Jump to content

Stepping on kicks: 45-degrees, or straight ahead (per Kontoranee Payakaroon session)?


Recommended Posts

First off, I want to say a big thank you to Sylvie for the dedication and detail you put into all your content and for sharing such a wealth of Muay Thai information with the world.

Having watched the great session with Kontoranee Payakaroon, I had a question or a request for clarification. My first Muay Thai trainer, Ryan Roy (pro MT fighter, previously head trainer for Fairtex in the Bay Area back in the day, and now owner of T2 Muay Thai in Mountain View, CA for any folks out there looking to learn) taught us to always step out at a 45-degree angle on our kicks to avoid getting caught by a punch to the face mid-kick. In your session with Kongtoranee Payakaroon, he taught you to step straight towards your opponent's front foot on your kick. I know there is never one 'right' style, but did the subject of head protection during the kick come up much in your session? At one point during the session, he gave you a tip about using your defensive hand more towards the center of the face rather than the 'usual' by-the-ear position. I'm curious to know his approach, as I have seen a lot of kicks in pro MT fights where the fighter does not seem to step on that 45-degree angle, but again this technique has been drilled into my brain from training (even though I'm terrible at actually doing it!). I also remember watching an MMA fight (a different world than MT, but still...) where one fighter stepped straight towards his opponent on his kick and ended up getting knocked out with either a punch or elbow to the head. I continue to be curious on this topic, and to understand any subtlety or conditions of the varous approaches you have learned to the step. (I also enjoyed Arjun Surat's 'always defend on kicks' approach in your session video with him.) Thanks once again for your continual sharing of knowledge! - Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The 45 degree step is preferred by most trainers and gyms that I've experienced. When krus have you step straight forward, it's usually because they kick "through" the opponent more, but then your guard has to stay up pretty solid as a defense as you come in. Like the Arjan Surat arm, or "Pinsinchai Arm" as Kevin and I call it, to defend punches. This was never explicitly stated by Kongtoranee to me, but other krus who have taught to step right on or near an opponent's foot, it also allows your kick or knee to "track" them if they try to pivot off or move to the side. 

Rambaa, Karuhat, Yodkhunpon and Sagat all teach that elbow toward the center as a defense. It f***ing hurts if you punch an elbow. Can break someone's hand quite easily.

  • Like 1
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

    • Speculatively, it seems likely that the real "warfare roots" of ring Muay Thai goes back to all the downtime during siege encampment, (and peacetime) Ayutthaya's across the river outer quarters. One of the earliest historical accounts of Siamese ring fighting is of the "Tiger King" disguising himself and participating in plebeian ring fighting. This is not "warfare fighting" and goes back several hundred years. One can imagine that such fighting would share some fighting principles with what occurred on the battlefield, but as it was unarmed and likely a gambling driven sport it - at least to me - likely seems like it has had its very own lineage of development. Less was the case that people were bringing battlefield lessons into the ring, and more that gambled on fighting skills developed ring-to-ring. In such cases of course, developing balance and defensive prowess would be important.  Incidentally, any such Ayutthaya ring-to-ring developments hold the historical potential for lots of cross-pollination from other fighting arts, as Ayutthaya maintained huge mercenary forces, not only from Malaysia and the cusp of islands, but even an entire Japanese quarter, not to mention a strong commercially minded Chinese presence. These may have been years of truly "mixing" fighting arts in the gambling rings of the city (it is unknown just how separatist each culture was in this melting pot, perhaps each kept to their own in ring fighting).
    • For anyone who follows my writings I do not argue for any sense of a "pure" Muay Thai, or even Siamese fighting art history. Quite different than such I take one of Siam and Thai strengths is just how integrative they have been over centuries of development (while, importantly, preserving its core identity). For instance Western Boxing has had a powerful influence upon the form and development of Muay Thai for well over 100 years, and helped make it perhaps the premiere ring fighting art in the world, but Western Boxing itself was a very deep, complexly developed art which mapped quite well upon traditional Muay Thai in many areas, allowing it to flourish. This is quite different than the de-skilling that is happening in the sport right now, where instead the sport is being turned towards a less-skilled development, for really commercial reasons.  The story of whether the influx of attention, branding, not to mention the very important monetary investment that Entertainment Muay Thai has brought will actually help "save" traditional Muay Thai is yet to be written. It very well might, as the sport was reaching some important demographic and cultural dead-ends, and it needed an infusion. But, let's not have it be lost, what itself is being lost, which is the actual very high level of skill Thailand had produced...and how it had developed it. Let's keep our eye on the de-skilling.
    • One of the more slippery aspects of this change is that in its more extreme versions Entertainment Muay Thai was a redesign to actually produce Western (and other non-Thai) winners. It involved de-skilling the Thai sport simply because Thais were just too good at the more complex things. Yes, it was meant to appeal to International eyes, both in the crowd (tourist shows) and on streams, but the satisfying international element was actually Western (often White) winners of fights, and ultimately championship belts. The de-skilling of the sport and art was about tipping the playing field hard (involving also weigh-in changes that would favor larger bodied international fighters). Thais had to learn - and still have to learn - how to fight like the less skilled Westerners (and others). In some sense its a crazy, upside-down presentation of foreign "superiority", yes driven by hyper Capitalism and digital entertainment, but also one which harkens back to Colonialism where the Western power teaches the "native" "how its really done", and is assumed to just be superior in Nature. The point of fact is that Thais have been arguably the best combat sport fighters in the world over the last 50 years, and it is not without irony that the form of their skill degradation is sometimes framed as a return to Siam/Thai warfare roots. It's not. Its a simplification of ring fighting for the purpose of international appeal. 
  • The Latest From Open Topics Forum

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      1.4k
    • Total Posts
      11.6k
×
×
  • Create New...