Diesel Breakdown | Controlling No Man's Land

[Tayski]

Lots of them around bud

Definitely not "lots" around, they're a minority.

Also that chart image is offensive to people like @AndyMaBobs whose height isn't even listed on there

 

[AndyMaBobs]

A little jab to the eye and you start crying? You sure you didn't break a nail either?


The whole idea for them getting a hard on for height is that longer reach means they can start clinching at the shorter guy's kicking range, given they are really the lanky thin archetype. Its harder to do "traditional" pummeling playing into their game. Same with knees, it comes from farther. But thats just one aspect to it. If it were true, all the best fighters would be basketball players, and manlets would have to move onto another sport like poker or video games.

Clinching is so deep that it could be classified as its own martial art. Even stalling is part of the strategy, people who just teach go for the kill end up losing here, worse case, when bursting out of frustration is when I time the spin or dump. Its waayyyy better if they're strong and don't fall as I time the spin, because the knee that I shoot out will be money.

But you have to remember, doing the shin shield type defense in the clinch, is considered an "advanced technique". Fuckin' lol.

You found that Sambo helps? Isn't it a gi style though? Or did you mean you flying heelhooked him?

I'm not even kidding I genuinely did break a nail.

Sambo does have a jacket, but I don't train in one because my coach really doesn't care unless you're going in for sambo competitions, then you need to practise with the kurtka, because you need to know how to defend it. I found that sambo helped me a lot, because there's a lot of posture breaks that come before a throw, and several of the throws are muay thai legal - so it's progressively getting harder and harder to sweep me because I can always keep and maintain my balance, it also helped me get better at keeping my centre of gravity low, and also to drive up on taller guys, because you can pull them DOWN and into your head, and drive your head into their jaw, a bit like in BJJ.

So I find that helped me a lot with my clinching game.


Also I can echo you on the knee shield being considered 'advanced'. It seems that they're SO pre-occupied on striking that they neglect the clinch to the point where everyone is just constantly going for the double collar and it NEVER WORKS... and they wonder why they get swamped in Thailand.

 

[j123]

Definitely not "lots" around, they're a minority.

Also that chart image is offensive to people like @AndyMaBobs whose height isn't even listed on there

Bud I post on Sherdog, I'm 6'7. Everyone in the heavies and wasteland are 6'5+

I'm not even kidding I genuinely did break a nail.

Sambo does have a jacket, but I don't train in one because my coach really doesn't care unless you're going in for sambo competitions, then you need to practise with the kurtka, because you need to know how to defend it. I found that sambo helped me a lot, because there's a lot of posture breaks that come before a throw, and several of the throws are muay thai legal - so it's progressively getting harder and harder to sweep me because I can always keep and maintain my balance, it also helped me get better at keeping my centre of gravity low, and also to drive up on taller guys, because you can pull them DOWN and into your head, and drive your head into their jaw, a bit like in BJJ.

So I find that helped me a lot with my clinching game.


Also I can echo you on the knee shield being considered 'advanced'. It seems that they're SO pre-occupied on striking that they neglect the clinch to the point where everyone is just constantly going for the double collar and it NEVER WORKS... and they wonder why they get swamped in Thailand.

Wait til more Sambo guys get into MT then. The old school fate will happen:

"Let's proove my martial art is better, by banning all of their cool techniques"

Head into jaw + collarbone is great. When they want to dump me, they have to pull me over that side, but the head is preventing them, so its great. I think that's a Greco thing.

In Thailand you get dumped without even knowing, and you end up making the teenage Thai look like that Aikido story where the old man barely moves a cm, and people around him falls to the ground.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

Bud I post on Sherdog, I'm 6'7. Everyone in the heavies and wasteland are 6'5+


Wait til more Sambo guys get into MT then. The old school fate will happen:

"Let's proove my martial art is better, by banning all of their cool techniques"

Head into jaw + collarbone is great. When they want to dump me, they have to pull me over that side, but the head is preventing them, so its great. I think that's a Greco thing.

