Striking Defense: Stance and Guard

[td82394]

Ugh... okay, wrestler chiming in here. People, you have the same likelihood of being taken down in the old school boxing stance as you do in a muay thai stance. Hell, at least in a deep stance like how positioning your head off center without being off balance practically forces you to do, you're prepared to sprawl. In a muay thai stance, with your hands really high and standing tall, you're practically begging to be taken down because you're not in a position to sprawl. And also, you can't just shoot these days in MMA. More often than not, you have to set up your takedowns with strikes. If you can't lay a glove on the guy, you're not going to take him down.

 

[Discipulus]

Anyone here fight Muay Thai or kickboxing? What are the viable defensive stances for that? Here's a clip of Kru Samir Seif working pads with a student of his. Notice that his guy uses a bit of a crouch/shoulder roll here and there to protect his head from punches. And someone in the comments said that he should stop doing that or he'll eat a kick. Either I'm missing something, or that doesn't make any sense.


Edit: Whoops, forgot the clip. Thanks.

 

[Sinister]

Psst...you forgot the clip.

 

[aries]

I think it has a lot less to do with having their hands up and lessening the distance their punches travel and a lot more to do with their opponents not being able to effectively use lateral movement. In mma there are plenty of boneheads that want to 'stand and bang' and those guys will make the Diaz brothers look like a million bucks.

As far as condit is concerned, what was he supposed to do? Stand in front of a pressure fighter and exchange, effectively playing into nick's strengths? Dude applied a little strategy & movement against a pressure fighter and made diaz look like a bumbling amateur.

I disagree on the first point because while guys tend to not use lateral movement enough, the whole reason they don't is because they can't get their heads around why the Diazs can beat them to the punch because of the foreshortening effect. It has a big effect because it gives them speed, range, defense, volume and accuracy.

And don't get your panties in a bunch I wasn't criticizing Condit because I loved the gameplan he implemented, it was perfect. I was just stating a fact, he didn't deal directly with the extended arms by using head movement and working on the inside, he chose to employ another strategy which was stick and move using his kicking game. A good boxer could stand and bang with the Diazs if they had good head movement and were good inside fighters. I can't think of any current MMA fighters who fit that bill.

 

[Sinister]

I'd just like to have one thread about Boxing, and maybe even how it applies to MMA, without the Diaz Brothers being mentioned.

 

[td82394]

I'd just like to have one thread about Boxing, and maybe even how it applies to MMA, without the Diaz Brothers being mentioned.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

That's f***ing funny.

 

[KylePulley]

Besides, if a competent MMA fighter learns to box correctly AND bothrs to have a good ground game, then if you manage to take them down because you can't stand with them, all that'll end up happening is after getting beaten-up, you'll get choked-out.

stick with boxing...you don't quite understand mma...

fighters won't learn how to box "correctly" because it doesnt translate into mma like that. It has to be modified.

Even if they could, they have to learn all disciplines which means they won't be of the same caliber as a professional boxer...when it comes to punching and boxing.

lol...so your saying mma fighters should ignore wrestling? Focus on BJJ, and boxing only?

You obviously don't grapple...here's a guide..

Bjj> Wrestling
Wrestling with some Bjj > Bjj with some wrestling
Wrestling with some BJJ with punches,elbows allowed >>>> Bjj with some wrestling and punches, elbows allowed.

 

[Discipulus]

stick with boxing...you don't quite understand mma...

fighters won't learn how to box "correctly" because it doesnt translate into mma like that. It has to be modified.

Even if they could, they have to learn all disciplines which means they won't be of the same caliber as a professional boxer...when it comes to punching and boxing.

lol...so your saying mma fighters should ignore wrestling? Focus on BJJ, and boxing only?

You obviously don't grapple...here's a guide..

Bjj> Wrestling
Wrestling with some Bjj > Bjj with some wrestling
Wrestling with some BJJ with punches,elbows allowed >>>> Bjj with some wrestling and punches, elbows allowed.

