Don’t know if this has been up here yet, (y’know, cuz I’m a Kung-Fu guy, so I don’t come here much;-)
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81667136/
What are your thoughts?
[QUOTE=TenTigers;1119712]Don’t know if this has been up here yet, (y’know, cuz I’m a Kung-Fu guy, so I don’t come here much;-)
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81667136/
What are your thoughts?[/QUOTE]
Kimbo isn’t a great mma fighter or anything, but he has sense enough not to telegraph his punches as do most boxers. Kimbo is just being polite.
yeah i think he’s just being polite.
Actually kimbos boxing isn’t that bad, it’s just everything else in his arsenal that sucks.
Ok which one of you can handle Kimbo Slice? On the real? cause if he’s much better than you are, then its only fair to give the man his props. he’s a beast.
[QUOTE=Dragonzbane76;1119754]yeah i think he’s just being polite.
Actually kimbos boxing isn’t that bad, it’s just everything else in his arsenal that sucks.[/QUOTE]
Sadly, that’s what happens when you try to be a nice guy. Some jerk posted a video entitled, “Kimbo Gets Schooled.” I hope that Kimbo stuffs that dude in a trash can.
I think give Kimbo his due he improved a great deal on TUF. If he could ground work and so fourth as good as he strikes he`d be a contender in the UFC.
thoughts?
- its easy to do this cr*p when you arent trying to hit with power and your opponent isnt hitting back
- Kimbo is a nice guy
- i know who my money would be on in a real fight
[QUOTE=TenTigers;1119712]Don’t know if this has been up here yet, (y’know, cuz I’m a Kung-Fu guy, so I don’t come here much;-)
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81667136/
What are your thoughts?[/QUOTE]
I saw some kung fu principles in that video. For example, the emphasis on the elbow as “propulsion” and not the shoulder. The use of slow (yin) strikes as opposed to fast (yang), to get he same results, that is, hit the target.
That video will provide the “modernist” a small window into the wisdom of some of the TCMA methodologies and concepts.
Thank you for posting.
[QUOTE=Hardwork108;1119807]I saw some kung fu principles in that video. For example, the emphasis on the elbow as “propulsion” and not the shoulder. The use of slow (yin) strikes as opposed to fast (yang), to get he same results, that is, hit the target.
That video will provide the “modernist” a small window into the wisdom of some of the TCMA methodologies and concepts.
Thank you for posting.[/QUOTE]
If I watched this without sound, I would agree with you. Since I paid attention to the audio, I thought it was a mixed bag of faulty logic and show boating. The, “instructor,” demonstrated martial arts technique, but nothing he said was worthwhile.
personally id give it credit if he could show those principles in action against kimbo, should be easy to do right…
Kimbo and Bob Sapp are the reasons that weight divisions exist, lol.
He does seem to be a generally nice guy, though. I don’t know if he was while he was doing his street fighting or not. I wonder, was he maybe humbled a bit when he started training in MMA?
I like him. He was obviously being polite.
I didn’t see anyone getting “schooled”. Kimbo sat there and listened to the other guy explain things. So what? This wasn’t a sparring match or even a boxing match where the teacher was applying what he was taught.
I think those principles are good if you are fighting in a point fight contest where the action is started and stopped and contact is limited, but when it is fast and furious how well does it hold up.
I’m in total agreement with his alignment, elbow down, non-telegraphic movement, etc.
I’m not too keen on his power generation, however. The way he’s throwing it, I am not sure if it has enough body behind the blow. If he can do the same thing but engage his body more during the power chain, it would be quick, not telegraphic, and powerful.
lol theory is just that, i love it when people who havent fought like to tell fighters what they are doing is wrong
[QUOTE=Frost;1119864]lol theory is just that, i love it when people who havent fought like to tell fighters what they are doing is wrong :)[/QUOTE]
Do do you think that boxing trainers who haven’t fought are less proficient than ones who have?
personally id give it credit if he could show those principles in action against kimbo, should be easy to do right…
having people post some actual “hard” proof would be like finding the ark of the convenant or something of that nature.
but as “someone” posted above this is a window into the what “traditionalists” consider wisdom and concepts. :rolleyes:
I liked how he said that moving side to side created an optical illusion that allowed him to move forward more easily, nothing to do with avoiding punches.
[QUOTE=HumbleWCGuy;1119889]Do do you think that boxing trainers who haven’t fought are less proficient than ones who have?[/QUOTE]
i think its hard to teach something you have never done
[QUOTE=Frost;1120044]i think its hard to teach something you have never done[/QUOTE]
I agree. It can be difficult. I tend to see it as a mixed bag. They don’t really know so they can over train guys, misinterpret ring situations, or give generally incorrect advice in adverse situations that they have no experience in.
I think that professional coaches who have never actually done something can be very good in certain ways. Sometimes they may be very good mitt holders, know a lot of drills, or have good conditioning routines. Because they didn’t fight, they have developed other skills, or knowledge with the extra time. Guys who have never trained can also run good gyms because of other factors like being good at the business and creating the right environment to train in.
[QUOTE=Frost;1120044]i think its hard to teach something you have never done[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Almost all of the best sports coaches I know used to also be athletes in that sport to some degree, even though some didn’t compete at the highest levels of their sport.
You have to have some direct knowledge of the nuances of the game to really have someone excell at it.