Do boxers have root?

[IronFist]

They're not very stationary. Do they have root? Does their root or lack of root help or hinder them? What do you think?

IronFist

[SanSoo Student]

Boxers don't usually have roots because they don't stand flat footed. The stand on the balls of their feet, to give them a sort of spring. The spring uses the quads and calfs to help the speed of their footwork and dashes.

[Water Dragon]

Yes, boxers have root. It's in the front foot. The next time you watch boxing on TV, watch how the boxers use their front leg.

[joedoe]

Also watch how they plant their feet when they go for a power shot.

[Shooter]

that's just crazy talk...

[rubthebuddha]

buster douglas had plenty of root, but that was more gravity having plenty to grab hold of than anything else.

but for regular boxers, yes, and the comment about the front leg is key.

[SanSoo Student]

When u stay on the front or balls of your feet that counts as a root?
I thought that being rooted was having your whole feet planted like in a horse stance...??:confused:

[CrippledAvenger]

WD has come down with an unmistakable case of the correct.

[Serpent]

Watch tapes of Prince Naseem fighting. Watch how he plants his heel for the power shots.

Now that's rooting!

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

some do.

[Repulsive Monkey]

On the whole boxer's have very little root compared to martial arts. What counts for a root in boxing is usually a split second plantation of the front foot but truncated through upper body power so they don't use that root in the way as one would in your Gung-fu. As in Taiji, many would declare outright that boxers have no root due to not having the whole body move as one unit.
Why else would a boxer decide to beef up his upper body strength if he could transmit whole jin up from the earth and legs?
I'm sure there is a lot conjecture on this subject, but whether you like it or not Kung-fu and boxing execute their power into different ways and thus consideration to the root is variable too.

[Kristoffer]

It's not BETTER just DIFFERENT. And it's also depends on the boxer, no-one fights the same way.

[guohuen]

Someone said it earlier. It's called flat footed boxing. An old style.

[norther practitioner]

What counts for a root in boxing is usually a split second plantation of the front foot

It doesn't matter how long.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Repulsive Monkey
On the whole boxer's have very little root compared to martial arts. What counts for a root in boxing is usually a split second plantation of the front foot but truncated through upper body power so they don't use that root in the way as one would in your Gung-fu. As in Taiji, many would declare outright that boxers have no root due to not having the whole body move as one unit.

And they would be wrong. During that 'split second' where the boxer plants his foot to power his strike, his whole body is moving as a unit. If it isn't, he's not a good boxer.

You may argue that boxers don't use root the same way as gong fu practitioners, but if root is defined as "connection with the ground to issue power", "moving the whole body as a unit", and "transmitting power from the legs and hips through the punch", boxers have it. Period.


Why else would a boxer decide to beef up his upper body strength if he could transmit whole jin up from the earth and legs?

Because, when you punch, you are using the whole body as a unit. The upper torso is part of the body, therefore boxers beef up its strength... just like the beef up the lower body strength, and the core strength. Neglecting part of the chain is foolish.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by FatherDog



You may argue that boxers don't use root the same way as gong fu practitioners, but if root is defined as "connection with the ground to issue power", "moving the whole body as a unit", and "transmitting power from the legs and hips through the punch", boxers have it. Period.

[/B]

This is a left hook to the liver of correctness. On 2 different levels.

[Former castleva]

" that's just crazy talk... "
?

"On the whole boxer's have very little root compared to martial arts. ... "
Boxing qualifies as a martial art.
Besides,it can be more martial and just about as good-elitism aside.

"It's not BETTER just DIFFERENT. "
Yeah.Different does not translate to worse or better.If there was only one fundamental way...



Do botanists have root?


:D

[Phrost]

It really depends on the punch thrown.

A jab involves the rear foot planted, then leaning forward a bit on the ball of the same foot as the punching hand.

A cross has the front foot, opposite the forward "lead" hand planted, while the body leans in on the ball of the punching hand. This is the primary power punch in boxing.