In Thailand you get dumped without even knowing, and you end up making the teenage Thai look like that Aikido story where the old man barely moves a cm, and people around him falls to the ground.

No matter how good you are, there is a 5 year old in Thailand who is 5 times better than you.

Russians seem to be getting into muay thai lately, like that guy Khayal who stitched up Buakaw - I do wonder how they approach learning it.

 

[j123]

No matter how good you are, there is a 5 year old in Thailand who is 5 times better than you.

Russians seem to be getting into muay thai lately, like that guy Khayal who stitched up Buakaw - I do wonder how they approach learning it.

For sure. I gotta go there one day. Who knows, maybe I'll run into Payak and an entourage of ladyboys

Heavy on boxing maybe? Russia has a good history on that, their style of boxing is different from 'merican boxing anyways. Very heavy on hitting but not getting hit. They also have good wrestling and doping. Fuck, is there anything they ain't good at? Even ruskie women are better than 21st century western chickas

 

[Azam]

Y'see I don't agree with the Semmy argument either - because there were plenty of tall guys that failed to have the same success as him... in fact, there isn't another 7 foot tall fighter in kickboxing or MMA as successful as him, dude was just a smart fighter. As for as Dieselnoi though, the reason his height is overstated is people seem to think the stuff he was doing only worked because he was tall, but his approach to knees and mine are VERY similar, and I'm like 5'6/5'7.

Also height in the clinch doesn't = advantage, because a big objective to the clinch (if you're doing it properly) is to bore your head into the cheek bone, jaw and neck of your opponent, and get double underhooks to grind them out - which is MUCH easier to do when you're short. Using height to pull opponents into double collar tie is just amateur shit.

I think we may differ in opinion on the clinch in general (because I'm a boxer/clinch guy) so I won't get into whether its entertaining or not, but as far as him relying on it, it's not that he's relying on it, it's that the other guys can't stop him. It's like when Demien Maia or Khabib utterly dominate an opponent on the ground. When I hear 'rely' I normally think of it like: 'they rely on this because they aren't good everywhere else' - which might not be what you're saying.

Now I'm not saying that his unusual height wasn't a factor in his success, but he was far more technical than most let on.

Interesting debate going on in here thought I'd add what I think.

I kinda agree with you & @Tayski - I can see what Tay is saying though.

Height is definitely an advantage to have in the clinch - not specifically I'd argue with grappling but more so with you're ability to get leverage into knees & elbows. I think it's a good thing to ask yourself would Dieselnoi have been so dominant with the clinch/knees if he had been 5ft5? Would he have been able to throw such devastating knees at that height? Would his clinch/knee game been as effective as it was?

Of course no-one is saying that's the only reason he was so good - it does play a significant part though into how good he was with it (I think). Again I personally don't think it's an issue though because at the end of the day it's a fight. If you are tall & naturally lean towards a strong clinch & knee game - then you should make use of what your strengths are. At the end of the day it's a fight - I don't think it's a big deal that he clinched/knee'd everyone into oblivion. No-one was able to really stop it - so why diverge away from doing something different when no-one has an answer for that part of your game. At the end of the day again - it's a fight the objective is to win not to display your arrange of techniques necessarily. Do what works for you. I think the onus was on Dieselnoi's opponents to figure out & counter that clinch/knee game.

In regards to Semmy - I'd ask the same thing. Would he have been as great as he was if he'd been 6ft & 105kg - i.e. if he had been the same general height/weight as most people in his division. When I look at Semmy's fights - I think it's hard to argue that he made use of his height, he made use of his range and I don't knock him for it - I would do the exact same. His repertoire mainly consisted of jabs, straights, front kicks, teeps & knees - he fought where he kept people at the end of his reach & if they got close - front kicks, knees & rear hands.

On the other hand you have a guy like samart who doesn't really have significant physical advantages. So I can see why Tay thinks more of Samart.

