K1 fighters VS. UFC fighters?

Question

First off, I wrote a fairly long rant about this so bare with me lol. I'm also not trying to offend anyone in UFC or martial arts disciplines other than ones I'm supporting here. I think all martial arts can be effective if used properly by a devoted fighter.

One thing I would really love to see is master K1 strikers squaring off against famous UFC fighters in a UFC match. The thing that would make it extra entertaining is how both types of fighters have evolved completely differently. The thing that bugs me is, I'm a big fan of flashy kicks and acrobatic type stuff which is basically never seen in UFC. People always say "well X fighter has a background in taekwondo or another similar style" but you hardly see a glimpse of that.

I think master K1 strikers could really overwhelm UFC fighters because they aren't equipped to deal with opponents as fast or versatile as they are. The reason why many UFC guys don't think styles like Taekwondo are effective in UFC is because everyone puts so much effort on their ground game because it's so prominent in the sport, then the rest is hitting the gym and focusing on punching. If everyone in the UFC is training to become a Grizzly Bear then they'll probably have a hard time fighting a Tiger.

Those K1 guys take no prisoners when they strike. Not only are they fast amazing kickers and acrobatic, but also many of them are as big and built just as strong as UFC middleweights. I've seen those guys throw their opponents up against the cage with brute force from a single kick and leave 'em vulnerable. When's the last time you've seen that in UFC?

Sure they would have a disadvantage in grappling but these guys wouldn't easily let that happen lol. Also there's no reason why they couldn't learn grappling. It's a lot easier to learn some grappling techniques than become ultra high performance Olympic level strikers through years of conditioning and discipline.

What do you guys think? If you're not familiar with K1 then you don't have much say.

Answer 1

Because your analysis of the problem (read: rant) is quite long, I'll quote things to make it more readable.

" I think all martial arts can be effective if used properly by a devoted fighter. "

This statement shows me you are more intelligent then 80% of the MA community. Congratulations.



"One thing I would really love to see is master K1 strikers squaring off against famous UFC fighters in a UFC match."

That already happens. Several top-tier K1 fighters have made their appearance in MMA contests, the most prominent being Alistair Overeem and my personal favorite Semmy Schilt. Overeem even is a champion in both sports. So I think that kinda answers your question.



"The thing that bugs me is, I'm a big fan of flashy kicks and acrobatic type stuff which is basically never seen in UFC. People always say "well X fighter has a background in taekwondo or another similar style" but you hardly see a glimpse of that. " That is true, because of their fear of takedowns, many fighters don't see chance to use their kicks as often as they'd like to. But again, that is very realistic. In contradiction to what you see in movies, a fight between two skilled opponents seldom comes down to a bunch of flashy, athletic kicks. The most advanced techniques are not the best against a skilled opponent, because he knows how to counter that. With equal skill, you must see to win on speed or power, and it is easier to use a simple technique for that.

Some fighters have succeeded in using their striking successfully, like Cung Le, CroCop and Vovchanchyn, but in general we can say that purists are less effective then the mixed fighters. But I think that is the charm of MMA, a good fighter must know every aspect of the fight in order to be successful.



"Also there's no reason why they couldn't learn grappling. It's a lot easier to learn some grappling techniques than become ultra high performance Olympic level strikers through years of conditioning and discipline."

That is not entirely true. Grappling is just as much an art as striking and there is a lot of strategy involved in many grappling arts. Learning a few techniques doesn't give you the slightest chance to submit a BJJ blackbelt or a real wrestler. That is what makes MMA so difficult, that you cannot just learn a little and be successful, there is incredibly much to learn, on the ground as well as in the stand up game.



Bottom line, I like to watch both K1 and MMA matches, and discussions about the subject are sometimes very interesting.



__________________A little edit___________________________



The reason that Semmy's MMA record doesn't look too impressive is that he started as a inexperienced boy in pancrase, which was dominated by a very experienced group of strong, Jappanese shoot-wrestlers. The later years of his MMA career, he only lost to some of the great names like Fedor, Josh Barnett and Nogueira. You shouldn't only look at numbers, but also look at the names. If you had the bad luck to come against Fedor in his prime, you had a nearly unavoidable loss.

Answer 2

It's been mentioned already, but the first name that comes to mind is Semmy Schilt, a very decorated K1 fighter who has a 26 and 14 MMA record...not exactly setting the world on fire. It's also not like he can't claim to be inexperienced in MMA, seeing as how he first started competing in 1996.



Again though, this is like asking why there aren't more boxers in MMA, it may be similar in that both are combat sports, but they ARE different sports.

Answer 3

Lol, "wouldn't easily let that happen", Orlly?



It's easier to grapple a striker than the other way around, that's why Muay Thai is often chosen as a striking base, it teaches some clinching ability, which means that if you're lucky you might be able to land a good knee on a wrestler when he shoots.

As for your comment on grappling being easier to do, patently false, sprawling against a good wrestler is damn hard, as for a Judoka, he clinches, you lose, if you're a good grappler, you WILL be able to take someone down, you might have to accept a weaker position, might not be able to land a big throw, but you can do it if they aren't very good at TD defense.



Imagine having to fight off a single-leg every time you kick, and a shoot to a double every time you punch, you'll go down sooner rather than later.



Adding grappling defense to a striker is like a grappler doing basic boxing, really not going to stand up against someone who's good at it, it's putting off the inevitable, to gain more time to implement your own game plan.

Answer 4

You PRIDE nuthuggers are all retarded, It would be awesome to see Pride vs UFC just to shut you guys up. If there was to be collaberation I think the match-ups might look something like this. LW- BJ Penn vs Takanori Gomi (BJ already beat him via RNC) WW- George St. Pierre vs ??? (not 1 PrideFC fighter in the top 10) MW- Anderson Silva vs Paulo Filho (would be a great fight cant really give to either guy) LHW- Chuck Liddell vs Wanderlei Silva (Again another tough match-up to close to call) HW- Either Tim Sylvia or the UFC's latest addition Mirko Cro Cop vs Fedor Emelianenko Everyone wants to see Fedor/CroCop II so another match to close to call and Big Tim vs Fedor would also be to close to call, now of course all you MMA keyboard warriors are gonna say that fedor would take Tim to school but you are wrong, I hate Tim as a fighter but he has a great size/reach advantage and dispite him having boring fights he is in fact very good at "not losing" He also has the camp and potential to be the best HW of all time, I think that fight would be just as close as CroCop/Fedor, but I cant wait to see CroCop/Timmy because we all know its going to happen in 2007. So anyways lets break this down. Pride vs UFC, 5 fights and you only need 3 to win, I see LW and WW division going to the UFC and Id put my money on Chuck Liddell and Anderson Silva so I would have to say that UFC would come out on top. Plus eventually the UFC is just gonna buy Pride anyways so we'll find out then