How Effective is It?

[Jaron Bernstein]

Muay Thai is definitely an effective art. I would just throw in a caveat here that to be well rounded you need at least some level of competence at all ranges, including grappling (preferably in a way that enables you to transition from striking to grappling and vice versa).

[Steve Fitch]

Muay Thai is definitely an effective art. I would just throw in a caveat here that to be well rounded you need at least some level of competence at all ranges, including grappling (preferably in a way that enables you to transition from striking to grappling and vice versa).

True...OR

You can also learn the "original" form of Muay Thai, called Chaiya.

http://www.muaychaiya.com/

Nice grappling techniques.

[Alan Abu Bakr]

Muay Thai is definitely an effective art. I would just throw in a caveat here that to be well rounded you need at least some level of competence at all ranges, including grappling (preferably in a way that enables you to transition from striking to grappling and vice versa).

III. Learn the 4 ranges of combat

* Kicking
* Punching
* Trapping
* Grappling

Jeet Kune Do students train in each of these ranges equally. According to Lee, this range of training serves to differentiate JKD from other martial arts. Lee stated that most but not all traditional martial systems specialize in training at one or two ranges. Bruce Lee's theories have been especially influential and substantiated in the field of Mixed Martial Arts, as the MMA Phases of Combat are essentially the same concept as the JKD combat ranges. As a historical note, the ranges in JKD have evolved over time. Initially the ranges were categorized as short or close, medium, and long range.[4] These terms proved ambiguous and eventually evolved into their more descriptive forms although there may still be others who prefer the three categories.

[Steve Fitch]

Muay Thai is definitely an effective art. I would just throw in a caveat here that to be well rounded you need at least some level of competence at all ranges, including grappling (preferably in a way that enables you to transition from striking to grappling and vice versa).

III. Learn the 4 ranges of combat

* Kicking
* Punching
* Trapping
* Grappling

Jeet Kune Do students train in each of these ranges equally. According to Lee, this range of training serves to differentiate JKD from other martial arts. Lee stated that most but not all traditional martial systems specialize in training at one or two ranges. Bruce Lee's theories have been especially influential and substantiated in the field of Mixed Martial Arts, as the MMA Phases of Combat are essentially the same concept as the JKD combat ranges. As a historical note, the ranges in JKD have evolved over time. Initially the ranges were categorized as short or close, medium, and long range.[4] These terms proved ambiguous and eventually evolved into their more descriptive forms although there may still be others who prefer the three categories.

I agree as well..

If you ever see MMA fight training, for their "striking" most use Muay Thai. I am in no way saying that other striking arts are crap, I am just saying that in my opinion, Muay Thai dominates.

[Jay Vail]

Muay Thai is definitely an effective art. I would just throw in a caveat here that to be well rounded you need at least some level of competence at all ranges, including grappling (preferably in a way that enables you to transition from striking to grappling and vice versa).

III. Learn the 4 ranges of combat

* Kicking
* Punching
* Trapping
* Grappling

Jeet Kune Do students train in each of these ranges equally. According to Lee, this range of training serves to differentiate JKD from other martial arts. Lee stated that most but not all traditional martial systems specialize in training at one or two ranges. Bruce Lee's theories have been especially influential and substantiated in the field of Mixed Martial Arts, as the MMA Phases of Combat are essentially the same concept as the JKD combat ranges. As a historical note, the ranges in JKD have evolved over time. Initially the ranges were categorized as short or close, medium, and long range.[4] These terms proved ambiguous and eventually evolved into their more descriptive forms although there may still be others who prefer the three categories.

I agree as well..

If you ever see MMA fight training, for their "striking" most use Muay Thai. I am in no way saying that other striking arts are crap, I am just saying that in my opinion, Muay Thai dominates.

Let's not have this discussion fall into a "my style is better" discussion.

Fact is, of the major forms dominating the rings today, each of them has good qualities, but also each of them has weaknesses. That are areas where they excell, but also areas where they need improvement.

My take on this point, based on hours of watching fights, often replaying them in slow mo, is the following. Please be aware these are generalizations.

Muay thai is excellent at striking, particularly with the feet. However, it could improve the hands, although there are many fighters who are quite good with the hands. It could also improve the clinch and muay thai people generally do not grapple in the stand up as well as sanshou fighters. They are also deficient in wrestling on the ground because of their rule set.

MMA people generally strike well with the hands but kick poorly, especially compared to muay thai fighters. MMA people typically have only two leg techniques, the round house and the knee, while muay thai fighters will use the entire battery of kicks (front, side, backd, spin, round, knee, etc). They grapple well on the ground, but are not as good as sanshou in the clinch or stand up grapple. They excel the others on the ground.

