They were a study posted on a couple of websites ( here too I think ) that measure different striking technique with some machine and, if I remember correctly, a knee from a thai clinch scored the highest but a boxer puches scored higher than a high kick. Of course the study is flawed as hell ( the boxer might be a power puncher while the kickboxer feather "fisted", plus I don't trust a machine to accuretely predict the power of a strike) and IMO shouldn't be taken seriously.
I'll take half a dozen shots to my face, from a 10 ounce gloved fist, from a 250 pound man no less...over ONE shin behind the ear from that same man.
I watched the show that done the study and no the boxer DID NOT punch harder than the guy that kicked the pad. The boxer got around 750 psi and the kicker got around 1500 psi.
Is that the one that showed on national geographics? Because in that show knees from a muay thai clinch scored the highest second would be a kick then then a punch.
Never saw the show, only read a recap, I knew that the muay knee scored the highest ( as I said in my previous post ) but I thought the punch scored lower than the low kick but higher than the high kick, guess I was wrong.
If you guys start arguing and use some show on National Geographic and use words like PSI and "speed times mass equals destructive force ladies and gentlemen", then you just just quit while you're being idiots.
I'm inclined to agree. When National Geographic does an episode on cheetahs, it gets a bunch of experts on cheetahs. When National Geographic does an episode on Muay Thai, it gets a third-rate kickboxer and a computer imaging geek.
I saw Cro Cop get devestated before by this guy Kevin Randleman. The guy wasn't invincible before the Gonzaga fight.
It's just nobody really expected Gonzaga to kick at all, let alone land a crushing KO kick to Cro-Cops head.