Sure not all fighters who had height/weight advantages were as dominant but I think that says more about their ability & the way they fight. Struve for example while having being tall never really fought like a tall person should (never made use of his height/reach) - you can say the same with Silva. Choi on the other hand was just plain awful. But I don't think it takes away from anyone if you use your physical advantages - you'd be stupid not too.

Personally I think in clinching/grappling exchanges - the smaller dude usually has the advantage because his centre of gravity is much lower when it comes to purely grappling exchanges.

Also I wonder who'd be the better instructor - a guy like Dieselnoi who had relied heavily on clinch/knees or someone like Samart who was more well rounded. I think Samart would probably be better overall but you can't discount the specialism & those hidden gems of knowing in depth of how to clinch/knee as destructively as Dieselnoi. I guess you could argue there are a lot more well rounded teachers out there - there are probably a lot less teachers out their who have the specialism Dieselnoi has though with clinch/knees.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

In regards to Semmy - I'd ask the same thing. Would he have been as great as he was if he'd been 6ft & 105kg - i.e. if he had been the same general height/weight as most people in his division. When I look at Semmy's fights - I think it's hard to argue that he made use of his height, he made use of his range and I don't knock him for it - I would do the exact same. His repertoire mainly consisted of jabs, straights, front kicks, teeps & knees - he fought where he kept people at the end of his reach & if they got close - front kicks, knees & rear hands.

On the other hand you have a guy like samart who doesn't really have significant physical advantages. So I can see why Tay thinks more of Samart.

Sure not all fighters who had height/weight advantages were as dominant but I think that says more about their ability & the way they fight. Struve for example while having being tall never really fought like a tall person should (never made use of his height/reach) - you can say the same with Silva. Choi on the other hand was just plain awful. But I don't think it takes away from anyone if you use your physical advantages - you'd be stupid not too.

Personally I think in clinching/grappling exchanges - the smaller dude usually has the advantage because his centre of gravity is much lower when it comes to purely grappling exchanges.

Also I wonder who'd be the better instructor - a guy like Dieselnoi who had relied heavily on clinch/knees or someone like Samart who was more well rounded. I think Samart would probably be better overall but you can't discount the specialism & those hidden gems of knowing in depth of how to clinch/knee as destructively as Dieselnoi. I guess you could argue there are a lot more well rounded teachers out there - there are probably a lot less teachers out their who have the specialism Dieselnoi has though with clinch/knees.

As far as I'm aware from people that have trained with both, Dieselnoi is the better coach and Samart is generally disinterested - I think that is more of a personality thing though, Samart just isn't as passionate about the sport.

On Struve and that, I think that's why I disagree with people saying that Schilt only one because he was tall. He won because he was good and could use it, and I find it funny that Schilt's detractors moan about him being tall... in spite of the fact that Schilt lost several times in his career - to people he also beat - it wasn't like he was just unbeatable because he was too tall, fighters knew what they had to do to beat him, and sometimes they could exercute it, sometimes he executed his gameplan better.

And yeah as for Dieselnoi in the clinch, I do think that was what was so remarkable about him, he excelled in an area in which his height was a disadvantage - the height his knees got was certainly a plus, but he was really just great at denying grips and walking his opponents into traps.

My favourite Dieselnoi technique (that I now do all the time, or at least the best I can) is to rather than check the kick to knee under the opponents kick, after you've kneed their thigh, bring that foot down in the opposite stance and knee the body.

 

[j123]

My favourite Dieselnoi technique (that I now do all the time, or at least the best I can) is to rather than check the kick to knee under the opponents kick, after you've kneed their thigh, bring that foot down in the opposite stance and knee the body.

So as orthodox:
you check with your left, then right (rear) knee, step down and knee with your left? If they don't back step or you back them up, its gonna be jammed up?

Seems kinda strange, but who knows.

