MT & SanShou differences applicable for street defense

[jubaji]

According to you if someone invented a move and 5000 miles somewhere else someone invented that one too. The credit goes to the first dude.

"The credit"?!

This whole argument is stupid.

[Ello]

All chinese martial arts summarised: Kung Fu. The last time I checked San Shou/San Da is chinese.

Do you really think soldiers aren't taught how to fight without weapons? So according to you a soldier is defensless when they're out of bullets and lost their knife.

Duh, just because something is called a spinning elbow doesn't mean it always executed the same way. Of course there's a name that generalizes it, but that's why when we talk about a particular one, we put they exact name in front of it(this case: MT spinning elbow, Tiger style spinning elbow).

Cung le is not that chick from SF II. That's Chun li. Why don't you just admit that Cung le is one of the best fighters these days.

You are forgetting that San Shou is based on chinese martial art systems. So the roundhouse is probably based of a chinese system, but defintly not MT.

BTW some minor points: you are avoiding the point saying wrestling is not san shou and sanshou is not kung fu. According to you if someone invented a move and 5000 miles somewhere else someone invented that one too. The credit goes to the first dude.

Basicly your post is flawed and it's enough to wipe my ass with

[Rebiu]

Let see, you basically have zero substantial argument in your post. You said that San Shou was created as a propaganda for the army. Ok, you find the proof since you make the claim.

What proof would convince a little commie groupie like you.

But either way, it doesn't change what I said. San shou was created by the army so they have a universal system of hand to hand fighting, not to counter against Muay Thai or whatever crap you spew.

Wow you really have lost you decorum. I have known several veterans and none of them have ever engaged an enemy in hand-to-hand combat. How many veterans have you met that say they killed the enemy in this way? I used to train the Kansas highway patrol in hand to hand. There were no round kicks. The focus was on gun retention, knee on the stomach ground control. Striking was done with the, baton of flashlight. I trained with a navy seal in BJJ class. He said the only application used in the military was in control prisoners on the ground.

Saying that armies use guns and not hand to hand combat is as dumb as the rest of your post.

This statement verifies that you are an idiot

Of course bulk of armed forces is about weapons training, but that doesn't mean that hand to hand combat is not important and is not found in real war situations.

Evidence please.

Every army in the world have hand to hand combat taught in training.

Please elaborate. What system does the US Army use.

I don't know what using guns have to to do with it.

You understood a few sentences ago when you said the bulk of training is with weapon systems.

Muay Thai is still use in the Thai army, for example.

Muay Thai is not a product of the Thai military.

Muay Thai have throws before San Shou was around? Kung fu have throws before Muay Thai existed.

San Shou is not Kung fu.

The ancient Romans had throws before Muay Thai existed?

Wrestling is certainly not San Shou.

Thai fighters don't even use throws in the ring as a main weapon.

That is an overgeneralization and inaccurate.

They hardly use throws.

That is an overgeneralization and inaccurate.

Saying Muay Thai have harder throws means nothing because there is no video proof. I am playing dumb? I don't think so buddy. You are the one who said: "MT is a sport as is San Shou neither is appropriate for MMA or real fighting." LOL. Try harder next time. MT and SS are not effective in real fighting? I don't know what you are smoking. Since you don't even know who Cung Le is,

She is that Chinese fighter on streetfighter II

I don't think you know much about San Shou in the first place. Vertical Elbows? Spinning elbows? Bajiquan had vertical elbows way before Muay Thai.

Bwahaahahah. Bajiquan is a joke, a fake style. Ancient chinese secreat.

Tiger style kung fu have spinning elbows.

The footwork is different, therefor the techniques are not the same.

Thai style roundhouse? I'll give you that. But many other styles have roundhouse kicks too (different methods of course).

What does San Shou do that is not a cheap ripoff of a much better style for doing it?

Next, I asked you to name some arts that are better than San Shou and are like San Shou at the same time. Instead you name arts that have totally different emphasis than San Shou. Muay Thai is better than San Shou. Not in recent head to head competition. In fact there is no evidence that Muay Thai is better, just depends on the fighter. It is not better or worse. Boxing is better than San Shou? Your evidence for this is? Nowhere. Wrestling is better than San Shou? How can you compare a pure grappling art with a primary a stand up/takedown art with groundfighting? Their strategy is not even the same. San Shou wrestling is fast wrestling that utilize the clinching of limbs during punching or kicking attacks of the opponent along with fast body throws. Wrestling is about submissions on ground usually using clinching of the entire body more and the focus on gaining the correct and dominate position. San Shou is not better than wrestling and vice versa, they are just different. Saying wrestling is better than San Shou is like saying wrestling is better than Muay Thai. It makes no sense. A good Thai fighter with good takedown defense can beat a wrestler. Likewise, a good San Shou fighter with takedown defense or hard throws can beat a wrestler.