A hook is slightly more dynamic, involving the boxer supporting his weight mostly on the balls of both feet while turning his body into the punch. Although it's the opposite of a centerline type strike, the footwork resembles Wing Chun shifting a bit, at least on the punching "leg".

You have to remember that Boxing focusses on one aspect of fighting only. As such, it's only concerned with dominance of that "range". Just as its footwork is awesome for its purpose, it's lacking for other purposes, such as defending against a shoot, or stopping kicks.

[Xebsball]

Originally posted by Phrost
You have to remember that Boxing focusses on one aspect of fighting only. As such, it's only concerned with dominance of that "range". Just as its footwork is awesome for its purpose, it's lacking for other purposes, such as defending against a shoot, or stopping kicks.

Yes indeed

[Phrost]

I mean, honestly, this is how I see the transition of combat sport art into actual combat.

Boxing < Kickboxing < Vale Tudo < Street fighting < Warfare.

Each category can contribute to success in the ascending category, though success in a lesser category does not necessarily guarantee success in a greater one.

If I'm intellectualizing this too much, let me make an example.

A boxer does not train to defend against kicks.

A Kickboxer does not train to defend against takedowns (excluding San Shao) or submissions.

A Vale Tudo/MMA stylist does not train to defend against eye gouges, hair pulling, knives, beer bottles, or pool cues.

A street fighter, does not train in movement under fire, three-five second rushes, small arms, Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical protection, or squad tactics.

But the smart fighter, trains in all aspects. Because you never know which situation in which you might find yourself.

[norther practitioner]

Phrost,

It is also carrying the skill up in ranks too. As a basic theory, I would agree....

An interesting thing happens when you break down some of the categories though...


That is why we have these great forums.

[rubthebuddha]

getting somewhere, but also remember that since boxers train just that range and train it to as close of perfection as they can get, they have just as much a chance in defending themselves against most opponents. they know that as soon as someone steps into their normal range and as long as that person stays there, he's breakfast. put the boxer on the ground and it's a different story. skill in all ranges can easily lose to expertise in a single range, and vice versa.

[Shaolin-Do]

hehe...
I have never once met a boxer who threw a punch using just his arm... Every good boxer Ive met throws it from the legs to hips to waiste to arms... ect... The body moves as a whole, planted weight transfers into the punch.
Would this not be root?
Try to throw a punch using just your arm....
:)

[norther practitioner]

Try to throw a punch using just your arm....

OK... Now what? :D



Rub...
I think that though, to go with that model you'd have to assume that the first category would be more like single discipline rather than boxing...
And I would have to put kick boxing only like maybe a half step up from the single discipline, then the mma type stuff.

[Shooter]

" that's just crazy talk... "
?

Former castleva, that's what I post after I delete what I originally posted because my original post went completely over everyone's head.:D

[Former castleva]

"Former castleva, that's what I post after I delete what I originally posted because my original post went completely over everyone's head."

OK. :D

Leaves some questions imo but now I know how to react the next time I notice that line.

[rubthebuddha]

NP,

not sure what you're saying. i was just saying that someone who focuses entirely on a specific range is going to have a huge advantage within that range, but someone who is comfy in all ranges will have the advantage in the other ranges.

kinda like this: i can kick mad ass at old school legend of zelda, but as far as gaming in general goes, i'm not even par. put me against my more diversely gaming roommate and have us see how well we do in zelda and i will mop the floor with his ass. however, toss in any other game into that console and the advantage is his.

not sure if i'm just rambling, but it makes sense in my head. lots of things do, but that isn't always helpful. :D

[norther practitioner]

Rub, thats OK, I know exactly what you are saying... thought you took that argument another step, whatever, I've had a long day (and I got like 5 hours left!)

[rubthebuddha]

nah.

too long a day for me to argue, too, and it's not quite 4 p.m.

i was just stepping up for boxers and going with the view that different is not better, and that someone shouldn't stand within swinging range of a boxer and say that their flavor is crap. :)