Squirrelfighter

I gotta disagree with you man in the context of MMA. Boxers have been seriously injured by simple leg kicks. Two fighters, one a boxer and the other a kickboxer(who only know these arts) and are of the same skill level, duke it out. There is very little chance of victory on the part of the boxer for a couple reasons:

1. Leg kicks: He'll be ripped apart by leg kicks. Boxers do not condition their shins or knees to handle leg kicks.

2. Distance: A kickboxer can strike with kicks (not just roundhouses) thrust kicks, and snap kicks to keep the boxer out of punching range.

3. Guard: Boxers (and kickboxers for that matter) have a tendency to "turtle up" and tank strikes. YOu know for a fact you cannot take a roundhouse, or straight snap to the face and keep coming.

The kickboxer just has too many weapons in his arsenal for the boxer to counter, weapons he's never encountered before in boxing competition. He's be crusified in a matter of minutes IMO.

__________________


Sig courtesy of that photo-matic magician limba

ASTRO1D

What would a kickboxer use to take out a boxer of equal, if not greater strength?

thats the million dollar question$$

Squirrelfighter

To take out someone of greater strength, the kickboxer needs greater speed and agility. He's gotta ware someone like that out. Using thrust kick(see previous post) if he got too close would be the best plan until he was winded, and trust me when I say, solid thrust kicks can knock the wind right out of you. Once he's winded, heaving, and red-faced, the kickboxer comes in for the kill.

If there's no room to evade, i.e. up against the cage/ring the best option is sheer ferocity to breakout and evade(or clinch in the case of MT). But against someone of superior stength the best option is to make him miss.

__________________


Sig courtesy of that photo-matic magician limba

buckeyefighter

IMO it doesnt matter which one you train in. if you work hard at what you do you can become good enough at it to make it work for you and your style. Mirko is a kickboxer who has had great succes in mma, granted not so much since coming to the UFC but he was still a champion in pride so you gotta give the man some respect. Then you can look at vitor belfort and here is a guy who almost exclusivly does boxing and knocks guys heads off with it. it is more a matter of how much effort and time you put into your training than what you train.

Squirrelfighter

The point isn't which art is better...no art is better than another. The point was if a straight up boxer fought a straight up kickboxer, who would win if their skills were equal. It all comes down to what a kickboxer and boxer are taught.

You can't compare boxing, oriented for MMA, with traditional boxing. Would the greatest boxing champion in the world stand a chance against the best MT or kickboxing fighter in the world in a kickboxing match? No chance in hell! But would the greatest MMA practitioner of boxing in the world stand a chance against the greatest MT or kickboxing practitioner in the world? For sure.

You gotta remember that boxing gyms don't teach MMA boxing, unless its an MMA specific gym.

__________________


Sig courtesy of that photo-matic magician limba

GKY

Muay Thai is probably the best striking art if you insist on taking one. However, in a fight with kickboxing rules, the kickboxer would lose more than a boxer would in boxing. This isn't because kickboxing is a worse striking art, but because kickboxing doesn't allow leg kicks. In MMA, the kickboxer would likely win, because the boxing stance is extremely prone to leg kicks. Thats the whole reason for the 8 kick rule, no leg kicks makes it very difficult for a Kickboxer to beat a boxer. With leg kicks, the kickboxer should would handlidly.

So all in all, if you only can chose KB or B I would take KB because it's more complete.

__________________
Forum Bets: 2-0

__________________________

LivingItUp

each has their own advantages and disadvantages. People will say this or that but the winner is the one who put more work in at training, provided they're not absolute idiots.

LivingItUp

you guys realise that professional boxers and fighters are absolute monsters right ? You also realise that if a kickboxer and a boxer fight forreal (outside of the ring) it's probably not going to last very long at an amatuer level ? You also realise that the liklihood of a kickboxer and a boxer squaring off on the street to fight the good fight in the name of honorable combat and glory is hilarious to even consider as a likely thing ? At the end of the day a lousy tradesman blames his tools.

Voiceless

No, not necessariy. Whether you're a "monster" or not depends on where on the rankings they stand. Being a professional means in the first place just that they are getting paid for boxing. That can be the Klitschkos (monsters), but it can also mean paid bum fights (no monsters).

__________________

Curious1

Boxers generally get smashed when they come to K1 it would be no different under MMA rules.

For starts they cant defend leg kicks nor have their legs been sufficiently conditioned to take damage. But kickboxers have sufficient skills to defend against superior hands.

Its usually a pathetic sight of the boxer unable to continue after a few low kicks.

Punching is more important than kicking imo (you get punch heavy kickboxers) BUT a good kickboxer will beat a good boxer most times.