advantages you can have that overcome any physical differences that might weigh against you. I present this argument about Muay Thai and women more at length in: The “Natural” Inferiority of Women and The Art of Muay Thai. Just as shorter fighters can fight (and beat) taller fighters, smaller fighters can beat heavier fighters and slower fighters can beat faster fighters, whatever projected or real physiological differences between women and men there may be, they can be overcome. That is the entire point of a fighting art, especially any art stemming from combat contexts. Interestingly enough, Daniel Jaquet actually points to modern "institutional competition" as over-informing the way we think about the capacities of a fighting female. We think in terms of classified differences (weight classes, and even rulesets, etc), and one of these classifications is simply gender. Fight Like a Girl.pdf The article documents a conspicuous absence of women regarded as (possibly) equal combatants for nearly 700 years in combat literature, as gender became more codified in the European tradition. Jaquet marks a foothold in the timeline with this sword and shield technical manual in 1305 (Liber de arte dimicatoria), one of the last documentations of an assumed and illustrated gendered equivalence, at least for purposes of instruction.     There is a great deal to think about in this topic at large, but here I'm most interested in the effects modernization, or rationalization of a fighting art can lead to ideas of gender equality, under fighting arts. And some of the ways modernization can push against it was well. Jaquet's finishing remarks (above) speak to this basic, rationalizing idea. Bodies are all different, they are all capable of differing physical actions, amounts of force being applied, speed of reaction times, etc. It follows, just as physical weaponry like swords or shields are force amplifiers, so too are the analogical "weapons and shields" (techniques) when practiced in a fighting art. If you know how to throw (or slip) a punch, you are within a force amplifier. The rationalization of fighting arts is a modernizing concept of extracting aspects of a traditional process of embodied knowledge practice, and classifying it, for pedagogic reasons, analysis, or commercial use. Seeing gendered bodies as force equations is rationalization. If you follow my writings you know that I have a great deal of hesitance regarding the eroding forces involved in the rationalization of fighting arts, both in terms of teaching and commercial performance (we can lose valuable and hidden habitus as we re-contextualize practices), but this does not mean that I wholesale resist rationalization/modernization. Instead it can act as a scissor, weaving and unweaving as it goes. As Jaquet points out, modernization itself also brings forth conventions which can regard important, liberating rationalizations of a fighting art. How Rationalized Jui-jitsu Changed the Early 20th Century Fight World What I'm really interested in is something that Jaquet does not pursue, and it's something that I have only touched on in my reading. What follows therefore is going to be only a broad sketch of intuitions that would be interesting areas of study. I was particularly struck by this 1905 photo included in his article: And the note tells us, this is the Duchess of Bedford training in Jiu-jitsu in England. I have not dug deeply into the history of Jiu-jitsu's immigration to England through Japanese masters, as well as other countries all over the world, but I assume this is part of a powerful rationalization impulse found in Japanese martial arts, much of it typified by Kanō Jigorō and his invention of Judo. Influenced by Western ideas of rational education and theories of utilitarianism Kano had the dream of modernizing traditional Jiu-jitsu along educational and health lines, and spreading this modernized version all over the world, eventually making it an Olympic sport. Judo and other forms of modern-leaning Jiu-jitsu spread internationally at this time, and the Duchess of Bedford's Jiu-jitsu no doubt was a part of this diaspora of the fighting art. Famously, it reached all the way down to Brazil, eventually becoming today's Brazilian Jiu-jitsu, but at this time it it also reached Siam (Thailand). King Vajiravudh of Siam (reign 1910-1925) was actually raised and educated in England in his youth and young adulthood, for nearly a decade before taking the throne. He brought with him not only an appreciation for British Boxing (which would deeply shape the development of Siam's Muay Thai), but also, one might expect, Judo/Jiu-jitsu which had growing presence in Britain. In 1907, two years after the photo of Mary Russell the Japanese community in Bangkok is recorded as teaching Jui-jitsu, in 1912 Prince Wabulya returns from study abroad in London having learned Judo, and teaches it to enthusiasts and in 1919 Judo is taught at the very important Suan Kulap College, along side British Boxing and the newly named "Muay Thai". It is enough to say that the modernization of Muay Boran into Muay Thai in the 1920s, in the image of Western Boxing (at the time Siam is making efforts to appear civilized in the eyes of the West), was part of an even larger, in fact world wide rationalization effort lead by Judo/Jui-jitsu. When we see this photo of Mary Russell in England, this is part of the one-and-the-same British movements of influence that created modern Muay Thai over the next decades (gloved, weight class, fixed stadium, rounds). Rationalization is happening. Notably, this unfolds it is in the context of King Chulalonkorn's previous religious reformation of Siam which would have lasting impact on the seats of Siam's Muay Thai, moving it away from temple teachings and magical practices. Siam is becoming a modern Nation, and the reformation of Buddhism (along with Muay Thai) is a