1/14/2009 5:13pm, #31
My interpretation is that the depictions we see of the old timey boxing stances are probably somewhat exagerated and stylized. Much like when you see fight poster photos of todays boxers and kickboxers they're holding their hands in positions that are only vaguely similar to the position you should actually fight from..
1/14/2009 5:14pm, #32Originally Posted by 3moose1
PS: it's not tag-teaming, it's having the same opinion on stuff. We just happen to feel the same way and feel compelled to post on most of the same topics.
1/14/2009 5:24pm, #33
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- MCMAP, Judo, sex appeal
You completely ignored the part about your dog.
Honestly, he was presenting history, history, history.
This is his interpretation of it, and that is all history really can be, an interpretation of the facts. No one was there, so we don't know EXACTLY how they stood, etc. We can make extremely educated guesses and conjectures, but that is it. He is explaining how they stood when dealing in a PARTICULAR rule set.
some (girly men) pull guard in jits tournaments. There is a reason for this, it fits in well with the rule set.
I COMPLETELY forgot what the point i was trying to make with that above line was...
PROOF that I'm not a completely useless poster:
Originally Posted by Cy Q. Faunce
1/14/2009 5:44pm, #34Originally Posted by AnnaTrocity
it is stagnant.
There is no movement to show the footwork, upper body movement, head movement, hand movement.
Part of the problem with olde timey boxing photos is:
the guys had to stand still for awhile while the picture was taken.
Part of the problem with current fighter pictures is:
they want you to see the face and when the put the images of the two fighter together, sometimes they digitally alter positions so they can fit in.
Sometimes the drawing *try* to depect the slipping of a shot which is why they look the a strong wind is pushing them back.....sometimes they are trying to capture and illustrate they fighter is fighting the "HONORABLE" fighter and standing upright.
1/14/2009 5:53pm, #35Originally Posted by KidSpatula
Out of curiosity, what boxing credentials does he have besides having supposedly "done boxing" as many years as I've been alive?
These old time champions obviously know a thing or two about the sweet science I suppose, but they neither wrote the article, nor are they being quoted directly.
Since I don't really know what to look for, care to post some examples? You can do your service as a forum bully by making this thread much more informative with some educational videos.
YouTube - Bob Fitzsimmons vs. James Corbett
YouTube - Jack Johnson vs Tommy Burns (1908)
YouTube - John L. Sullivan, James J. Corbett and James J. Jeffries
YouTube - Old Boxing Video
Seriously, there are dozens of these old fights on YouTube. Search for Bob Fitzsimmons, Jim Corbett, James Jeffries, Jack Johnson, etc. if you want to see more.
None of this really explains the use of the stance. In fighters are merely one branch of the many styles of modern boxers. There are lots of boxers today that work the outside. None of which stand like these boxers supposedly did. Is it because of the throws? Sanda fighters don't stand anything remotely like this. Is it because of the lack of gloves? Kyokushin fighters don't stand like this either.
I'm not saying the man is full of ****, but he does a very poor job of explaining his points. This would all be far more informative with sources and some live examples of the technique in application. As is, we just have to assume that he's correct because he's some sort of historical authority.
1/14/2009 5:58pm, #36Originally Posted by AnnaTrocity
On the other hand, most of the early books are illustrated with drawings rather than photographs, and the written technical text is very specific regarding guard positions, mechanics, tactics etc.
1/14/2009 6:50pm, #37
Originally Posted by KidSpatula
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- (PT) mya231 - gmail.com
- GoJu-Ryu (karate) BJJ
I get a very small space when i change from a Vertical fist to a Horizontal one with knuckles up.
Not that this 2-3 mm would be of any great usefulness, after all this are punches not blade cuts.
Still i have to admit that i feel my hand more "protected" and stable with a vertical punch, than with an horizontal one. My Karate teacher is all about Horisontal punches and torsion of the fist at last moment... or what ever. He even adverts me everytimes he catchs me doing Vertical punches.
But i still think that i would prefer to punch someones face with a vertical punch than with a horisontal one. Body blows i would probably do horisontal.
That is if i ever punched someone in the head. I would probably kick him in the balls and then do a takedown+ mount and pound, or Ezekiel choke.
Perhaps i would surprise hook with a horisontal fist on the Temple (head), that would seriously hurt.
1/14/2009 7:00pm, #38
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
back in my lau gar days I was always taught to punch and twist the fist to horizontal at the last moment.
Is there any real point to doing this from a torsion perspective - genuine (probably stupid) question cos the only mention I've seen on this is on one of Geoff Thompson's videos where he suggests its got a greater chance of cutting your opponent but thats about it.
1/14/2009 8:00pm, #39
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Raleigh, North Carolina
- Kenkojuku Karate, Judo
1) I couldn't get the experiment to work either as presented, but this worked: extend your arm out with a vertical fist touching the wall and move back until your hand is just barely touching, then rotate over into a horizontal fist and your hand magically comes off the wall a couple of millimeters.
This only worked, however, if I was using my first two knuckles on both vertical and horizontal punches. If I let my fist lie flat across the bottom 3 knuckles, as everyone who advocates vertical fist punching does, the reach was still superior with horizontal + first 2 knuckles because my first two protrude 8/10 of a centimeter beyond the ring finger's knuckle (yes, there happened to be a tape measure two feet from the computer while reading this).
2) The upright stance perfect makes sense to me, if the game was more range-based due to lack of gloves + face punches. Upright, your face will be further back and away from harm.
3) What I don't get about their old-school stances is, upright/hunched or outside/inside...why stand flat-footed? What advantage could that possibly have provided them under any ruleset?
1/14/2009 8:09pm, #40
The old videos posted sure do not at all look like the stances posted about. This furthers my opinion that these depicted "stances" really weren't stances at all and just stylized positions with a vague resemblance to what they were actually doing. Really the guys are moving all over the place and just going balls to the wall so there's no real discernible stance which is quite different from modern boxers who maintain the same position pretty consistently.
I'm not seeing any reason at all why allowing dumping people on their ass needs to change what I do. I dump people on their ass starting from a modern boxing position all the time.