Damnit, Kyle, could you not stink up my thread with an endless argument about "MMA Boxing?" If you have a legitimate reason why you believe that boxing techniques must be modified for MMA or kickfighting, then tell it. But don't just say this same old nonsense about boxing not translating into MMA. It sounds like an excuse for sloppy striking. In fact, I think it is.

Edit: Sinister mentioned before that Muay Thai contains stances that don't rely on reactive defense. I'd love to hear more about that. Anyone have any insight?

 

[Lucas Coradini]

Edit: Sinister mentioned before that Muay Thai contains stances that don't rely on reactive defense. I'd love to hear more about that. Anyone have any insight?

Pretty interested in what people will say about this

 

[td82394]

stick with boxing...you don't quite understand mma...

fighters won't learn how to box "correctly" because it doesnt translate into mma like that. It has to be modified.

Even if they could, they have to learn all disciplines which means they won't be of the same caliber as a professional boxer...when it comes to punching and boxing.

lol...so your saying mma fighters should ignore wrestling? Focus on BJJ, and boxing only?

You obviously don't grapple...here's a guide..

Bjj> Wrestling
Wrestling with some Bjj > Bjj with some wrestling
Wrestling with some BJJ with punches,elbows allowed >>>> Bjj with some wrestling and punches, elbows allowed.

Dude, Sinister works with MMA fighters all the time and is a grappler himself. If you'd read ANY of the stickies, you'd know that. Does your trolling know absolutely no bounds? He's a mod for pete's sake, you can't troll the mods.

EDIT: He has a legitimate reason for saying so. NEWS FLASH: Wrestling isn't absolutely necessary in MMA. GSP never wrestled a day in his life until he became an MMA fighter. And guess what, Nick Diaz actually wrestled in high school. So did Frank Mir and Eddie Bravo. How much do you think wrestling has helped any of the last three guys? How much do you think the lack of wrestling has hindered GSP?

By the way, this is coming from somebody who's grappling experience comes almost entirely from wrestling. What I do know about BJJ, I know from the 6 months I trained back in 2009 and from YouTube and Sherdog, along with various instructionals. I'm not dissing wrestling: It's my sport, and I love it to death, even if I don't necessarily agree with or particularly like the mentality behind it. It is not necessary for MMA.

 

[Azam]

Anyone here fight Muay Thai or kickboxing? What are the viable defensive stances for that? Here's a clip of Kru Samir Seif working pads with a student of his. Notice that his guy uses a bit of a crouch/shoulder roll here and there to protect his head from punches. And someone in the comments said that he should stop doing that or he'll eat a kick. Either I'm missing something, or that doesn't make any sense.


Edit: Whoops, forgot the clip. Thanks.

He won't eat a kick by doing that, that's for sure, but if someone really follows through with a roundhouse kick or jodan mawashi geri, then I'd be worried about doing that, but otherwise it's not a problem as far as I can see.

In Kyokushin there are different defensive stances used depending on preference but in our dojo, we are taught to keep are centre of gravity low, so keep the stance slightly low & deep, so you have a good grounding & better balance.

 

[SAAMAG]

There are as many muay thai stances as there are gyms. It's not so much that "muay thai" contains stances that do this or that...it's that certain gyms and trainers have their own ideologies as to what the best way to stand is for their interpretation of muay thai.

Everything varies...from the curvature of your back to the posture of your guard, to the feet placement and contact points. Every single person is going to have a slightly different stance that they're comfortable with and that suits their fighting style and body type.

In general, the constant characteristics of a proper muay thai stance will be:

1. balanced posture
2. hands up and forward
3. chin down
4. shoulders slightly raised
5. feet about shoulder width apart
6. knees slightly bent

The rest...is personal preference. Some prefer a more square stance, some more bladed, some like rear weight with a light front leg, some like front weight with rear heel raised, etc.

 

[Sinister]

FWIW - Kyle just trolls on the notion that if I ban him it's because "see, I was right!! Sinister can't take being wrong so he banned me!!" and all that kind of dribble.