significant part of that process: from The Modernization of Muay Thai – A Timeline   Returning to the rationalizing efforts of British Jui-jitsu which will almost necessarily un-moor rooted gender bias, with even political consequences. As Jaquet writes, the medical/physical perspective of empowerment and health ended up expressing itself in the Suffragettes Self-Defense Club, to aid in physical confrontations with police:   Now, this certainly was not happening in Siam. In fact Siam/Thailand was busy "civilizing" itself in the eyes of the West by importing the strong Victorian views of powerful visual differences between genders. Modes of dress, differentiating the sexes, were even at one point legally mandated by the government in coming decades. What we today read as quintessentially "Thai" traditional attitudes towards the differences between the sexes though complex is actually, perhaps best explained as a Western value and practice importation during the first half of the 20th century. The visual differentiation of the sexes in dress: Thai cultural mandate #10 (1941): Polite international-style attire   Civilizing the Savage and Savagizing the Civil What I'm interested in is the connection between the early 20th century rationalization/modernization of Jui-Juitsu in Britain, and today's rationalization-modernization of Muay Thai in Thailand. The schism between Thailand and Britain in terms of gender, under the guise of "civilization" recently and long last was symbolically bridged when women were finally integrated into Lumpinee Stadium promotion: The First Female Fight In Lumpinee Stadium Breaking the Prohibition. Note: the strong division between the genders of the late 1930s and 1940s in the "international-style" of work and dress is also in the context of the construction of Rajadamnern Stadium (1945) and Lumpinee Stadium (1956) under Thai fascism and Field Marshal Plaek Phibunsongkhram (Prime Minister    1938-1944 and 1948-1957). It is unknown what gendered Muay Thai practices may have developed without this heritage of an imitation of the West. As an contemporary outsider we tend to assume these "traditional" gendered differences as purely and essentially "Thai" and not a product of Western example or influence. Seeing these two photos, well over 100 years apart, in relationship to each other under the view of Internationalized Rationalization of fighting arts is fecund to examination. There is no clean line that leads between rationalization of the art and sport and the equality of the genders. Importantly, and not without irony, when King Vajiravudh modernized Muay Boran in imitation of British Boxing he was attempting to purge Siam and its fighting art of the impression of savageness. Contestants did die in the ring (probably quite rarely) with rope-bound hands, but more importantly the use of feet and elbows and probably much more of Siamese fighting was seen as primitive by British report. Codifying Muay Thai was no simple desire to just imitate the West as superior, as the West used the motive of civilizing "primitive" people to justify the colonization of peoples, including all the countries in Siam's orbit. No doubt King Vajiravudh had adopted many British aesthetics during his decade in British schooling, but there also something prophylactic to the transformation of Muay Thai before the eyes in the West. Now though, Thailand is bending its fighting art to the Internationalist tastes of greater violence, more aggression, as part of a vision that is pushing it to join what might be seen as a globalized Combat Sports Industrial Complex, battling for eyeballs. And, as I say ironically enough, with this comes the rising commercial viability of women seen as equals. As Lumpinee Stadium seeks to Internationalize itself it brings in women, and also it brings in the "savagery" for which Siam's fighting was (politically and colonially) stigmatized over 100 years ago, as MMA comes to its storied name. The "Be more civilized!" and "Distinguish the genders!" that was once demanded by the globalizing West has become "Be more violent!" and "Equalize the genders!" by the globalizing West...a West that is actually now an Internationalist vision. What is missing from this story perhaps is the equivalence of Britain's Suffragettes Self-Defense Club, which is to say the way in which equality under a martial arts rationalization is connected to the political fight for women's liberties and rights. From my view I suspect that the growing importance of respected female fighting in combat sports is an expression of the increased social and economic capital women have in a globalized world. Women as having real and imagined physical prowess in the traditionally male-coded ring (and cage) symbolically manifests actual changes in female powers in society. Women in rings has grown out of the Suffragettes Self-Defense Club, not now equalizing themselves with embodied knowledge in the streets against police, but rather signifying their political and socio-economic heft to a globalized world. Yet, as all things bend back, the commercialized capture of symbolized female power in the ring is part of its re-domestication, as women's bodies become sites of judgement and eroticized re-packaging, problemizing any overriding narrative of liberty. As women are called to the ring under the auspices of aggression-first promotional fight theater in the double-bind navigation of globalized freedoms, the role of rationalization remains circumspect. Rationalization can and does lead to the re-codification of the genders, as we see with the conventions of institutional competition, as well as within the commodification of the female person and body by combat sport entertainment, yet it also holds the power to un-moor entrenched sexism and bias which work to restrict the possibilities of women as fighter who stands as proxy to the power of women in general.
