Not Your Everyday Request

[SamuraiGuy]

Hey, Hey, I'm doing a ISU (independent study unit) for my kinesiology class and the topic is "Technique Vs Power in contact sport"... this involves any contact sports but boxing came to my mind first. So I'm wondering waht all your thoughts are on this.... if you have any examples of when power beat out technique (maybe one boxer KO ing another) , you know of any resources or articles that I could look at ... or just any personal opinions on what is better... and reasons why would be good... soo any articles... examples or forms of proof for either side would be GREATLY appreciated...

Thanks People.

[Jeremy Lobdell]

Great question!

Nice question. From what I've seen, especially in pro boxing, a guy with power always has a chance. The best example I can think of is when George Foreman completed his first comeback (in his middle 40's) and knocked out Michael Moorer in the 12th to win the heavyweight championship. Moorer dominated the fight and was winning on all the scorecards. His technique was better than Foreman's and he continually won points by using quick combos and then getting out of the way and backing off before Foreman could counterpunch. All Moorer had to do to win was stay away in the 12th to win. Unfortunately he didn't, and Foreman was able to hurt him with one punch, then went in for the kill. HBO just did a peice on this last week. I hope this helps and I'm sure other people will have other examples.
Mahalo, Jeremy

[Tom Yum]

Its not as simple as that.

George Foreman vs. Micheal Moorer is a good example of how power determined the match.

Roy Jones Jr. vs. John Ruiz is a good example of how technique/speed determined the match.

Tyson vs. Etienne - again Tyson's power.

Delahoya vs. Vargas - Delahoya by technique/smarts

Gracie vs Severn - Gracie by technique

Baroni vs Menne - Baroni by power...

and so on.

[Garland]

there are so many other decisive factors that go into a fight, to say one could win with only power and no technique is almost more likely than somebody with all the technique in the world and no power or means to use it.

You have to have both. The idea isn't to focus on one or the other but to be a superior tactician to the other fighter, with superior skill and techniques, and be well conditioned enough that so you can last without getting gassed in a later round. Having the power and the accuracy as well as technique to pummel and feint to get an opening to KO in the first round could be attributed to either real skill and technique or power and luck, but there is always just a little bit of each thrown in the mix. Get what I'm sayin'....?

[adacas]

I prefer technique cause well i'm not very powerful. Besides I always find is amusing when big dudes get knocked around by smaller more agile opponents. I like to compare it to the weight classes in UFC. In the lower weight classes you will see much more technique in play. I'm sure you'll count more armbars and triangles and what not. In the heavyweight division you will see a lot of ground and pound not to say that you won't see technique there either or ground and pound in lower weights but that is just an observation that i made.

[shasan]

I think there is also the smaller aspect to consider that, all else being equal, the introduction of different technique can mean the gain or loss of power.

For example, a karate punch vs a boxing punch, two different techniques and even if the same guy did both, would see a difference in power.

I've realized power-gains on punches and kicks if I have just tweaked something small about how I execute them.

[SamuraiGuy]

Hey thanks for all the great feedback and by all means keep it coming. And if you happen to know what date these fight examples are.. that would just be fricking great... theres only one thing i would like to state. Obviously technique AND power.. are superior and usually necessary... soo before you make any posts about having to have both... just know I realize this... but im looking for ways to prove that whichever one is superior... like the Rocky Marciano thing... that helps prove the power. Anyway thanks alot for the info and keep it coming for sure.

[SamuraiGuy]

Also any clips... or videos of technique or power being dominant would be sick.. thanks.

[Jeremy Lobdell]

Mike

Great post to Mike Brewer, as usual. If you get a chance to see the piece done on the Foreman-Moorere fight by HBO, Moorer admits that he was out on his feet after the first shot, that was the fight stopper. He goes on to say that he has no memory of anything after that and his first memory is being revived after the fight was stopped. Granted that Foremans experience and Moorer's history of not listening to his corner played huge parts in determining the outcome. Foreman hadn't worked the body successfully in the earlier rounds to take Moorer's legs and through his experience, Foreman knew that he needed a knockout in the 12th to win. I believe (for what it's worth) that technique ko's are set up early in a fight by working the body and power knockouts are from one well placed shot that the guy never saw coming. Ie.. Jones-Carver 2.
Mahalo, Jeremy

[SamuraiGuy]

You wouldnt know anyway of me getting this HBO piece on the moorer thing would you....? is it video or text? .. that'll give me a idea of what to look for if you dont know where to get it..

Alrite thanks keep it coming.. ill look into that jones-carver 2 thing.

[Jeremy Lobdell]

Foreman-Moorer

The show i refered to was done by HBO boxing (Jim Lampley) in a 1 hour peice. It showed last week (that's why it was fresh in my mind when you posted this thread). HBO usually replays these things to death, so if I see it again, I'll try to record it for you. Mahalo, Jeremy

[SamuraiGuy]

Thanks a ton man.

Anyone else with more thoughts, examples... comments.

[HtTKar]

Torque

Just my opinion.

technique-vs-strength would be easier to debate.
With good technique comes power, but not the otherway around.

I once had this girlfriend that had no idea of how to make a fist, let alone punch. She really had to be taught. But afterwords, she learned to build up a lot of power by using proper technique.

A lot of techniques are not even seen. For example; Tighten your left hand as hard as you can. All of a sudden, your right hand is 20% stronger.

Tighten your abs and glutes, and you'll be able to do at least twice as many pushups/pullups as you would if you used just your arms.

Personally I think that both Power and technique have to be devoloped. But power is only developed after learning proper techniques.

I have this one friend that is strong as an ox, but I dont think he could Knock me out. His punches are sooooo very slow, that I dont think they would connect. But if they did I dont think they would have proper technique to deliver all that strength into me. It would be more like a push than a punch. He's a great wrestler though.

Taking the punch for example, through basic techniques you attain stability in the lower body, sufficient twist in the hips, and a sharp penetrating strike. Footwork is essential in order to add speed and power to the punch.

If the lower body is unstable, there is no twist in the hips, your stike is not sharp, there is no speed to you punch, and you lack proper footwork; you will not be able to throw a powerful punch.
If anyone mastered ALL of these techniques, they would be able to throw very powerfull punches.

By developing the technique of tension, power is developed. Torque.

dragondoor.com deals alot with strength training. Here is an article that might help you out.

http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/85/

[medic06]

I think the idea is of brute strength v. technique. In my mind I think of power as:

POWER = strength + speed + proper body mechanics (technique)

I think this equation is variable, you might replace speed with timing, etc.

[Jeremy Lobdell]

Power

Coming form the point of view of a bigger than average guy (5'10" and 225lbs.) I feel that true power is the ability to still k.o. someone when fatigue has set in and your technique is sloppy.
Mahalo, Jeremy