2/17/2003 5:07pm, #21
Although it is true that boxers are very good at controlling range, this still only applies to punching, which is only one of four fighting ranges. I think the point is more that boxers are limited in their ability to transition between different fighting ranges, as opposed to adjusting distance within one range.
Exactly. The idea being to try to keep the fight where your strengths lie, and keep it away from where your opponent wants it. Easier said than done, but we all need goals, don't we? :)-----------------------------------------------------
"The difference between us, and other martial arts websites you might be looking for, is that we're not going to feed you, well, bullshit about martial arts."
2/17/2003 5:42pm, #22
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
Well nobody's perfect, but it's better to know what your doing and have difficulty doing it-- that's what practice is for-- than to not have a clue and lose your ass for sure.
Case in point:
Sugar-Ray Leonard beat Tommy Hearns in 15 rounds.
Later, Marvin Hagler beat Hearns in only FIVE rounds.
From this, you might think that Hagler's a better boxer than Leonard, right? Until, that is.....
Leonard later beat Hagler in THREE rounds!
How is this possible, one might ask?
The answer is incompatibility of styles, and failure to read and adapt them; Leonard's style combined aggressive defense with speed and deception, while Hearns combined power with long-range punches, using his 78" KO-striking range had earned him the title "Motor City Cobra."
Hagler, meanwhile, liked to use the "blitz" infighting approach, where he'd just close the distance and pummel the other guy.
In the Hearns-Leonard fight, the styles of the two caused Leonard's aggressive-defense patter of poppping into and out of range,to force him to cross into Hearns' range, strike, and then move back, once again crossing into Hearns' strike-zone on the way out. Thus, Leonard was exposing himself two-for-one. The result was a grueling match if 15 frustrating rounds, just like in the movie "Rocky," until Hearns finally dropped from exhaustion more than punches.
Hagler, on the other hand, used a blitz-attack method against Hearns, which allowed him to move in and crowd Hearns, whose long arms rendered him relatively helpless at close-range. If Leonard had done this, against Hearns, he could have won similarly in less time.
In the Leonard-Hagler fight, however, Hagler's blitz-attack method played right into Leonard's hands, as Hagler wore himself out trying to counter Leonard's pattern of aggressive defense, evasion, baiting and trick-fighting; he ended up chasing Leonard, who just moved, hit and moved until Hagler- who had about the same reach as Leonard-- was finished in short work.
The moral of the story is that you have to adapt your strategy as best fits the situation for maximum advantage, since if you marry a style, then you'll lose your ass if the situation works against it to give you a disadvantage. Know yourself, know your enemy, and know how to use this knowledge to advantage.
Edited by - dansevering on February 17 2003 16:56:00
2/17/2003 6:55pm, #23
A blow to the knee will hardly down an aggresive opponent, a sharp kick to the stomach or face is much more affective. My two cents.
- Join Date
- Feb 2003
The problem with kicking an MMA practitioner in the head or the stomach is that their natural reaction is to grab the kick, pass it and shoot for a take down. It is much easier and safer to Thai shuffle and blast a lead leg Thai kick to the opponents leading leg while tying up.