My favourite moo thigh combo is @ARIZE 's favourite. 1,2, 1,2

 

[AndyMaBobs]

So as orthodox:
you check with your left, then right (rear) knee, step down and knee with your left? If they don't back step or you back them up, its gonna be jammed up?

Seems kinda strange, but who knows.

My favourite moo thigh combo is @ARIZE 's favourite. 1,2, 1,2

Not quite, I'll get a visual:

You're essentially kneeing under their kick, so you bring the leg up as though you would check, but the difference in timing means you knee their hamstring.

 

[ARIZE]

Honda demonstrated excellent Muay Thai technique in that fight.

But that's just what happens when it faces boxing.

@ARIZE

This attempt was too weak man, you can do better than this...

he excelled in an area in which his height was a disadvantage

Common man, you cannot say that... Been tall in the clinch is a huge advantage. Of course there are techniques for the shorter guys, and if you are better than your opponent, height wont matter that much.
But you cannot say been tall is a disadvantage in the clinch...

And we are not talking about few centimeters, he had a huge difference.

Been tall and having big reach advantage:

-You control the clinch entry. You can initiate it from farther than you opponent.
-You can deny the clinch safer. Not so much in danger from elbows when you push your opponent chin away for example.
-Advantage with piercing knees while engaging or disengaging the clinch.
-Better grounded, without having the need to be on the toes.
-A lot harder to make you bend on the waist.
-A lot easier to bend the opponent.
-You can tire your opponent, just by resting your frame on them.
-Obviously easier to knee high, and less tiring.
-Huge advantage in the elbows.
...

He was a killer in the clinch, with great technique in it... But not despite his height.

Also height in the clinch doesn't = advantage, because a big objective to the clinch (if you're doing it properly) is to bore your head into the cheek bone, jaw and neck of your opponent, and get double underhooks to grind them out - which is MUCH easier to do when you're short. Using height to pull opponents into double collar tie is just amateur shit.

That's not really true...

It's one of the strategies for clinching, but is far from been THE BIG OBJECTIVE... Specially the part with the underhooks... You get underhooks, mostly when you want to stall the action and make the referee break the clinch, or if you try to unbalance your opponent...
But with a double underhook, you cannot elbow, and you cannot knee as easily... It's not the weapon of choice of aggressive clinchers...
Of course they know how to use it, and having a high double underhook can be an advantage... but not the way you present it.

You're essentially kneeing under their kick, so you bring the leg up as though you would check, but the difference in timing means you knee their hamstring.

Never been able to feel comfortable enough to try it in a match... Can't remember who showed me this, but I just kept the part of: check with the rear, step in when putting the leg back down to throw a kick from the southpaw, as if you made a switch.





For your article:

It's talking about MMA and Boxing. So I don't like it...

More seriously, I don't have much to say about it. I feel that for MT and TKD it's a bit different, but since you talk about MMA and box, and don't really have a valid opinion on it.

 

[Superhet]

I don't know about thaiboxing, but in mma, being shorter in the clinch is not the clear-cut disadvantage that it seems in thaiboxing. Here's a list of things you can do in mma which are easier for the shorter fighter, that you can't do in thaiboxing because of the gloves and lack of ground game:

- Rotate to their side and get a body lock or vice versa. If you have an underhook, grab his far arm with both of yours and knee. With an overhook, just squeeze his near arm and knee and take extra care to place your leg behind his hip so he can't turn to face you.
- Fake a takedown and when he compromises to defend it, come up with a knee. Can be done from range and in the clinch. He has to respect the attempt because if not...
- Take him down. Your center of gravity is lower. Which also means you'll have an easier time pushing your head into his jaw, preventing him from doing much of anything and seeing what you're doing.
- You gain the possibility of arm triangling him if he tries to control your head recklessly or doesn't see it coming.

Clinching in mma and thaiboxing are different games just like mma boxing and boxing-boxing and I re-discovered that a few weeks ago when I did some thaiboxing rounds.

------------------------------------

Now about the article itself...!