There are no San Shou fighter with good takedown defense.

On the other hand, a good wrestling that takes down both probably have the advantage because wrestling have a much deeper submission game. Again, it just depends on the fighter, not the art. And BJJ? Same thing. BJJ is better groundfighting art because it is purely about groundfighting. San Shou is a standup/takedown art with some groundfighting. San Shou have better stand up game and BJJ have a better ground game. One is not better than the other...they are just different art with different emphasis. Your last point is also irrelevent. MMA beats San Shou? Did I say MMA couldn't beat San Shou? No. MMA is a combination of arts. Obviously it has multiple advantages over a single art.

San Shou is a compilation of arts meant to be complete. Where are the San Shou mma champions?

So far, I don't see a single arguement that refutes what I said before.

I do not think you are capable of seeing in as it is right there in front of you.

[Rebiu]

Jeeese the guys suck

Ok, here we go again. First, they are bad at throwing? LOL. And yet, San Shou fighters have toss Muay Thai fighters out of the ring and knock Japanese fighters out with throws. But then you claimed that they cannot throw hard. What prevents them from throwing hard? Nothing. They throw hard enough to knock out fighters like in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbiyEQw-mnc

Why don't you have video of a devestating throw of a Muay Thai fighter? I am amazed at how bad these guys are. Yes the throw finishes the guy. However the guy being thrown show no countering skill. A basic wrestler would have held his waist, pushed his head away or any of a hundred other techniques to keep from being put on his head. The thrower did not developed any slam to the throw. He just pivots and drops him like he is a sack of potatoes.

Again, there is no evidence that San Shou throws sucks. On the contrary ring fights have proven otherwise. I think video evidence is more substantial then a guy name Rebiu. LOL.

You own videos are the evidence.

Now, about groundfighting. First you claimed that San Shou is not complete because they do not have groundfighting. I already proved you wrong.

You have proven only that you are ignorant of grappling skill.

Now you switch your arguement and claim that it sucks. Ok, your claim. YOU PROVE IT.

Like I said before your own video prooves it.

And lastly, your analysis of San Shou fights is basically: San Shou sucks. Your mind is already set. Ok, your opinion. I can also put out a point by point analysis. But why bother?

Given you track record of showing videos of lame as fighters I agree.

[Ello]

Well, I still don't see where you see any real MT techniques in San Da?

[Drag'n]

I'm saying it wouldnt be where it is now. Sanshou stand up used to be really sloppy. After many of their top fighters got their asses whipped by Thais, they started to encorporate more MT techs into their art.
Traditional Kunfu is nothing like san da. San da closer to kickboxing with suai chao throws now. Thats to be expected though. Traditional Kung fu doesnt work well with gloves and ring rules. Just natural adaptation.
When traditional arts chose to put on gloves and fight with rules in a ring they all tend to adapt closer and closer to MT style techs, because thats what works best under those circumstances.

[Ello]

Drag'n, I'm sorry, but I don't get why San Shou wouldn't be here if it wasn't for MT. Plz explain

[Tom Yum]

Many say San Shou is much tougher than Muay Thai , saw Cung Lee fight he is real tough fighter. I think San Shou people have studied Muay Thai and adapted it.

Its hard to say, but I've only trained/sparred with amateurs in both styles. I'd guess at the pro-level the cream rises to the top.

The tough thing about san shou is if you get taken down, its as close to a slam as possible and its different than getting kicked or punched; the wind gets knocked out of you. In terms of stand-up, I've seen everything from sloppy stand up to really tight, smart boxing-like stand up from san shou guys.

The solution: Work takedown drills and defenses while wearing gloves. Do LOTS of breakfalls, working up to the slams.

The tough thing about muay thai is powerful strikes. I remember the first time I sparred with contact and getting leg kicked so hard, I went into a slight shock. Leg kicks are something else, especially if you're not prepaired.

Some muaythai fighters like to slam kicks to set you up for a big kick or punch and then clinch when you get close; others prefer to close quick and "machine gun it" in the boxing range, kicking only defensively.

[DragonsWay]

Many say San Shou is much tougher than Muay Thai , saw Cung Lee fight he is real tough fighter. I think San Shou people have studied Muay Thai and adapted it.

[jubaji]

I thought it sucked that points were awarded easily for throws.

........................

Why?

