Dan Hooker vs Claudo

Not really because that whole "leftie or rightie" thing is as outdated as Folgers Crystals.
I can't remember the last time I thought about it. I usually just take a stance according to what I want to set up. In training and on the heavy bad, both sides get trained. When sparring I try to pick what is uncomfortable for my opponent.

I often see MMA switch up frequently or the take that squared stance.
 
"southpaw vs orthodox" has got to be one of the oldest, dumbest dead horse debates in the history of combat sports.

So dumb, it's the whole plot of Rocky I and Ii.

Prove me wrong
 
I can't remember the last time I thought about it. I usually just take a stance according to what I want to set up. In training and on the heavy bad, both sides get trained. When sparring I try to pick what is uncomfortable for my opponent.

I often see MMA switch up frequently or the take that squared stance.
In boxing, stances tend to be dualistic because at the end of the day, it's all about jabbing vs power punches.

In Asian boxing styles, not as much.

In southeast Asia, they don't give a damn about which foot is forward or behind, man. They will kill you with kicks.

From a grappling point of view you don't ever want somebody to know what your weighted leg is going to be.

I always mute the commentators. I don't give a damn about their pedigree. They are not in the fight, they are blabbing.
 
Daniel Cormier, the announcer, is a well trained, champion in MMA.
Again so what? Ever heard Charles Barkley talk about basketball? Sometimes he's right, other times his head is up his keister.

Do you think that because somebody is a Muay Thai pro boxer or an MMA champion, they are 100% correct?

Dude, there are a million no name Nak Muay out there who don't even have Internet access or speak English. They don't have these "leftie or rightie" debates.

Do you think they give a damn about left foot, right foot, Greek, English, or UFC?

...

Listen, a teep penetrates deep regardless of the opponents stance, and it's dependent on the kicker and timing. Stance does not matter, if do right. Muay Thai videos on YouTube do not matter. UFC commentators do not matter (they tend to be old and retired).

Do you even know what teep means in Thai?

Does anyone here? I am getting strong feeling that I am the only person in this discussion who has been teeped for real. I hope that explains my frustration.
 
Last edited:
I should probably state my actual argument in plain English: I find most martial arts "breakdown" videos absolutely ridiculous especially if hey focus on something as dynamic as combat footwork.

And especially especially when they are done by pros. And most of all, when it's a commentator sitting on their *** watching a fight they are not part of.

5:40pm Eastern Time.

And people who love to share and demand they are evidence of anything, silly as hell.

Call me an experiential existentialist. You have to understand that unless you have been teeped hard or done it to another you won't have a clue about what I'm ranting.
 
Glad I got that out of my system.

So, back to basics, who here has been kicked like this or kicked someone like this?

Be honest.
 
Understand?

Never listen to commentators talking about stances. It's worse than so called "foodies" yapping about the umami.
Lol.. yeah I still get moody about oblique kick. Lol

They are people and people make mistakes. But I can tell what they don't use from some of the comments they make. Kick with the front leg then all of it will be in range.

I think the front kicks in general are not well understood by most. There are a lot of people who think that they are for pushing people away. Good for me but unfortunate for them because the are missing out on the real power behind the kick. Maybe it's like that because some people are kicking elbows.
Ever heard Charles Barkley talk about basketball? Sometimes he's right, other times his head is up his keister.
ha hah a.. Basketball? You are being way too kind. There's a lot of stuff that he says that are questionable lol.

Listen, a teep penetrates deep regardless of the opponents stance, and it's dependent on the kicker and timing. Stance does not matter, if do right.
100% correct. Just basing things on what my brother told me about the troubles he had with the teep. My guess is that people are kicking a lot of elbows.

I also think that this is the view of most when it comes to teeps. As something that is used to push people away.


You have to understand that unless you have been teeped hard or done it to another you won't have a clue
This is correct. Recieving a solid teep = not something to be absorbing multiple times. Having used one = understand how it works and understand good methods and mechanics needed to land it.

Does anyone here? I am getting strong feeling that I am the only person in this discussion who has been teeped for real. I hope that explains my frustration.
Yeah you normally don't get frustrated lol

So, back to basics, who here has been kicked like this or kicked someone like this?
Not me. :angelic:
 
My frustration is easily summed up with a word: language.

