- Joined
- Dec 14, 2015
- Messages
- 3,077
- Reaction score
- 298
Which reason do you consider more doable?
1. The technique is very hard to learn, and other striking styles like kick boxing, and muay thai are "easier" to master? In other words you need to be kind of "special" (natural talent) and/or years of experience to be able to master this fighting style?
2. Top MMA coaches are still skeptical because this fighting techniques are something "new" to MMA and cannot be considered something proven and/or reliable?
3. This fighting style is a myth, meaning that it is really not optimal for MMA (other than as a complement) and Thompson and Machida are really just that good of a fighter meaning that the could be equally if not more dominant using a more common "MMA striking style"?
1. The technique is very hard to learn, and other striking styles like kick boxing, and muay thai are "easier" to master? In other words you need to be kind of "special" (natural talent) and/or years of experience to be able to master this fighting style?
2. Top MMA coaches are still skeptical because this fighting techniques are something "new" to MMA and cannot be considered something proven and/or reliable?
3. This fighting style is a myth, meaning that it is really not optimal for MMA (other than as a complement) and Thompson and Machida are really just that good of a fighter meaning that the could be equally if not more dominant using a more common "MMA striking style"?