  • The Latest From Open Topics Forum

    • Great Step Taken. I would always admire Lumpinee as an inspiration!!!
    • I wanted to comment on this theme of MMA in regards also to what Kevin said on your last Muay-Thai Bones Podcast ep 26. Kevin spoke that he felt a red line had been crossed by allowing MMA in Lumpinee. He said He didnt want inferior MMA being shown there as one reason. He spoke of the inferior MMA of One Championship as compared to the UFC. Though the pool of fighters in One is smaller, it has for instance Team Lakay from the Philippines, and the Lee family of Hawaii:  Angela, Christian and now Victoria who could be champions in the UFC too, The UFC is best at exploiting and ruining the lives of its fighters who are subject to terrible contracts and endless bullying by this massive corporation.  Thank God One Championship exists, and many thanks to Chatri Sidyodtong for bringing Muay-Thai and Kickboxing into the program in 2018. The real problem of having MMA in Lumpinee is the problem of MMA itself. MMA usurped MuayThai years ago as the premier fighting art. In the early 90s when they had the first cage fights, it was also a contest of which style would prevail. Unfortunately BJJ 🤢 was the winner in those early years. Muay-Thai was only useful in standup, and striking could only prevail on the feet. If the fight went to the ground grapplers would prevail. Wrestlers, judokas jui jitsu, and sambo fighters could easily take down a stand-up fighter and submit or choke him out.  A third point which makes MMA the most attractive art is the streetfighting aspect which makes it more "realistic" to the bored average Western viewer. So MuayThai is seen as only one part, -and a less important aspect of MMA😢. What I am getting at basically is that from a Muay-Thai standpoint it would be better if MMA:                                         A) Never existed, or                                         B) Would just go away!😈
    • It was just announced that, starting January 8th of next year, Lumpinee will start promoting an afternoon show that is only children. There will be 4 bouts per card, starting at 1:30 PM. Children have been permitted to fight at Lumpinee for a long time, but there has always been a weight limit (and ostensibly an age limit, but I'm not sure what that was; the weight limit kind of takes care of the age limit at the same time) of 100 lbs. As it's been told to me by Legends and older fighters who entered Lumpinee at that 100 lbs minimum, it's a bit of a forgiving line and fighters sometimes had to eat and drink in order to try to hit 100 lbs, rather than anyone dropping down to it. This new show is lowering the weight limit to 80 lbs, which will allow younger fighters or will at least acknowledge what weight some of those fighters are actually at when they come to the stadium. The intention of the show is to give access and opportunity to dao rung or "rising stars" as they are called in Thai. It's unclear from the announcement who will be the promoter for this particular program, but it's in line with something that Sia Boat of Petchyindee had initiated and invested in for his own promotions prior to the most recent shutdowns from Covid. It is unlikely that this will include girls; but we'll see. Of note is that the graphic used for this announcement are two young fighters Jojo (red) and Yodpetaek (blue), two top young fighters are 12 and 13 years old, who recently fought to a draw on a high profile fight. Neither of these two fighters meet the weight requirement at 80 lbs.
    • To be honest, from my perspective, it feels like "ok we going to allow women fighting so we just gonna allow everything". Pyrrhic victory. 
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      1.1k
    • Total Posts
      10.1k
×
×
  • Create New...