It's really not worth the energy even replying to his rhetoric, which only demonstrates how he doesn't even read what I post. Nor does he know the first thing about fighting.

That kid is a glowing reason to use the "ignore" feature.

 

[Discipulus]

There are as many muay thai stances as there are gyms. It's not so much that "muay thai" contains stances that do this or that...it's that certain gyms and trainers have their own ideologies as to what the best way to stand is for their interpretation of muay thai.

Everything varies...from the curvature of your back to the posture of your guard, to the feet placement and contact points. Every single person is going to have a slightly different stance that they're comfortable with and that suits their fighting style and body type.

In general, the constant characteristics of a proper muay thai stance will be:

1. balanced posture
2. hands up and forward
3. chin down
4. shoulders slightly raised
5. feet about shoulder width apart
6. knees slightly bent

The rest...is personal preference. Some prefer a more square stance, some more bladed, some like rear weight with a light front leg, some like front weight with rear heel raised, etc.

What are the reasons for some of these stance choices? Is there any attention paid to the center line and the line of attack, or is this ignored in traditional Thai stances due to the emphasis on kicking rather than punching?

I have a good question. Does anyone know of some good kickfighters who use kicking often in their game, but also have an elusive, non-reactionary stance? I'm very interested in how fighters like Orono and Somluck manage to stay in the pocket and punch and throw elbows while taking very little damage themselves. I'll be looking at videos, but since my eye is less trained than others in here, what do you guys say?

 

[SAAMAG]

What are the reasons for some of these stance choices?

I have a good question. Does anyone know of some good kickfighters who use kicking often in their game, but also have an elusive, non-reactionary stance? I'm very interested in how fighters like Orono and Somluck manage to stay in the pocket and punch and throw elbows while taking very little damage themselves. I'll be looking at videos, but since my eye is less trained than others in here, what do you guys say?

The reason for some of the stance choices will vary from general comfort, personal style, body type, and technical strategy and tactics.

For example: Someone who is front weighted may be a pressure fighter who likes to punch--always ready to pounce forward. Having the weight on the back foot might be better for someone who likes to throw a lot of lead leg kicks. Someone who stands more squarely may do so because they like to kick with both legs equally. Someone who hunches their back may do so because it puts them into their "animal instinct". Someone who fights with the hands low may have a more elusive style where they use more body movement to avoid attacks to their upper region.

It's mostly about feel. Also, like any other fighting system as well...stances will change within the same bout.

 

[JWolverine707]

From the perspective of an orthodox boxer...

It is very important to keep your shoulders bladed i.e. left extended, right shoulder back. There are many passive defensive benefits that this stance grants you. Your left shoulder becomes a shield from right-handed attacks, and is especially effective to tuck your chin behind when pivoting clockwise away from an orthodox opponent's right hand.

From this stance, your right hand is given a more clearly defined purpose for defense. You can choose to position it on the right side of your face (more traditional) to shut down the left hook, or just can place it in front of your face to shut down one jabbing lane for your opponent. If you choose to defend the jabbing lane, you must be aware that there is an opening on your defensive radar for an incoming left hook. However, it is a VERY easy and compact movement to roll your shoulders as if you're throwing a cross and slide your right hand up high to catch the hook. This also sets up a loaded left hook counter for you, or you just shift your shoulder positioning back to normal and get back to work. You're not as open to the hook as you think from here, however... using this type of shoulder positioning puts your chin a few precious inches further away which means they either have to reach more for that hook, or commit their feet to it and really close range.

Fun trick associated with the last point on right hand positioning:
If you prefer to keep your hand in front of the face to close their jab lane as I often do, it can set you up very nicely to counter the jab. When you are ready to counter your opponent's jab, just move your hand back to the 'traditional' spot beside your face. After frustrating your opponent with a closed jabbing lane, they will find it very hard to resist this opening. Once you move that right hand, anticipate their jab and act accordingly... whether it is a parry into a counter jab, a slip into a counter, whatever. Just know that it is YOUR jabbing lane, and you get to choose when it is open.