Sanshou are the best well rounded fighters standing up. They strike well with the hands and feet. However, I would rate them as about even with muay thai. (It is said in some of the literature that kungfu, of which sanshou is a part, was heavily influenced by muay thai in the development of sanshou.) You cannot clinch with a sanshou fighter without great danger of being thrown. They have a really broad repetoire of throws. But they do not fight on the ground because of their rule set, so in an MMA fight a sanshou fighter probably is at a disadvantage.

Whatever, limitations exist in any of these forms, however, a person skilled in any of these approaches is going to be formidable and never should be underestimated. At the end of the day, of course, it gets down to the old cliche "it's the man not the method."

[Bill Welch]

I dont see where this discussion is going from an RMA perspective. This discussion seems incredibly off topic.

[Sripol Asanasavest]

I dont see where this discussion is going from an RMA perspective. This discussion seems incredibly off topic.

As much as I like having a discussion about Muay Thai, I would have to agree that it is off topic. Let's keep it on the subject.

And thanks everyone for replying.

[Sripol Asanasavest]

Did renaissance and medieval martial art incorporated a lot of boxing into its fighting skill. I have read a number of articles, but it all teaches wrestling...not much boxing. Why didn't it include boxing? I'm sure striking does complement wrestling if used correctly. Boxing is a very effective art.

[Mike Cartier]

yes this is all very off topic for our RMA studies, however it is my kind of off topic

I'll end it with a video of possibly the most technical Muay Thai fighter in MMA today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDmJamrT1ow&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmma%2Etv%2FTUF%2Findex%2Ecfm%3Fac%3DListMessages%26PID%3D1%26TID%3D1146981%26FID%3D1%26pc%3D1

Lets keep this on topic though....

[Steve Fitch]

yes this is all very off topic for our RMA studies, however it is my kind of off topic

I'll end it with a video of possibly the most technical Muay Thai fighter in MMA today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDmJamrT1ow&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmma%2Etv%2FTUF%2Findex%2Ecfm%3Fac%3DListMessages%26PID%3D1%26TID%3D1146981%26FID%3D1%26pc%3D1

Lets keep this on topic though....

I love this guy for Muay Thai http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0-8nOzLx54

Now...Back on topic.

[Jeffrey Hull]

Did renaissance and medieval martial art incorporated a lot of boxing into its fighting skill. I have read a number of articles, but it all teaches wrestling...not much boxing. Why didn't it include boxing? I'm sure striking does complement wrestling if used correctly. Boxing is a very effective art.

You can get an answer to exactly that from my new article

Getting Punchy – Fist-Fighting, Wrestling and Fight-Books
http://www.thearma.org/essays/getting-punchy.html

My article is one of only like two articles, each published just this past year, done to address that specific issue.

Anyway -- although I do not expect everybody to agree with every single thing in my article, I did exert great effort to substantiate everything I assert in the article. I hope it proves interesting to those who research the history of combatives.

[Jay Vail]

Did renaissance and medieval martial art incorporated a lot of boxing into its fighting skill. I have read a number of articles, but it all teaches wrestling...not much boxing. Why didn't it include boxing? I'm sure striking does complement wrestling if used correctly. Boxing is a very effective art.

You can get an answer to exactly that from my new article

Getting Punchy – Fist-Fighting, Wrestling and Fight-Books
http://www.thearma.org/essays/getting-punchy.html

My article is one of only like two articles, each published just this past year, done to address that specific issue.

Anyway -- although I do not expect everybody to agree with every single thing in my article, I did exert great effort to substantiate everything I assert in the article. I hope it proves interesting to those who research the history of combatives.

Excellent article, Jeff. Good research and analysis.

[Jay Vail]

yes this is all very off topic for our RMA studies, however it is my kind of off topic

I'll end it with a video of possibly the most technical Muay Thai fighter in MMA today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDmJamrT1ow&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fmma%2Etv%2FTUF%2Findex%2Ecfm%3Fac%3DListMessages%26PID%3D1%26TID%3D1146981%26FID%3D1%26pc%3D1

Lets keep this on topic though....

That is one bad man. He can really box.

[Sripol Asanasavest]

Spiderman, huh? LOL That guy can really box! I have a couple of tarantulas myself! LOL Anyway, great video. Goes to show how effective boxing can be when intergrated into a fighting system.

[Sripol Asanasavest]

Did renaissance and medieval martial art incorporated a lot of boxing into its fighting skill. I have read a number of articles, but it all teaches wrestling...not much boxing. Why didn't it include boxing? I'm sure striking does complement wrestling if used correctly. Boxing is a very effective art.

You can get an answer to exactly that from my new article

Getting Punchy – Fist-Fighting, Wrestling and Fight-Books
http://www.thearma.org/essays/getting-punchy.html

My article is one of only like two articles, each published just this past year, done to address that specific issue.

Anyway -- although I do not expect everybody to agree with every single thing in my article, I did exert great effort to substantiate everything I assert in the article. I hope it proves interesting to those who research the history of combatives.

Thank you for the article! A great read indeed! I'll have to read it when I have the time.