The differences between Muaythai and Sanda

Dawei · 11-12-2007 03:12PM #1

Sanda is a modern style of Chinese kung fu, Although in Sanda competitions elbows are not allowed in order to reduce the risk, it was designed with different striking techniques including elbow and knee strikes. So we only talk about the both arts in competitions

1 Throws are practiced in Sanda , it is an icon for sanda. as there is almost no throws in Thai.

2 Striking techniques. regardless of Punching or kicking, the way to throw a kick or punch is different between sanda and muaythai.

I remember Bruce Lee in a documentary movie said, a kung fu punch is like an Iron bar attached to an Iron chain. For instance , when I throw a punch, all my body is relaxed, before my fist lands on my opponent I contract the arm muscle and clinch the fist . This can only be done by practicing it through a few month time.

In Thai, the strikes are more or less like an Iron bar.

3 Kicks. The angle of a kick is differet.

So the above are some of the differences between the two arts.

If you have any questions or commnets you would like to make, please feel free to do so.

RedRaven · 11-12-2007 03:39PM

I cant speak for Kung Fu...

But in Thai there are many types of differences:

There are many types of throws in Thai...there are no hip toss throws...

The are many types of kicks and angles of kick in Thai...

Punches: there are many types of punches

Grappling is a big part of Thai and various methods used in grappling...

Knees are used in many ways also with different types of knees...

Elbows are used for close range fighting are the are many types of elbows some as heavy as an iron bar and some as fine as a razor...

The best description of Thai I can give you is it is like playing a game of chess at 100MPH......

I have no experience of Kung Fu but my Teacher does and I find your description of the differences between the two is very uneducated...In my opinion.

SorGan · 11-12-2007 03:50PM

RedRaven wrote: »

I have no experience of Kung Fu but my Teacher does and I find your description of the differences between the two is very uneducated...In my opinion.

there are many types of gung fu:)

RedRaven · 11-12-2007 04:09PM

SorGan wrote: »

there are many types of gung fu:)

Im sure there is!!

paddyc · 11-12-2007 04:23PM

excellent

my da would beat all your da's together... thats a fact....

come on lads every day there rows on here bout the same old ****e.... MMA vs TMA... boxing vs thai ( we all know thai would win:)) and now this.....

...come on let everyone have a speak and relax your kaks a bit if you dont agree with it

sandas sanda and thais thai... leave it at that unless there gonnabe money changin hans

all the best paddy

RedRaven · 11-12-2007 04:53PM

Paddy the peacemaker...and him from Belfast.....spreading the love...and god knows what else!!!

Khannie · 11-12-2007 04:58PM

RedRaven wrote: »

and god knows what else!!!

Fungal infections tbh.

RedRaven · 11-12-2007 05:27PM

Khannie wrote: »

Fungal infections tbh.

at the very least......

Killme00 · 11-12-2007 05:46PM

SorGan wrote: »

there are many types of gung fu:)

There arent many types of Sanda, they are basically the same in competition.

RedRaven's analysis looks good

Edit to add: Dawei, a better comparison of Sanda would be MMA, however the amount of time spent on the ground is the big difference here. Sanda matches involve throws and locks but once it goes to ground each fighter must be stood after 15 seconds. Also while Sanda does have some great throws, we would be destroyed on the ground by any MMA fighter competent in BJJ.

If we combine two arts, lets say BJJ and Muay Thai (lets call this MMA) and compare to Sanda or Shan Shou or Short Fist, then there is really no comparison. The MMA fighters would win every time.

RedRaven · 11-12-2007 06:02PM

Killme00 wrote: »

There arent many types of Sanda, they are basically the same in competition.

RedRaven's analysis looks good

I dont have time to write a long post on a description of each individual weapon in Muay Thai......Im sure if you have seen a Thai fight it speaks for itself.

Killme00 · 11-12-2007 06:13PM

RedRaven wrote: »

I dont have time to write a long post on a description of each individual weapon in Muay Thai......Im sure if you have seen a Thai fight it speaks for itself.

No you misunderstand..Im saying with all the different types of Gung Fu/ Kung Fu whatever, it all boils down to one type of competition Sanda

Im not saying Sanda and Muay Thai are the same, exactly the opposite

Nothingcompares · 11-12-2007 06:34PM

I don't know what the fuss is about? This is just a compare and contrast, I've often written similar with regard to Judo and BJJ and Wrestling.

