Boxing? – A different viewpoint.

[chris davis 200]

Hi all,

I have been wondering about Boxing recently and have sparred a lot with a boxing friend of mine.

What got me wondering was a very interesting situation a doorman friend of mine got into when we were working. He is a very good boxer. He punched up a guy that was of similar size to him, but ended up getting thrown to the ground. This resulted in his head being split.

I have come to the conclusion that the methods used in modern boxing Alone are not of use for street defense.

Waaaa! I here you all cry. But here are my findings.

1. Buoyancy – Boxing stances are based around a notion of ease of maneuverability.
But they are also based on a stable and solid surface underfoot. This is obviously not the case ion the street

In order to achieve the ease of movement, boxing uses buoyant stances and bobbing footwork. This creates a distinct lack of dynamic / stationary balance. High levels of movement are achievable while dynamically balanced (off balance but centered) without a buoyant nature.

Being in this state of constant buoyancy creates an easily throw able target, against a fighter trained in throwing methods a boxer will often loose out.

2. How effective is the punching really??
I know that boxers can punch. I have been on the receiving end of many a boxers jab, cross combo. But I have NEVER ONCE felt that I could not continue fighting.

If we look at your average boxing bout, these people pound each other in the face for any number of rounds, the only real result being fatigue.

But KO’s occure. Yes the do. No denial. But mainly either very very early in a bout when a surprise, non classical attack is applied (prince naseem etc) or when one or the other fighter is to fatigued to effect a good defence.

Hence my point being, if someone can take boxing punches for even 5 minutes in the process of fighting is this really the superlative striking art that many believe.

3. Fitness equates fighting proficiency?
I do agree that in order to be an effective ring or competition fighter you must be at the peak of fitness, you must be as fit, or fitter, than your opponent, able to last the distance etc.

But on the street, you don’t want your fight to ‘last round, after round’. What you do need is highly effective simple methods to disable your opponent quickly.

Boxing quite simply does not train these methods, the methods that finish someone in a couple of shots. They teach to bob weave jab etc. These methods don’t finish things, they score points.

Regardless of your size or fitness level, if you cant finish an opponent quickly on the street you are going to be in trouble.

4. Training your striking implements?
Boxers tend to train on bags, focus mitts, speed balls etc.

From this a boxer can expect to increase the punching power of their shots and the fitness level of their body.

They can also expect to feel a similar impact from body shots. But most of the boxers I know go for head shots on the streets. The also break their knuckles.

Why is this? Boxers do not condition there striking implements of prepare them for the impact of hitting bone.

I study internal arts, this practice is also absent from these arts, BUT they do account for targeting specific areas, using appropriate weapons to target those areas. EG bony areas get struck by palm heel strikes, elbows etc.

5. Telegraph your intention?
It is a fundamental practice of street fighting that you never telegraph your intention to strike or your ability to inflict damage.

All boxers I have seen in a street situation have reverted to what they know and understand, Boxing guard, boxing stance. They normally end up with a major aggressive situation on their hands. This sort of preparation will trigger either a fight or flight response.

To your average street thug who thinks he has got big old balls – it will trigger a fight response.


Here I have outlined the flaws that I can see in boxing as a stand alone method. As a mixer it has its merits, but I am still unsure about the punching style itself.

I can look at the arts I practice such as Hsing I (most comparable due to its striking nature) and find favorable advantages to all the above, both in theory and application of basic techniques. I am not talking about hundreds of methods here. Hsing I has 5 basic methods.

Boxers are hard fit guys and in a ring I would back one over your average MAist.

But on the street, their art falls down with surprising and alarming regularity.

Now i know boxing is mainly a sport, but in my area many many people train it because they think it will give them the edge over the street thugs.

It is my distinct belief that it wont.

Just some thoughts.

Chris

[kid_chocolate]

Boxing is good but it needs to be cross trained. Things like internal Chinese arts are often over-elaborate and abstracted and usually don't train with a live resisting opponent. For this reason I would say (modified) boxing is superior. Why don't you try your Hsing-Yi with boxing gloves on vs a good boxer. See what happens. Its a good place to test out the various kung fu theoretical arts.

[chris davis 200]

Why don't you try your Hsing-Yi with boxing gloves on vs a good boxer. See what happens. Its a good place to test out the various kung fu theoretical arts.

have been wondering about Boxing recently and have sparred a lot with a boxing friend of mine.

I have!

