Muay Thai or boxing as a striking base ?

Dirge said:
McGregor? The guy rarely throws kicks.
Click to expand...
It he does throw them, even if it is just to set the distance. And he knows how to defend them. OP was asking if you could ONLY train one and I think having the wider skill set would be better.
 
Draxton said:
It he does throw them, even if it is just to set the distance. And he knows how to defend them. OP was asking if you could ONLY train one and I think having the wider skill set would be better.
Click to expand...

Ah fair enough.

I'd say kickboxing would be more effective than boxing. You get the fundamentals of boxing plus the ability to kick and check kicks.

Hell watching Volk chew up Holloway's legs with kicks shows just how effective they are. Plus kicks are a great range equalizer for shorter fighters.
 
DatSamboKid said:
You're beating a dead horse here.
The question was Muay Thai or Boxing as a striking base.
This is not a debate, if you have one base to choose from, it's the sport that teaches you how to throw/defend kicks, hands, knees, elbows and clinching. This is what is going to translate by far the most in an MMA fight, more than simply knowing how to throw hands. You're overthinking the whole stance and defence approach to Muay Thai, were talking about striking base here. Why couldn't fighter A with a Muay Thai striking base know as much grappling as striker B with a boxing base? Are you arguing that if you have two fighters with the same amount of experience in grappling, the one that only knows how to boxe is the superior fighter? I can't disagree more.
Based on the arguments your sharing, I'm 100% sure you've never competed in MMA, Boxing or Muay Thai.
Click to expand...

Why so triggered bro, we are just talking on a forum, calm down.
For your information, I started out with boxing/kickboxing, then went on, after 3 years, to bjj, which since has became my main focus (I also compete on a regular basis) but I still attend 2-3 striking classes a week as a hobbyist.
So I'm not an expert striker, but have I ever pretended to be one? No, I'm just giving my opinion and trying to friendly debate, so stop hating...

Whatsoever, yes I think if striker A (the boxer) has as much grappling experience as striker B (the mt guy), there are as much chances (at least) that striker A wins, since everything he's throwing won't put him off balance, and that he knows how to defend punches.
Moreover, let's not forget that there is no possible comparison between a mt guy's punches and a boxer's ones...
Of course, striker B would have his weapons too, but stop acting like striker A wouldn't stand any chances...
 
Last edited:
Depends on what you are, If you more of a puncher

Than it's boxing and trust me

There's examples of Boxing kicking Muay thai's butt in MMA

Ninja vs Randleman is an excellent example




Even tho the guys a wrestler, He can sure use those Fists

If you're more of a guy who uses His feet or knees and wanna clinch

Muay Thai's your guy

Some people just wanna punch more than kicking

That's why Boxing is more their thing

Examples are Nate Diaz, Nick Diaz, & Kevin Randleman

But I'm not underestimating Muay Thai as Wanderlei Silva was a savage with that kind of style

I would say Boxing but I think Muay Thai has an advantage
 
Dirge said:
Ah fair enough.

I'd say kickboxing would be more effective than boxing. You get the fundamentals of boxing plus the ability to kick and check kicks.

Hell watching Volk chew up Holloway's legs with kicks shows just how effective they are. Plus kicks are a great range equalizer for shorter fighters.
Click to expand...

Good point, kickboxing is way superior to mt imo, as it teaches you how to move, to punch and defend punches properly, while also teaching you those deadly kicks.
 
Well having trained both MT and Boxing. MT for 11 years and Boxing for 4 years and being in successful in both going to have to say MT. Specifically, Dutch Kick Boxing or Western Mt.

MT teaches you clinching, striking with multiple limbs, and blocking and countering. Basic foot work as well that can transition easier to an MMA stance.


Boxing is much more specific and surgical. Foot work is totally different and so are the counters. However, the advantage is that boxing gets you is speed, angles, and a helluva chin.

My two cents is, learn both. The more tools you have in your tool belt the more dangerous fighter you become.
 
GoatArtemLobov said:
Why so triggered bro, we are just talking on a forum, calm down.
For your information, I started out with boxing/kickboxing, then went on, after 3 years, to bjj, which since has became my main focus (I also compete on a regular basis) but I still attend 2-3 striking classes a week as a hobbyist.
So I'm not an expert striker, but have I ever pretended to be one? No, I'm just giving my opinion and trying to friendly debate, so stop hating...

Whatsoever, yes I think if striker A (the boxer) has as much grappling experience as striker B (the mt guy), there are as much chances (at least) that striker A wins, since everything he's throwing won't put him of balance, and that he knows how to defend punches.
Moreover, let's not forget that there is no possible comparison between a mt guy's punches and a boxer's ones...
Of course, striker B would have his weapons too, but stop acting like striker A wouldn't stand any chances...
Click to expand...
I'm not triggered at all broski, you're just bringing up UFC 1 debates in 2020.
I totally disagree with your statement. I believe if you have two fighters, equally skilled in grappling, A only knows how to throw hands and B knows how to throw hands, kicks, knees and elbow, B has the better striking base for MMA.
 