I've not practised Sanda/San Shou or any of the hard forms of Kung Fu and my experience of Muay Thai is insignificant compared to that of Redraven and Paddy. I've no interest in the non-combat sport aspects of either martial art either.

In my opinion:
Dawei is right that there is a greater emphasis on throws in sanda than in MT. The Hip throws and shoulder throws are used in Sanda, I've never seen them used in MT. The MT clinch seems to focus on controlling the head and neck of your opponent in order to strike it more effectively or cause your opponent to loss balance and fall. The elbow strike is as important in MT as any of the other "weapons" and this is another significant difference between that and Sanda.

When I look at the competitions of both they both look like kickboxing with slight variations on the rules. I think Sanda could be used as alternative to Thai-boxing if your aim was to bring striking to your MMA game. However, Thai-boxing has a much more accomplished professional circuit and following so I expect the best Thai-boxers to be better strikers than the best San-shou guys.

It was also my impression, perhaps dawei can confirm or deny this, that Sanda practioneers spend more time training aspects not relevant to the combat sport than their MT cousins.

Here's a video, shows Cung Le fighting, a lot more wrestling than I expected, low guards too...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvLp5FOPET8&feature=related

Dawei · 11-12-2007 11:08PM

Nothingcompares , I would consider Cung Le as an American Sanda fighter. and about the training, I think different trainers have different styles. Let's not generalise them

RedRaven. I never claimed one is better than the other, I only compared the two arts , personally I am a big fan of MT. I don't know if you have seen any of the fights between the two, but the MT fighters are the ones on the groud all the time.

RedRaven · 12-12-2007 12:36AM

Dawei wrote: »

RedRaven. I never claimed one is better than the other I only compared the two arts , personally I am a big fan of MT. I don't know if you have seen any of the fights between the two, but the MT fighters are the ones on the groud all the time.

I never said you claimed one was better than the other

you compaired them badly:rolleyes:

I have seen fights where a Muay Thai fight has had to fight under kick boxing rules more or less....

....Im hurt by your comments about the Thai fighters being on the ground all of the time!!!:rolleyes:

Tell you what mate you stick to your Sanda because thats your thing and thats what you know...

I will stick to Muay Thai...because clearly its what you dont know.:cool:

Dawei · 12-12-2007 08:03AM

RedRaven wrote: »

Tell you what mate you stick to your Sanda because thats your thing and thats what you know...

I will stick to Muay Thai...because clearly its what you dont know.:cool:

You know what? I totally disagree, when I was learning from my teacher in China,as I am from there , he always told me to learn from different styles, find out what is good in them and study them. If I was a MT fighter I would learn throws from a sanda fighter, in the other hand as I am doing sanda, I will learn elbow strikes from Thai fighter. I have to admit that now days, the thai fighters in Thailand train much harder than sanda fighters, therefore their strikes are more powerful.

3KINGS · 12-12-2007 09:36AM

Firstly there are at least 12 throws in Thai systems,including hip ones.There is a ground fighting system in Thai arts too..........not wrestling,ground fighting.As for Thai arts,they fought the Chinese in War beat them,fought the Burmaese too beat them,fought Khrmer too beat,fought Malay beat them.....Japanese,guess what.....yes beat them..it goes on and on and on,my friend.
Thai arts are complete,on the ground,standing up,weaponed....what ever,throws,locks the lot.Its just said to say that the dont pass there art on well and who can blame them,as none Thais normaly just basterize arts.I mean look at kickie boxing...to say its even close to The art of Muay Thai is an insult.My firends in thailand who are Arajans are happy to hear that Ireland is basicly the main driven force to fight true Muay Thai with ELBOW in Europe..........no elbow,no Muay Thai.Any one wanting to see Muay Thai throws the lot,is welcome to come and see at the next Khru Stan course or can go and see my Khru in Belfast Frank Mc Conville.........

RedRaven · 12-12-2007 10:36AM

The Muay Thai/Boran is a complete system that is not schooled a great deal outside of Siam only the few are skilled in the art...