It was good. i dominated mostly, he got some very good shots in, but was thrown lots and got some seriously brused ribs!

Hsing i is quite a simple art when you have got the body mechanics down. It is based on 5 principles of movement and striking.

cheers
chris

[Thai Bri]

Chris, much of what you say about pure sport Boxing training is true. But all arts have their weaknesses. Mixing your training to find your own method is a good way to go.

In fairness to him though, how many people has he "seen off" using boxing? I bet he doesn't get battered every day.

[chris davis 200]

Oh indeed, he is a big hard guy. But his total reliance on boxing is his big downfall.

I agree with you. You must find your own way, I myself cannot profess to use strictly one style in a real encounter. i do what my body does based on my training - i dont use tai chi if this happens, ba gua if that happens etc etc.

I am not really saying that boxing has no merit. My point is that to focus on the style, thinking that you will have the necessary tools to fight very proficiently is not correct.

This is the opinion I have come across in my area and to some extent here.

Cheers
Chris

[kid_chocolate]

Boxing is what you end up with if you want people to fight using only gloved fists. Its good at what it does.

[Maxetai]

Boxing is the foundation to hand strikes. It is not an end of itself but rather a basis for hand techniques.
Case in point: In Boxing you learn all basic angles of attack like linear (Jab, Cross, Backfist perhaps), Circular (Hook), Arc(uppercut, overhead).
Therefore it is extremely important to a well rounded fighter.
Throw in the rigorous training, the realistic full contact, and the coordination and you've got some pretty good elements that are developed.
Arguably (meaning it's my opinion and yours may vary), Boxing is the mother of the Striking Arts and Wrestling is the mother of the Grappling Arts.

[kid_chocolate]

100% correct

[chris davis 200]

Boxing is the foundation to hand strikes. It is not an end of itself but rather a basis for hand techniques.

My point is about Boxing as a stand alone method.

Arguably (meaning it's my opinion and yours may vary), Boxing is the mother of the Striking Arts and Wrestling is the mother of the Grappling Arts.

100% correct

Not really - Western striking arts maybe - but eastern methods developed independent of western boxing - which is what we are discussing.

I am saying that as a stand alone method it does not hold up. as a mixer it is useful.

Throw in the rigorous training, the realistic full contact ....

Realistic. for the ring yes for the street no.

All of the points you raise are valid - as a basis for other things boxing has its merits - as a ring sport it is entertaining - as a self defence method it is not realistic or practical.

I understand that few train it for this reason - but there are those that do. To them i say find a better system. from my personal experience of street encounters.

cheers
chris

[kid_chocolate]

It was good. i dominated mostly, he got some very good shots in, but was thrown lots and got some seriously brused ribs!

Maybe he's just a crappy boxer, who knows? He certainly doesn't seem to have much of a clue about reality. If you let him know that it was an "anything goes" fight and he still tried to box then thats not very clever.

Also you were throwing him etc. You would be badly beaten too if you attempted to use only Hsing Yi against a decent MMA fighter. Your techniques would be too limited. They would just take you down and smack you around or strangle you unconscious.

It would have been a fairer test if you tried only your Hsing Yi punches vs his boxing punches, because boxing only works that area. Fairer still if you had tried it maybe 10 times against decent amateur boxers, instead of 1 terrible-sounding guy. Boxing doesn't claim to be a self defence system; its the science of hitting with the hands and nothing more. If you doubt this then why don't you try to win the world title using your Hsing Yi techniques- you could be a rich man if its as superior as you claim.

The bottom line is that boxing teaches you to hit, HARD. Find me a Hsing Yi master that can hit harder than the world champ in his weight division and I will be very surprised.

[chris davis 200]

Ha! The guy is an ex semi pro from the US! But nice try! a very good boxer with about 5 years experience.

I was basically using hsing i as this was not a strictly boxing match but a few occassions i threw him away cause i noticed a real big opening - just to prove a point.

Hsing i IS a more complete art.

I never said that it is a superior hand fighting method, although i think it does. More weapons from the hands rather than just the closed fist.

Boxing doesn't claim to be a self defence system; its the science of hitting with the hands and nothing more.

I KNOW!!!!

Please read my posts!

I understand that few train it for this reason - but there are those that do. To them i say find a better system. from my personal experience of street encounters.

I am not really saying that boxing has no merit. My point is that to focus on the style, thinking that you will have the necessary tools to fight very proficiently is not correct.