SKSer45 said:
Well having trained both MT and Boxing. MT for 11 years and Boxing for 4 years and being in successful in both going to have to say MT. Specifically, Dutch Kick Boxing or Western Mt.

MT teaches you clinching, striking with multiple limbs, and blocking and countering. Basic foot work as well that can transition easier to an MMA stance.


Boxing is much more specific and surgical. Foot work is totally different and so are the counters. However, the advantage is that boxing gets you is speed, angles, and a helluva chin.

My two cents is, learn both. The more tools you have in your tool belt the more dangerous fighter you become.
Click to expand...

Nice post bro.
Of course, the best is to learn both, but the point was to establish some hierarchy between striking arts, hence the question "if you had to choose only one".
When you spar mma, as an accomplished striker, don't you feel like many mt things are just too risky to throw. Of course, I'm far from your striking level, but I don't feel comfortable at all using mt tools when I spar mma, so I stick to boxing. What is your experience in that scenario?
 
I'd say mt. They'd have the advantage at long range with kicks as well as at super close range with clinch, knees, and elbows. The boxer would have to be much better at controlling distance to stay in the mid range where they'd have the advantage. It really depends heavily on the individuals though.

Also, I could see mt ppl feeling less out of place grappling since they do clinch work and have to deal with at least some takedowns.
 
DatSamboKid said:
I'm not triggered at all broski, you're just bringing up UFC 1 debates in 2020.
I totally disagree with your statement. I believe if you have two fighters, equally skilled in grappling, A only knows how to throw hands and B knows how to throw hands, kicks, knees and elbow, B has the better striking base for MMA.
Click to expand...

Except there is no comparison between striker A's hands and striker B's hands.
Would you agree with the statement "I believe, if you have two fighters(BJJ guy and wrestling guy) equally skilled in striking, the BJJ guy will win because he knows takedowns and submissions while wrestling guy only knows takedowns"?
Maybe it's your point of view but it's not mine.
 
Even though Muay Thai gives you more weapons
The narrow stance is a major detriment

Boxing stances can work into a wrestling and grappling game more effectively
 
In this topic, a bunch of people who don't know what good footwork and defence looks like and who've never watched real Muay Thai try to argue that boxing is better.

If DC knew how to defend kicks like a Nak Muay instead of trying to block and lean away like a boxer he wouldn't be eating body kicks and getting Cro Cop'd.
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/152589887/
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/152590857/

Also, small gloves are nothing new to Muay Thai, we've been using them since the old days of rope wraps.


GoatArtemLobov said:
Except there is no comparison between striker A's hands and striker B's hands.
Would you agree with the statement "I believe, if you have two fighters(BJJ guy and wrestling guy) equally skilled in striking, the BJJ guy will win because he knows takedowns and submissions while wrestling guy only knows takedowns"?
Maybe it's your point of view but it's not mine.
Click to expand...

You're making a false equivalency. A boxer has better hands, but that advantage is taken away by the rest of the tools found in Muay Thai. There's a reason that boxers usually get their shit wrecked in both Muay Thai and kickboxing, and the one time we had a world champion boxer vs. a world champion Nak Muay in MMA, the boxer not only lost the standup match but got taken down and beaten on the ground as well.
 
GoatArtemLobov said:
Except there is no comparison between striker A's hands and striker B's hands.
Would you agree with the statement "I believe, if you have two fighters(BJJ guy and wrestling guy) equally skilled in striking, the BJJ guy will win because he knows takedowns and submissions while wrestling guy only knows takedowns"?
Maybe it's your point of view but it's not mine.
Click to expand...
So are you now debating Wrestling vs Brazilian jiu-jitsu? Wasn't that debate settled when Royce Gracie submitted his way to winning UFC 1? Yes, I think the fighter who knows wrestling and submissions has the better grappling base for MMA than the fighter who only knows wrestling. The same way that I believe a fighter that can throw hands, kicks, knees and elbows has the better striking base then a fighter that can only throw hands, even if fighter B has better boxing. This is not a debate @GoatArtemLobov
 
DatSamboKid said:
History disagrees.

Click to expand...

Are we talking mma or not? If two trained mma guys are fighting and one is a good boxer, while the other is a good Muay Thai guy, then I would bet on the boxer 85% of the time. Most knock outs in mma happen with punches, not kicks.

If we’re talking about a straight striking fight where the boxer doesn’t know how to defend kicks, then yes Muay Thai is better.
 
I think boxing is the best base. Key word being base. You should learn all striking, spin kicks and flexibility from TKD, Karate's linear movement, wing chun's knee stomps, muay thai's kicks knees elbows. But having your base in the footwork head movement and punching from boxing is the most important.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,158
Messages
58,344,865
Members
176,009
Latest member
wmmaf

Share this page

Back
Top