[Drag'n]

I've competed in san da and MT. When I was training in san da in China in 2000, I thought their stand up game was pretty sloppy. They didnt have the power in the kicks that Thais have. Tended to swing wildly and had poor defence.
San da fighters who came to Japan to compete in K1 were defeated pretty easily. But that was K1 rules which are pretty over restrictive for both Sanda and MT.
When I fought under san da rules I thought it sucked that points were awarded easily for throws.But it was hard to score points for good strikes. So sanda fighters tend to go for alot of throws.
But lately Sanda fighters have made alot of improvement.They're obviously learning alot from MT. Ther is very little Kung fu left in it.( at least in the ring version).
Watching the videos its obvious that the shuai chao throws of san da are a very effective technique, and expose a big weakness in the MT defence. Sure their stand up game isnt up to the Thais yet. But they sure are learning from their past losses.
I look forward to seeing more sanda fighters in action in the future.
As far as all this trash talking each others styles goes, I think its pretty pathetic. Sanda wouldnt be where it is today if it wasnt for MT. And MT fighters looking to expand their throwing skills could learn from sanda.

We're not all that different really. Restricting yourself to only 1 way of thinking and putting your mind in a box is going to be your biggest weakness.

[Ello]

Most of the things have been taken down by mephariel, but there are still some things that annoy the hell out of me.

(1)Armies do not fight with San Shou they use guns.

(2)That is not what you say three sentances form now.There it is. Who is wrong now?

(3)Chung who?

(4)Then you are mistaken. Try the spinning elbow, Thai style round kick, Teep, and verticle elbow to name a few.

(1) So you want someone who only knows how to fight with a gun and still protect your country when they lose a gun?

(2) He said 'possibly, but it's not it's only application'. Meaning it could save you from a MT clinch, but it was not made for it.

(3) ok as mephariel said before, you're not really into MMA/cagefighting etc. if you don't know him. Uses SD and still is undefeated.

(4) Duh, it's the 'thai style'. Ever notice how all styles have some things in common, but still are a little different!

Next time think more, before claiming something

[Mephariel]

Not in your video.Are they as bad at it as they are at throwing?Yes they are. They fighter MT under their rules and manage to win on points. The run and run the whole fight.When it comes to assesing the fighting techniques in MT V Sanshou that statement has no value.
Video one
The Thai looks very good. The Sanshou lands very few punches and kicks he runs and runs the whole fight. His throws are very very sloppy and most attempts fail. The Sanshou guy really sucks.

Video two
The guy runs and runs again. He lunges from way outside with the ridiculous push punch. His side headlock throw is so poorly executed that he is underneath his opponent and has to get up after him. Double leg is atrocious, he starts to fall himself and must let go before the he can throw.
He keeps running and the Thai is waving him in. He keeps running and running the Thai keeps coming forward and he keeps circling. He is getting some single legs in the second round but the just gently set the Thai on his butt. They only seem to run out time for the Sanshou. He runs and runs some more. He tries a double leg and the Thai throws him. This Sanshou guy really sucks bad

Video three
Seems to be the same as video two.

I

Ok, here we go again. First, they are bad at throwing? LOL. And yet, San Shou fighters have toss Muay Thai fighters out of the ring and knock Japanese fighters out with throws. But then you claimed that they cannot throw hard. What prevents them from throwing hard? Nothing. They throw hard enough to knock out fighters like in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbiyEQw-mnc

Again, there is no evidence that San Shou throws sucks. On the contrary ring fights have proven otherwise. I think video evidence is more substantial then a guy name Rebiu. LOL.

Now, about groundfighting. First you claimed that San Shou is not complete because they do not have groundfighting. I already proved you wrong. Now you switch your arguement and claim that it sucks. Ok, your claim. YOU PROVE IT. Until you do, you are just spewing crap. But either way, you are wrong. San Shou is a complete system that includes striking, takedown and ground fighting.

And lastly, your analysis of San Shou fights is basically: San Shou sucks. Your mind is already set. Ok, your opinion. I can also put out a point by point analysis. But why bother? Record have proven you wrong already. San Shou fighters have beaten many Muay Thai fighters as well as fighters from other arts. If they suck, they should be losing right? Oh wait, you are wrong...just like you been wrong the entire time.

[Mephariel]

You are correct it was created as a propaganda tool to bolster the reputation of the militarily incompetent People's Army as well.I see you already knew about the propaganda part. Armies do not fight with San Shou they use guns. That is because you have been fooled by the San Shou spin.Muay Thai had throws before San Shou was even around. That is not what you say three sentances form now.There it is. Who is wrong now?Bwahahahahaahah. How often is a solder attacked with a round kick. Like I said earlier pure propaganda. I remember the Iraq army releasing footage of their guys training in martial arts before the first gulg war.Now you are just playing dumb.This statement reveals you game. The qualifier "for their standup" reveals that you understood right from the start. Chung who? Then you are mistaken. Try the spinning elbow, Thai style round kick, Teep, and verticle elbow to name a few. That depends on what your qualifier "like " means. Muay Thai is better, Boxing, Wrestling, and Bjj. Wait that is the core of MMA.They are fighting and not just because the Chinese military is promoting them.I do not recall saying that.That is why MMA beats San Shou, MT or BJJ.