Boxers are hard fit guys and in a ring I would back one over your average MAist.

If you doubt this then why don't you try to win the world title using your Hsing Yi techniques- you could be a rich man if its as superior as you claim.

There is no bout in my mind that in the ring with a set of rules i would be beaten to a pulp by any pro boxer. outside of the ring and without rules i would stand a better chance but may well still end up hurt.

You seem to be taking this as an afront on boxing in general. It is not.

I am mierly stating that people, that i know and some that post here, who think that a boxer would have a distinct upper hand against a street brawler are mistaken. That is all nothing more. If you look at 2 pro boxers going at it in a pre fight brawl you dont see much boxing! see what i mean.

I personally very much enjoy boxing, both participating with friends and watching on the box.

---------------------------------------------

Oh and Wang Shu Jin of Taiwan met and easily took punches from Jack dempsey at the time heavy weight champ.
He then did hsing I's crushing fist or drilling fist (cant remember) on jack and sent him across the room. Jack left with a large amount of respect for wang.
Wang took the full power stike of a heavy weight champion boxer with no obvious ill effects, Dempsey hit the far wall of the room.
Nuff said. and before we all start shouting - story story. Both sides admit to the event taking place, dempsey proclaimed great respect for Wang after the event.
Some also clame that wang slapped Jack around for coming to challange him although i do not believe this to be correct.

----------------------------------------------

anyways - please chill i am not insulting boxing or its practitioners.

cheers
chris

[darrianation]

chris davis 200

I think boxing is great for use in self- defense but it has some limitations.

First of all it doesn't give you techniques through all the ranges.
1) Outside range-weapons range (Clubs, Knives, etc).
2) Kicking range.
3) Punching ranges.
4) Grappling ranges-clinches and takedowns.
* Ground fighting range.
(These are the ranges I go by I know depending what system you study they have different names and or combine some of them).

Boxing gives only one maybe two of these ranges if you count the clinch, but boxing doesn't teach how to fight from the clinch.
Also boxing is geared towards sports with very specific rules and not towards SD

I like boxing but for SD you need to know how to kick, at least kick the legs and push kicks as well as a little grappling to include how to fall without getting your head split. Also specific case based techniques such as some one grabs you from behind with a bear hug or head lock, or against weapons, etc.

If you want sport boxing is one of the best. If you want SD boxing is good but their are better more complete systems out there. My favorite combination is MT and Judo. However their are systems that take the best of boxing and kicking techniques combine them with some of the more practical Judo and JJ techniques and teach them all together.
Something like that would good. Remember though unless they teach Mental control and fight psychology it may not be worth your while if your goal is SD.

[doubleouch]

I think you raise some interesting points about boxing Chris. I don't propose to have any of the answers, but I recently met someone who has been working hard to modify boxing to better suit self defense. If you haven't checked out Rodney King and his crazy monkey you should. He has a ton of ring experience plus alot of street experience on the mean streets of south africa. One of the main flaws he saw with boxing was that it was highly atribute based. You had to have extremely good atributes to bob and weave and slip and parry. He modified and developed a way of boxing that works very well in the ring and in self defense that is easier to learn and doesn't require years of attribute building to make work. When you see it in action you can't believe how incredibly simple and effective it is.

[tekshow]

funny you mention Hsing-I i happen to train with a practioner of both boxing and Hsing-I


our stances are not bubbly or bouncy in our boxing stances, but rooted like tai chi...


and i have been in a street fight lately and used my boxing skills; boxing alone didn't work but i was able to avoid getting hit by slipping my head and bobbing and weaving all while keeping my stance...


after punching the gent a few times he decided he wasn't going to be able to out box me, so he went for a frontal choke...


thankfully this same Hsing-I, boxing sifu I have also does BJJ, so I did a single leg takedown and then as the guy was getting up finishe dhim with some more boxing skills...



i guess the point is cross train... however, i've met and sparred with boxers that after a couple jabs, i felt like i couldn't continue... people can gain a quick intermediate to high level at boxing after a short time and put a lot of people out with the right coach...


i think it depends on the person,


just my .02
joe

[doubleouch]

Tek,
I tried to PM you but the admin wouldn't let me because I have to wait 6000 seconds to post? Anyway, I'd be happy to talk with you about my experiences at NWFA e mail me cane_prevost@gbsd.gresham.k12.or.us tell Jeff that Cane says hi.