This type of shoulder positioning opens an entire range of "shoulder play" which sets up different counters and active defenses. Offensively, it can also create some opportunities. If you keep the elbows in in conjuction with a leading left shoulder, you can discreetly line your jabbing hand up inside of their guard, inside of their punches, etc from the relative safety your hand positioning grants you. From here, drive off of the back foot and emphasize a slight turn of the upper body for the jab. The arm is completely taken out of the equation, and what you get is a ruler-straight jab that you can pop into any holes you see. I don't think I'm articulating this well!

Also, Sinister, while I appreciate the emphasis on the basics in your drilling video, your boy is jabbing directly at your glove and his partners glove!

Great post. My only question is are you leaning back and over the rear leg or more so eping you head over and in line with the rear leg? I tried leaning back with my head over my rear leg and found it harder to throw my kicks. When i lean over in line with my head in line but my weight even, i can kick faster but my neck feels a bit unnatural. Sure i just have to get used to it since i am used to standing more square like a traditional muay thai stance.

 

[KampfHund]

Thanks for isolating one aspect of my post and building a reply off of it.

The rest of your post was an anecdote about early boxers training with wrestlers. I had no argument with that. My point is that you assume that this stance gives you better striking capability without being willing to accept it does give you a disadvantage in wrestling/defending leg kicks.

However, I'm no advocate of fearing any portion of an opponent's game, when one is well-prepared. Apprehensiveness of that sort doesn't belong in combat sports. You're behaving as if anyone is implying to be negligent of takedown defense, which is not the case. Rather, what's being discussed is that takedown defense does not necessitate sacrificing striking defensive liability. For one thing, timing is what allows most good shooters to get a leg. Timing can be off-set by numerous things.

That's not really relevant to my point though. If the guy is of similar striking skill, having a stance where you're more in-line with your front leg (particularly if the toes point inwards as well) then it's easier to grab the leg. As I've said before, that's not to suggest it's unusable, but that it does often result in people being taken down easier than if it were not the case.

And you don't really need to wonder. A little exploration around here will alert you to the fact that many of us actually work with and help train MMA fighters.

But again, the classic stance isn't as "sideways" as is being implied here. I think one of the problems is people are only looking at it from the side. As an example, here's a frontal view of a guy in a classical stance:

And here's a traditional wrestling stance:

The difference in weight-balance is subtle, again, the classic boxing stance was designed that way.

P.S. - This isn't the first time this has been argued around here, either.

That's all well and good, but very few people box that way at all; that's not the same as Bhop's stance as pictured in the OP either.

 

[Sinister]

There's no assumption about the classic stance, its time-tested and proven. No assumption necessary. Again, I don't know about your second paragraph, above a wrestler (and I've wrestled myself, which that I didn't is an assumption you made) states slightly different.

In the opening photo we can't see Hopkins' legs, so I don't see using that photo particularly as a detraction being too relevant. When he fights he isn't typically turned specifically sideways, or standing straight up and down without the situation warranting such a motion. The classic stance just does not include having the feet sideways as if riding a skateboard as a principal. And yes, not many people box correctly, that's part of the whole point of this thread.

 

[ChachiKiller]

The rest of your post was an anecdote about early boxers training with wrestlers. I had no argument with that. My point is that you assume that this stance gives you better striking capability without being willing to accept it does give you a disadvantage in wrestling/defending leg kicks.



That's not really relevant to my point though. If the guy is of similar striking skill, having a stance where you're more in-line with your front leg (particularly if the toes point inwards as well) then it's easier to grab the leg. As I've said before, that's not to suggest it's unusable, but that it does often result in people being taken down easier than if it were not the case.


That's all well and good, but very few people box that way at all; that's not the same as Bhop's stance as pictured in the OP either.

The wrestler is a pose. His lead leg is way out in-front. He is also leaning on his back leg and more vertical than I think would be ideal. But once more, it is a HS yearbook style photo.

 

[GoatyP]

OP's question was about his stance because he was getting hit high and low.

I'm wondering if his immediate reaction is to freeze and take the punches and not to move away?