Let see, you basically have zero substantial argument in your post. You said that San Shou was created as a propaganda for the army. Ok, you find the proof since you make the claim. But either way, it doesn't change what I said. San shou was created by the army so they have a universal system of hand to hand fighting, not to counter against Muay Thai or whatever crap you spew. Saying that armies use guns and not hand to hand combat is as dumb as the rest of your post. Of course bulk of armed forces is about weapons training, but that doesn't mean that hand to hand combat is not important and is not found in real war situations. Every army in the world have hand to hand combat taught in training. I don't know what using guns have to to do with it. Muay Thai is still use in the Thai army, for example.

Muay Thai have throws before San Shou was around? Kung fu have throws before Muay Thai existed. The ancient Romans had throws before Muay Thai existed? What is your point? My point is, current Thai fighters don't even use throws in the ring as a main weapon. They hardly use throws. Saying Muay Thai have harder throws means nothing because there is no video proof. I am playing dumb? I don't think so buddy. You are the one who said: "MT is a sport as is San Shou neither is appropriate for MMA or real fighting." LOL. Try harder next time. MT and SS are not effective in real fighting? I don't know what you are smoking. Since you don't even know who Cung Le is, I don't think you know much about San Shou in the first place. Vertical Elbows? Spinning elbows? Bajiquan had vertical elbows way before Muay Thai. Tiger style kung fu have spinning elbows. Thai style roundhouse? I'll give you that. But many other styles have roundhouse kicks too (different methods of course).

Next, I asked you to name some arts that are better than San Shou and are like San Shou at the same time. Instead you name arts that have totally different emphasis than San Shou. Muay Thai is better than San Shou. Not in recent head to head competition. In fact there is no evidence that Muay Thai is better, just depends on the fighter. It is not better or worse. Boxing is better than San Shou? Your evidence for this is? Nowhere. Wrestling is better than San Shou? How can you compare a pure grappling art with a primary a stand up/takedown art with groundfighting? Their strategy is not even the same. San Shou wrestling is fast wrestling that utilize the clinching of limbs during punching or kicking attacks of the opponent along with fast body throws. Wrestling is about submissions on ground usually using clinching of the entire body more and the focus on gaining the correct and dominate position. San Shou is not better than wrestling and vice versa, they are just different. Saying wrestling is better than San Shou is like saying wrestling is better than Muay Thai. It makes no sense. A good Thai fighter with good takedown defense can beat a wrestler. Likewise, a good San Shou fighter with takedown defense or hard throws can beat a wrestler. On the other hand, a good wrestling that takes down both probably have the advantage because wrestling have a much deeper submission game. Again, it just depends on the fighter, not the art. And BJJ? Same thing. BJJ is better groundfighting art because it is purely about groundfighting. San Shou is a standup/takedown art with some groundfighting. San Shou have better stand up game and BJJ have a better ground game. One is not better than the other...they are just different art with different emphasis. Your last point is also irrelevent. MMA beats San Shou? Did I say MMA couldn't beat San Shou? No. MMA is a combination of arts. Obviously it has multiple advantages over a single art.

So far, I don't see a single arguement that refutes what I said before.

[Rebiu]

Analysis.

San Shou have a huge variety of throw and are not limited to trips. And San Shou can throw as hard as any art.

Not in your video.

And you are also wrong about San Shou having no submissions, ground fighting, and no techniques involving clothing. San Shou have submission and ground fighting, just not allowed in the ring.

Are they as bad at it as they are at throwing?

Watch the last two videos that I posted. Are the victories against Muay Thai cheap?

Yes they are. They fighter MT under their rules and manage to win on points. The run and run the whole fight.

A win is win.

When it comes to assesing the fighting techniques in MT V Sanshou that statement has no value.

The fact is, if clinching is allow, and clinching is a big part of San Shou, San Shou martial artists have beaten many Thai fighters in China and Thailand. And which techniques did San Shou got from Muay Thai that is exclusive to Muay Thai?

Video one
The Thai looks very good. The Sanshou lands very few punches and kicks he runs and runs the whole fight. His throws are very very sloppy and most attempts fail. The Sanshou guy really sucks.

Video two
The guy runs and runs again. He lunges from way outside with the ridiculous push punch. His side headlock throw is so poorly executed that he is underneath his opponent and has to get up after him. Double leg is atrocious, he starts to fall himself and must let go before the he can throw.
He keeps running and the Thai is waving him in. He keeps running and running the Thai keeps coming forward and he keeps circling. He is getting some single legs in the second round but the just gently set the Thai on his butt. They only seem to run out time for the Sanshou. He runs and runs some more. He tries a double leg and the Thai throws him. This Sanshou guy really sucks bad

Video three
Seems to be the same as video two.

I