J
Julius_Caesar
Guest
First thing that pops into my head is a fighter that's ranked highly in the main stadiums like Lumpinee and Rajadamnern but now days isn't it a little more complicated?
You have fighters who do well in the stadiums but not so much internationally based off a number of things. Over the years the stadiums have been influenced by the gamblers and even guys like Samart have come out and said its different to how it was in the golden era. International muaythai promotions CAN be judged differently and the pacing is also different. Its almost like comparing Olympic level amateur boxing with pro boxing. If a boxer has a successful amateur career and doesn't do as well as a pro is someone else who wasn't as successful as an amateur but did better as a pro considered better than him?
For example if someone like Petchboonchu lost to a foreign fighter in Onefc under full muaythai rules is that foreign fighter considered better than him even after all Petchboonchus success in the stadiums?
Another example you have 2 Thai's. Superlek and Panpayak. Both compete at the highest of levels in the stadiums and have beaten each other but Panpayak tends to get the better of him for the majority of the time yet Superlek does better internationally. He can adapt better to a variety of styles under different types of muaythai pacing and judging. From an aggressive heavy handed foreign fighter to a slick thai in the stadiums he shows an overall consistency whilst other fighters like Panpayak may do well in one area but not as well in the other. (This is only for arguments sake. Neither Panpayak or Superlek have had enough international fights for me to compare how effective they are internationally)
There are still a load of mismatches but its a lot more common now days to see foreign nakmuays beat thai's so not sure if its as simple as pointing at someone who's doing well in the stadiums as being one of the best even tho that should still be rated highly.
Guys like Yodsanklai, Saenchai, (maybe Yodwicha and Superlek) have shown that all round consistency. Yodsanklai had his fair share of losses in the stadiums yet he was still at an elite level and transitioned successfully. Fought a lot of mismatches but has also won some good fights. He even went into kickboxing and found success where others cant. What does that say about him compared to others? And I do understand opportunity plays a big part. Many thai's out there dont get the opportunity to compete but now days we're starting to see quite a few thai's transitioning back and forth in their primes.
What do you think it takes to be considered one of the best muaythai fighters?
You have fighters who do well in the stadiums but not so much internationally based off a number of things. Over the years the stadiums have been influenced by the gamblers and even guys like Samart have come out and said its different to how it was in the golden era. International muaythai promotions CAN be judged differently and the pacing is also different. Its almost like comparing Olympic level amateur boxing with pro boxing. If a boxer has a successful amateur career and doesn't do as well as a pro is someone else who wasn't as successful as an amateur but did better as a pro considered better than him?
For example if someone like Petchboonchu lost to a foreign fighter in Onefc under full muaythai rules is that foreign fighter considered better than him even after all Petchboonchus success in the stadiums?
Another example you have 2 Thai's. Superlek and Panpayak. Both compete at the highest of levels in the stadiums and have beaten each other but Panpayak tends to get the better of him for the majority of the time yet Superlek does better internationally. He can adapt better to a variety of styles under different types of muaythai pacing and judging. From an aggressive heavy handed foreign fighter to a slick thai in the stadiums he shows an overall consistency whilst other fighters like Panpayak may do well in one area but not as well in the other. (This is only for arguments sake. Neither Panpayak or Superlek have had enough international fights for me to compare how effective they are internationally)
There are still a load of mismatches but its a lot more common now days to see foreign nakmuays beat thai's so not sure if its as simple as pointing at someone who's doing well in the stadiums as being one of the best even tho that should still be rated highly.
Guys like Yodsanklai, Saenchai, (maybe Yodwicha and Superlek) have shown that all round consistency. Yodsanklai had his fair share of losses in the stadiums yet he was still at an elite level and transitioned successfully. Fought a lot of mismatches but has also won some good fights. He even went into kickboxing and found success where others cant. What does that say about him compared to others? And I do understand opportunity plays a big part. Many thai's out there dont get the opportunity to compete but now days we're starting to see quite a few thai's transitioning back and forth in their primes.
What do you think it takes to be considered one of the best muaythai fighters?