Thaiboxing is a ring sport which uses some of the weapons from its foundation art Muay Thai..for instance as 3KINGS has said there are many types of throws in Muay Thai but hip/shoulder throws are banned in the ring sport as are the stepping leg trips...

Dawei I have never taken a Sanda or San Shou class but I have sparred against San Shou practitioners and there are differences in styles no doubt, I think there is a slight advantage in regards to throws with San Shou as they train with this alot, but as for the grappling, use of knees, kicks and obviously elbows in my opinion Thai has the advantage.

Have you ever taken a Thai class before Dawei?

Michael O Leary · 12-12-2007 04:36PM

SorGan wrote: »

there are many types of gung fu:)

I have read that Kung-Fu/Gung-Fu is just a Chinese name for all martial arts, not just Chinese ones. Therefore Muay Thai is Kung/Gung - Fu.

Regards,

Michael

Michael O Leary · 12-12-2007 04:43PM

3KINGS wrote: »

As for Thai arts,they fought the Chinese in War beat them,fought the Burmaese too beat them,fought Khrmer too beat,fought Malay beat them.....Japanese,guess what.....yes beat them..it goes on and on

They were beaten by the Burmese in 1767.

Michael

Unpossible · 12-12-2007 05:02PM

I have read that Kung-Fu/Gung-Fu is just a Chinese name for all martial arts, not just Chinese ones.

I can confirm this

Slightly off-topic, but are there many San Sou or Sanda schools in NanJing in china? Or are they more popular in a different part of china?

Michael O Leary · 12-12-2007 05:32PM

RedRaven wrote: »

The Muay Thai/Boran is a complete system that is not schooled a great deal outside of Siam only the few are skilled in the art...

Thaiboxing is a ring sport which uses some of the weapons from its foundation art Muay Thai..

I think one of the problems is defining Muay Thai/Thai Boxing/Thai Arts as they are used inchangably.
Is Muay Thai a generic name for all Thai arts?
Is Krabi Krabong part of Muay Thai or a separate art?
Ling Lom is a Northern Thai art but is it related to Muay Thai?
As I said on a previous post, some Wing Tsun/Chun people feel that Ling Lom and Wing Tsun/Chun come from the same source as Wing Tsun/Chun originated near the border to Northern Thailand and many of the movements/concepts are the same.

Regards,

Michael

Khannie · 12-12-2007 06:11PM

Michael O Leary wrote: »

They were beaten by the Burmese in 1767.

That's it. I'm giving up Muay Thai!!!!

RedRaven · 12-12-2007 06:27PM

Hi Micheal,
No its very simple really shouldnt be any confusion.

1. Krabi Krabong is the Thai form with use of weapons.
2.Muay Thai/ Boran is the old style unarmed combat.
3. Thai Boxing is the ring sport.
4. Ling Lom Im sure because of its close location has some tie in with the martial arts that derive from the region.

Hows the training going...as you have trained in both Kung Fu and Thai what are your views in regards to both arts?

Dawei · 12-12-2007 10:14PM

RedRaven wrote: »

Have you ever taken a Thai class before Dawei?

Not in a class, but from a person I know , I would love to learn more as well as BJJ, but really don't have time.

daniel laruso · 12-12-2007 10:15PM

mt has ground fighting true? do ye tink trainers should be called krus ?
imagine calling sum1 kru paudie (egos)

Dawei · 12-12-2007 10:18PM

Unpossible wrote: »

I can confirm this

Slightly off-topic, but are there many San Sou or Sanda schools in NanJing in china? Or are they more popular in a different part of china?

I am sure there are many sanda schools in Nanjing. I am not sure where is it more popular. One thing I know that TKD is more popular than any Chinese art in China, as TKD is really flashy.

3KINGS · 13-12-2007 06:44AM

The Thais as a nation,have lost battles but never a War .As for Wing Chun haven any thing to do with Ling Lom.....not even close,they dont even look like similar arts.In the ring,out of the ring at the top end of the Thai game beats the Chinese stuff.I'm not sayen that Thai arts are unbeatable but from the early 60's when Muay Thai went more world wide.There has been no body else ranked number 1 in Muay Thai who hasnt been a son of soil of Siam.The only person to come close was Diamound Decker and it's always there for the taken,they'll fight anyone.
Do I think coaches,should be called Khrus.....no but I've been given the title by the Thais,do I like deing called it......hell no....my students just call me J.