The people basically dumbing things down to orthodox/southpaw are almost universally not from Southeast Asia. Hence, all these videos of foreigners going to Thailand to train, fight etc. Good on them, I knew a few Thai pros myself and trained with them. They may be great.

But these videos man....

Muay Thai has way more than 2 specific stances: Yeun Neung Khum, Yeun Song Khum, Yeun Saam Khum, and there are more, and if you really want to get deep, stances become meaningless when phalang yuth comes into play.

Just those alone, the 1, 2 and 3 point stances, and associated attacks and defenses, make Thai boxing infinitely more complex than European boxing, where orthodox or southpaw stances are adopted based on very basic attack and defense that does not include knees, feet, legs, elbows.

8 limbs, dude.

So I really do apologize if offend anyone, but as a Muay Boran guy, it irks me to hear people using orthodox and southpaw to describe these. It's really apples and oranges, and the only real similarity is the idea of a power side.

And if you really know Muay Thai, you know that the nak muay who showboat their "power side" with colorful flair (inside Muay Thai joke there if you know what I mean) are at a terrible disadvantage.

I know I'm ranting here. I'll feel better tomorrow, today was leg day.

"Timestamp your arguments"....come on. :D
 
Because, they are in open stance—Dan (orthodox stance) vs Claudio (southpaw). In open stance, Claudio's stomach is more open to Dan's kick.

Yeah looking back, this is what got me going off the rails.

"open stance": this video Marvin posted of some TKD dude is going off about "open" and "closed" stance which mean nothing in MMA or Muay Thai as far as I can tell.

We are talking about two well trained Muay Thai boxers, in a thread where a classic Muay Thai teep wins a fight last year (which is not a new thing in Thailand), and then my brain is trying and struggling to figure out why a TKD video about "open stance" has anything to do with MMA fights involving a Thai boxer (Dan) successfully thrusting his foot into Claudio Puelles, a 14 year veteran nak muay, whose stance (whatever it was at that moment) was not the reason he got teeped well.

He got teeped well because Dan is Dan and Dan knows exactly how to teep, and it won't matter what kind of stance you are in if he lands that correctly, like I said you will either move back or fall back.
 
So I really do apologize if offend anyone, but as a Muay Boran guy, it irks me to hear people using orthodox and southpaw to describe these. It's really apples and oranges, and the only real similarity is the idea of a power side.

And if you really know Muay Thai, you know that the nak muay who showboat their "power side" with colorful flair (inside Muay Thai joke there if you know what I mean) are at a terrible disadvantage.

I know I'm ranting here. I'll feel better tomorrow, today was leg day.
Your rant bring me joy because that's how I feel when there is talk about throwing away things and limiting technique applications. In the Jow Ga school we never used that terminology either. We had our own. "The good side and the goofy side." lol. when we drilled we did thing one direction and then in the other and sometimes we alternated. Eventually the goofy side becomes less goofy.

The biggest surprise for students after their brain melts, is when they learn the beginner form, they are so happy, then we say, Ok do it starting the working side. For me personally once I get that done then I do the forms with only the foot work and no punching. I try to grind it down until all of it is burned into me.
 
He got teeped well because Dan is Dan and Dan knows exactly how to teep, and it won't matter what kind of stance you are in if he lands that correctly, like I said you will either move back or fall back.
when that kick comes in just right, they won't even know it until it lands.. Sometimes it's like delay kick because there is to points of possible contacts. When the knee is lifted high, then blocking the knee feels like a successful block while the other part of the kick comes under the radar. Massive interruption. The most underestimated kick.
 
This is part of my ire.

Imagine Mick trying to explain to Rocky the mechanics of Khao loi?
ha ha ha.. He could if he did it and was able to land it successfully. I would share my thoughts on this one but I'm starting to sound really repetitive.


1702148530813.png




1702149302953.png
 
This is part of my ire.

Imagine Mick trying to explain to Rocky the mechanics of Khao loi?
Yep. Just wait until the lesson becomes "when the knee is lifted low" Then there's the knee that spears and the Knee that drops onto the opponent. Lots of good stuff.
 
Back
Top