Originally Posted by PIRA
Savate is quite simply out of date. Worked well against 1970's and 80's kickboxers but falls apart in Thai rules.
Can you elaborate on this?
It seems like Savate would be the best stand up for MMA considering it's fluid and based on countering your opponent, and footwork.
To me, knees are instinctive. If your opponents head is down, it's instinctive to push his head into your knee.
You learned that move in grade school.
If you're against a good fighter though, he won't put himself in that position in the first place unless he's hurt or Brock Lesnar who is afraid to take punches.
And when you're up close and your arms are occupied and your opponent is kneeing you, it's common sense to knee him back or do one of those judo trips that I often see.
Am I wrong?
So why would Savate lose against Muy Thai when the video I posted was the best Muy Thai fighter against the best Savate fighter in a K1 rules match, and the Savate fighter whupped his ass.
So, wouldn't it be logical that Savate would be the optimal art for MMA unless you're the type of fighter that doesn't like to move and will take a punch or kick to deliver a punch or kick?
Or a Margaritoesque type of fighter?
Can you elaborate one the strengths and weaknesses of Savate? I mean, I'm just trying to get a handle on which one I should learn if I should consider either.
I know that there is a Chinese martial art that was made to fight the Thais, specifically geared to fight against Muy Thai.
Perhaps that is where Savate got its roots from? I heard that it was the Chinese that fought French Sailors, and the Sailors initially punched, but added kicking to their regiment.