Different stamces for different opponents ?!

[Ivica Truscek]

Hi guys,

After months of constantly changing my mind between the two stances, I think I should simply suit it to my opponents style.

1. Boxing stance: Shoulders in line, feet in line, 45 degrees to the side. I feel its great for mobility and footwork.
Jab is great in this stance, faster and harder, and cross is more powerful. The down side is that a good kicker will kick the shit out of my front leg, and its not really aggressive (which I like to be), and not too good for takedowns.
Plan: I will use it only against guys I think are better grapplers and Im a better striker, where controling the distance and footwork is number 1 priority.

2. Bas Rutten style stance: All facing forward; shoulders and feet. A more powerful left hook and right uppercut, and much more aggressive style. Very easy clinching or takedowns after a punch setup. The down side is that I have no Jab and weaker cross, worse footwork and mobility, and more important, the stance is so much "forward" that I always end up in the clinch, which I dont want against a better grappler.
Plan: I will use it only against guys I think are better strikers where aggressive punching will setup a takedown, or at least a clinch.

I would really like to hear you thoughts about this, because it bothering me for a too long of a time.
Any help is appreciated.

 

[Rbagu3]

better to be REALLY good at one, then mediocre at both.

 

[Ivica Truscek]

better to be REALLY good at one, then mediocre at both.

That is what I thought until I lost my last fight by TKO, where I was constantly ending up in the clinch and on the ground (where the guy was better) because of the stance (I knocked him down with a left hook, but was unable to finish him).
Instead, If I had used boxing stance, Im 100% sure I would win, cus he really sucked at distance.

Now I think that for mma, it is better to be as versatile as possible.

 

[Rbagu3]

That is what I thought until I lost my last fight by TKO, where I was constantly ending up in the clinch and on the ground (where the guy was better) because of the stance (I knocked him down with a left hook, but was unable to finish him).
Instead, If I had used boxing stance, Im 100% sure I would win, cus he really sucked at distance.

Now I think that for mma, it is better to be as versatile as possible.

i think the traditional boxing stance makes more sense then using bas method. put it this way, you wouldn't do the chuck liddell style right? use what you know works, and get really good at that. like i said if you are just ok at both it doesn't matter. and i dont think your stance is going to matter if the guy shooting in at you is sean sherk, you just gotta tighten up your game

 

[SlowlyWeRot**]

A boxing stance makes it easy for you to be taken down though. The Bas Rutten style stance is well rounded, thus it suits MMA the best.

 

[Tim Chan]

i dont think theres really 1 stance that can be most versatile. i dont really think either stance is really mobile.

i adjust depending on situation and distance. if someone's trying to pull,push, grab, etc. i adjust my stance to lower elevation and get lower. if someone moves around in a distance a lot i adjust my elevation to be higher so i can be more agile.