Do bare fists make the boxing tuck and cover ineffective

[th0mas]

This is all a bit of a non-discussion...

As was mentioned earlier, A boxing guard is designed to maximise a fighters defence when fighting using boxing rules, that includes wearing gloves and fighting in a ring.

So the answer is; a modern boxing guard is not as effective if you don't wear gloves and fight using boxing rules.

To illustrate the point:
If you look at 18th Century pictures of bare knuckle fighters (compared with modern boxers) they not only have a lower guard but extend their guard forward. Given these guys took what they did seriously (remember bare knuckle - unlimited rounds eek!) their guard position was the most effective for their style of fighting competition. In those days the rules allowed throwing and grabbing, head butting etc - a more versatile guard was probably required (this is congecture as I have never entered a bare knuckle competion - and never will out of choice)

[maofas]

The extended guard works when you're at a longer range. The farther I am, the longer my guard stretches out, but the closer I get the higher and more compact my guard becomes.

The extended guard wasn't directly due to no-gloves, it's due to range (which in turn was due to no-gloves & knowing you'd be in a wrestling match up close). What I'm saying is, if you're in range to trade punches, you'll want your hands up as most modern boxers do regardless of whether it's bareknuckle or boxing gloves.

[th0mas]

I agree, in fact, no one with an ounce of combat experience would keep their guard static as it would change according to the circumstances.

My point was mainly that a "boxing" guard has been adapted over time to best suit the current boxing rule-base, which inludes wearing gloves.

In a bare knucle fight (especially if you are a professional who needs to maintain his tools of the trade) you are not going to want to step in close and trade blows in a classic "cover - guard" action. I would imagine that the fight would be handled at a greater distance than we are currently used to in modern boxing matches

(unfortunately there aren't maniy 18th Century boxing matches on youtube for me to verify my suggestions) :)

[Matt_Werk]

^^^

I found this article in a sherdog thread. It is about bare knuckles boxing. It also confirms the wrestling, and the extended guard.

http://http://www.savateaustralia.co...n%20Boxing.htm

Also, when I spar with 16 oz and 14oz gloves, I can take the hits on my arms and it really does not hurt that much. But I remember, when I was a child, and would play fight, or fight for real with the other kids, getting hit on the arms with a bare fist hurt a lot. In fact, it was one of the ways we would hurt each other, if we did not really want to do bad damage like going for the face. I am not sure if lighter gloves would have this effect.

Anyone here been punched by the various sizes of gloves? How do they feel compared the bare fist?

[maofas]

I agree, in fact, no one with an ounce of combat experience would keep their guard static as it would change according to the circumstances.

My point was mainly that a "boxing" guard has been adapted over time to best suit the current boxing rule-base, which inludes wearing gloves.

In a bare knucle fight (especially if you are a professional who needs to maintain his tools of the trade) you are not going to want to step in close and trade blows in a classic "cover - guard" action. I would imagine that the fight would be handled at a greater distance than we are currently used to in modern boxing matches

(unfortunately there aren't maniy 18th Century boxing matches on youtube for me to verify my suggestions) :)

There are plenty of bareknuckle Irish gypsy fights to watch. Much like mma in 4 oz gloves people tend to stay outside for longer, but at some point distance will close after someone lands a good shot and decides to follow up and try to finish while they have the advantage. No form of serious fighting is maintained exclusively at one range.

My point was people like to say things like:

So the answer is; a modern boxing guard is not as effective if you don't wear gloves and fight using boxing rules.

...which is misleading, because the question of gloves vs. no gloves is irrelevant on a practical level to how you should hold your guard. It's a question of distance, not gloves vs. no gloves. Perhaps you understand this, but someone who is asking the question probably does not.

And honestly, I don't think the modern boxing guard is any less effective at longer range, it's just that an extended guard has a couple of pluses there.

[th0mas]

Yep I think we are violently agreeing with each other :)

[SaintHamish]

Im just stunned this thread is still going.....

"The older guards, or “attitudes,” were far more extended. Because the fighters couldn’t rely on the extra protection gloves provide, they needed to block many blows farther away from their bodies. This is particularly true for shots to the head, which couldn’t effectively be blocked with the modern tuck and cover. Combatants needed time to react and parry, having little protection close in. Therefore, the distance in bare-knuckle pugilism was considerably longer than in today’s boxing, being fought just outside the range where each antagonist could hit the other without moving his body or feet. "

http://www.savateaustralia.com/Savat...n%20Boxing.htm

\

[Matt_Werk]

^^^

But even still, the 6-8oz gloves are much smaller than the 14-16oz gloves. That is the reason I think some people saying it should not make any difference. And I can see where they are coming from. I personally prefer to simply move out of the way period, but when I have been hit on the arms without a glove, it really hurts. When I have been hit with 14-16oz's, it feels less painful. But I am talking about body shots only. That is the reason why I think bare knuckles was fought with a more extended guard. They had to try and cut off the strike before it made direct contact with any surface.