Originally posted by Peach
No, you're doing it wrong.A Narutard is a fan of Naruto.
I find that it works well in describing the titular character as well. 😐
General: That's a good point. I dabbled slightly in Aikido for a semester in college, but then I had to transfer, so I never really got to have the full experience. I would like to go back someday.
Originally posted by Ms.MarvelWhich are more effective than legs because no matter what kick, your balance is lesser with a kick, where as with a punch your balance is rarely compromised.
i dont agre. boxing seems to be too linear compared to many eastern martial arts. you basically only have to degrees of attack which is your arms.
There is a big difference between linear and ineffective, there is no better strike than a punch to the head.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Which are more effective than legs because no matter what kick, your balance is lesser with a kick, where as with a punch your balance is rarely compromised.There is a big difference between linear and ineffective, there is no better strike than a punch to the head.
fists are only more effective in terms of power and speed. kicks have longer range and are harder to defend against. if youre exclusively a boxer then that means that youre not actually trained to defend yourself against attacks below the belt whereas most eastern MA's teach the user to defend themselves against both punches and kicks. if two fighters of equal speed and strength engaged each other and one was a pure boxer while the other was a TKD (real tkd not the westernized versions you see in europe and america) practitioner the tkd user would have almost every advantage. both strikes to the head and kicks are apart of the TKD regiment and as a result a TKD user is trained to defend against both while a boxer has literally no defense against lower attacks.
boxing is really only affective if mixed with something else be it grappiling or another striking MA unless its two boxers fighting.
Originally posted by Ms.MarvelLonger range and harder to defend against sure, but thing is, they are slower in execution, and a good boxer can get enough punches in to throw the opponent utilising kicks off balance, which is not really that hard, since a kick throws you off balance on its own. Boxers are not as well-trained to defend their legs, that is true, but that is compensated by the pure efficiency and power of a boxer. The "equal speed and strength" argument is quite possibly the most ignorant argument in these kinds of debates, the conditioning is a huge part of boxing, the average boxer is more conditioned than the average eastern martial artist, hell, I dare-say boxing conditioning may be the best MA conditioning in the world, along with a few grappling styles. The TDK user cannot hit as hard, and punches are still more effective than kicks for reasons already stated. Also, a low attack, barring hitting someone in the balls, is rarely a finishing blow, whereas a good flurry of punches to the face is.
fists are only more effective in terms of power and speed. kicks have longer range and are harder to defend against. if youre exclusively a boxer then that means that youre not actually trained to defend yourself against attacks below the belt whereas most eastern MA's teach the user to defend themselves against both punches and kicks. if two fighters of equal speed and strength engaged each other and one was a pure boxer while the other was a TKD (real tkd not the westernized versions you see in europe and america) practitioner the tkd user would have almost every advantage. both strikes to the head and kicks are apart of the TKD regiment and as a result a TKD user is trained to defend against both while a boxer has literally no defense against lower attacks.boxing is really only affective if mixed with something else be it grappiling or another striking MA unless its two boxers fighting.
The most effective style of fighting will always be a mixture. And really, that is not even necessary, all a boxer would really NEED to do for MMA fighting would be getting training for defending against lower body attacks.
Also, if you respond to this post with a post eight times as long, I am not replying and will PM you the disgusting things Scream PMed me.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Longer range and harder to defend against sure, but thing is, they are slower in execution, and a good boxer can get enough punches in to throw the opponent utilising kicks off balance,
and youre assuming that a TKD cant fend off a boxers strikes from close range why? theyre traiend to defend themselves against punches. their training doesnt put focus on it as much as boxing does but they do have training which is more then can be said for boxers when it comes to lower attacks.
Boxers are not as well-trained to defend their legs, that is true, but that is compensated by the pure efficiency and power of a boxer. The "equal speed and strength" argument is quite possibly the most ignorant argument in these kinds of debates, the conditioning is a huge part of boxing, the average boxer is more conditioned than the average eastern martial artist,
no matter what the statics say this will never be true. fitness is not something that is static. different people react to conditioning differently and people lack motivation compared to others. i know a boxer personally who is not very fast or a boxer. so no trying to state that a boxer is more conditioned then an eastern MA user is pointless. it varies.
Also, if you respond to this post with a post eight times as long, I am not replying and will PM you the disgusting things Scream PMed me. [/B]
lol.
Originally posted by Ms.Marvel1. That's where the slower to execute comes up. And a boxer would not have near as much trouble defending an upper body kick than a lower, lower body kicks have less range.
whats the point in throwing punches if your opponent is beyond your range?no matter what the statics say this will never be true. fitness is not something that is static. different people react to conditioning differently and people lack motivation compared to others. i know a boxer personally who is not very fast or a boxer. so no trying to state that a boxer is more conditioned then an eastern MA user is pointless. it varies.
lol.
2. No, but conditioning is. And obviously, despite people's differing body types, a person would benefit from better conditioning than it would from poorer conditioning. Does it vary? Of course it does. All things do, very little is absolute. But boxing conditioning is better, so logic would obviously dictate the average boxer is better conditioned than an eastern MA.
3. stfu.
ufc doesnt have the best fighters in the world. a chinese monestary dedicated to teaching ancient ways does.
and the only real way to find the best fight is to take a purist from each section. wrestler, boxer, kickboxer, karate, judo, bjj, maui thai etc etc. purist only then line them up in a round robin thing. whoever wins the most is better. no rules. if a fighter dies oh well. (purist meaning trained only in a particular area. for the slow kids)