Of course Thai arts have ground fighting.You tryen to tell me if in battle a warrior of Siam fell to the ground that there was a referee there to blow a whistle "Sorry lads but The Black Prince,has sliped...stop fighting till he gets up" MMA aint new,its a old as man.The arts of Siam are mixed arts and what I mean by that and I just want to be clear,is that on the ground...flat on there backs with or with out weapons...they can fight.One on one or one against many they can fight,with or with out wepons.Come along any time in London or Ireland....when we are over and we'll show you.All the best J

Michael O Leary · 13-12-2007 10:52AM

3KINGS wrote: »

The Thais as a nation,have lost battles but never a War .As for Wing Chun haven any thing to do with Ling Lom.....not even close,they dont even look like similar arts.

Hi 3Kings,

When you say the Thai’s have never lost a war since they were a nation do you mean since 1782? Also it is hard to define a “war” so the statement is very subjective.

Just out of interest, when did they beat the Japanese?

Maybe Wing Tsun/Chun has nothing to do with Ling Lom but considering they come from roughly the same geographical area I would be surprised if there was no connection especially as neighbouring peoples tend to borrow from each other. Did Muay Thai not borrow substantially from western boxing? I have a book at home which compares some of the fundamental Ling Lom movements to Wing Tsun/Chun they looked very similar. According to the author there was 70% similarity.

You said that the Thai’s beat the Chinese. I am sure they did but they were also Chinese themselves until they left their ancestral homeland of southern China and migrated to what is now Thailand in the 10th century. Does it matter? Not really but it just muddies the waters a little.

Regards,

Michael

Michael O Leary · 13-12-2007 10:58AM

Khannie wrote: »

That's it. I'm giving up Muay Thai!!!!

Yeah but there is a great story of what happened to one of the fighters who was captured and how he won his freedom by beating a load of Burmese fighters. He is celebrated on March 17th. (Paddy's day) Have a look in Wikipedia.

Regards,

Michael

Michael O Leary · 13-12-2007 11:19AM

RedRaven wrote: »

Hi Micheal,
No its very simple really shouldnt be any confusion.

1. Krabi Krabong is the Thai form with use of weapons.
2.Muay Thai/ Boran is the old style unarmed combat.
3. Thai Boxing is the ring sport.
4. Ling Lom Im sure because of its close location has some tie in with the martial arts that derive from the region.

Hows the training going...as you have trained in both Kung Fu and Thai what are your views in regards to both arts?

Hi Wayne,

I understand what you are saying. Thai Boxing is the modern ring sport and Muay Thai is the old unarmed art. However some sources quote Muay Boran as the old art from which Muay Thai came, otherwise known as Thai Boxing. I know there have been different interpretations between you, Paul and Dave Joyce.

I cannot really compare Thai Boxing to Kung – Fu. I teach and practise one type of Kung-Fu (Wing Tsun) which is miles apart from other arts, for example, Choy Lee Fut. Thai Boxing as I understand it, is specifically for the ring while other non-ring Thai martial arts have a different angle. For example, those taught to the army. I feel it would be easier to compare those arts with Wing Tsun as they are for a similar function.

My training is going good but I don’t get to do as much as I would like for reasons you highlighted yourself in another thread.

Regards,

Michael

3KINGS · 13-12-2007 11:33AM

Yeah...O.K no other country/force has ever fully occupied Siam or helds its land for any length of time..........also at the end of the day we are sons of monkeys,so thats that knocked on the head...also GAA and soccer are played on a pitch,came from geographicaly the same area but thats as far it goes....same for Wing Chun and Ling Lom or any thing Thai.
Western Boxing was mixed with Thai arts because Americans basterized it to make more money.....as in maken them where gloves.The modern art of Muay Thai has been so watered down but yet they still have the best K.O sport on the planet and they arent even usen the best part of there arts.
The stricken of the hands basicly comes from weapons training Mai Sok...nothing western about Muay Thai at all.....talking from an ole skool point of view............Keep'en it real J

The differences between Muaythai and Sanda

Comments