I actually disagree on the double/triple jab to control distance. I'm no Lomachenko and neither are the guys I train with. But for me, double jabbing just to keep range leaves an opening to get countered which lasts too long for it to be a sound tactic. In fact, double jabbing - as a guy who likes to counter outside of the clinch - is the thing I most like when my opponent does in striking (I can't think of another except overcommitting). When a guy throws a 1 but then switches to a 3 or 6 or a kick, I don't know whether my cross counter or low kick was the right strike to also counter his followup. But when he throws a 1-1 I counter both strikes with my response to the first one, even if I didn't anticipate that it was going to be the same strike twice. And at least I find it's not very hard to tell when someone is double jabbing because their posture won't shift (and I must admit, also because I am already hoping that they are double jabbing when I see them throw a jab).

(I had to find something to get back at you for promising me The One clinch article but not revealing it yet )

 

[Tayski]

Common man, you cannot say that... Been tall in the clinch is a huge advantage. Of course there are techniques for the shorter guys, and if you are better than your opponent, height wont matter that much.
But you cannot say been tall is a disadvantage in the clinch...

And we are not talking about few centimeters, he had a huge difference.

Been tall and having big reach advantage:

-You control the clinch entry. You can initiate it from farther than you opponent.
-You can deny the clinch safer. Not so much in danger from elbows when you push your opponent chin away for example.
-Advantage with piercing knees while engaging or disengaging the clinch.
-Better grounded, without having the need to be on the toes.
-A lot harder to make you bend on the waist.
-A lot easier to bend the opponent.
-You can tire your opponent, just by resting your frame on them.
-Obviously easier to knee high, and less tiring.
-Huge advantage in the elbows.
...

He was a killer in the clinch, with great technique in it... But not despite his height.

Glad I'm not the only one to say this.

 

[AndyMaBobs]

Seems a lot of this is a difference in opinion of how to approach the clinch - I think there are disadvantages and advantages to being short or tall - but as someone who is more or less a dedicated clinch guy now - there are plenty advantages to being shorter
- lower COG
- less porouse defence thanks to gangly arms
- head it automatically low than your opponent making it far easier to drive up
- easier control with a zip tie

A short clincher does better with an all the way in/all the way out strategy - to stay on the end of the opponents kick - draw the kick out and the as it falls short to come in with the clinch entry.

 

[j123]

Seems a lot of this is a difference in opinion of how to approach the clinch - I think there are disadvantages and advantages to being short or tall - but as someone who is more or less a dedicated clinch guy now - there are plenty advantages to being shorter
- lower COG
- less porouse defence thanks to gangly arms
- head it automatically low than your opponent making it far easier to drive up
- easier control with a zip tie

A short clincher does better with an all the way in/all the way out strategy - to stay on the end of the opponents kick - draw the kick out and the as it falls short to come in with the clinch entry.

This post reeks of manlet propaganda

 

[eternaldarkness]

I wouldn't go as far as shooting, but it's pretty wrong, maybe I'd throw a dagger or something.

I'd strongly recommend looking at the videos on youtube of him teaching his style. He had great counters to kicks and pretty formidable teeps that remain under rated. It's not so much that Dieselnoi was a one trick pony, so much as it was that he had a policy of not knowing his weapons unless he needed to - if he could back you up, he would and attack with knees, but it wasn't unusual to see him counter kicking.

The clinch is kind of the ground game in MMA though, the person who's better at fighting and maintaining the clinch wins. Nobody beats a clinch fighter unless they're very good at denying the clinch, which is part of why Sagat was able to beat Dieselnoi but Samart didn't.

I think his height is often overstated too, because of the myth that he never lost, he did and he lost more frequently than people would imagine, he wasn't a guy who just dominated with his size, he was a very technical clincher and fighter, who despite his height wasn't exactly a powerful guy - I'd argue that Sagat hit harder and was physically stronger.

just heard the story of "the shadow of the devil" the other day. a thai fighter than won a world title within three fights in boxing. damn.