bridge concepts vs boxers

[WanderingMonk]

greetings,

how should the following the two southern style fighting concepts be modified or apply against boxer type strikers?

sorry for the poor translation.

1. if a bridge presents itself cross it. If no bridge exist, build your own.

2. wc: seize those which are incoming, help those leaving leaves.

most of the today's strikers tend to employ the boxing paradiam of "stick and move. strike and do not get entangle";

it is difficult to apply these southern-style hand immobilization concept against these strikers. how should these concepts be adopted for modern application?

[hasayfu]

This is agood quetion for the southern folk and one that is hard to discuss on a forum. I'll try anyways.

First, the boxing tactic is not so different as long range fist arts with the exception of the jab. IF a boxer can beat you with his jab, it means his hand speed is faster then yours AND his foot speed is faster then yours AND he can pack enough power in an uncommited punch to beat you. If all those three things are true, the style doesn't really matter now does it?

I'm not a big boxing expert but isn't the jab used to set up the killer punch? Most fights are not won by the jab alone. Also, the jab scores points and irritates the hell out of someone so it can cause mistakes.

Now to your question. So for the hit and run jab, one strategy is to intercept it as it's coming out or follow it as it comes back in. You need to have a strong use of angles and footwork but it can be done.

Another is to avoid the jab and wait for the big punch to bridge against.

Finally, for a pure boxer, bridge in the clinch. Boxing rules stop the fight in the clinch. This is where they are most vulnerable. Of course MMAs don't care so much about being clinched and this is not a good strategy for those type of fighters.

[brothernumber9]

I think it is difficult to bridge and continue to control bridging against a fast jab if the idea is to maintain bridging. However most southern styles imply along with the "bridge come, bridge over" concept, the additional concept of lin siu dai dat (simultaneous stop hit).

The simultaneous stop hit can either follow in line or expand upon the "bridge presents/cross bridge" as you say. (kiu loi kiu serng guo ?). Against a jab, as Hasayfu mentioned it is difficult but can be done. Good boxers employ it often when counter punching against the jab. Just the same It would be insightful to watch a good proponent and executor (sp?) of bridging concepts box against a decent boxer, perhaps even with changing opponents of different size, weight, and speed.

[Tigrentera]

It is usually a bad idea to try to bridge onto a jab. As someone stated the jab is usually a distraction that sets up for the big payload strike.

My experience in sparring with boxers is that you don't want to let them play their game.

There strategy is to lead in with a jab and then move in with a volley of more or less linear strikes.

If you are very fast with your hands then you can go toe to toe with them and quickly deflect their hands while countering.

If you are not so fast then you need to step off the line of attack and hit from an off angle.

In addition, this is very important, you need to work their legs.

If they try to launch a big volley of attacks on you, get your legs involved and knock them on their a$$ with a trip or sweep.

Boxing is sport and it doesn't involve leg techs or throws, thats how they can get away with these big overcommitted flurry of punches.

Kung fu strategy is usually way more conservative and cautious because we are always on the look out for sweeps, trips and throws.

Hope that helps. ;)

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by hasayfu

I'm not a big boxing expert but isn't the jab used to set up the killer punch?

having said this, do you really want to do this:



I wouldn't, unless I were changing my level, lowering to avoid that oncoming cross. Even still, you don't want to anticipate, or you may run right into something else. Also, think of what other attributes you have - I wouldn't recommend going on the inside of a boxer unless you are better on theinside than him, which may not be the case, unless he has longer arms than you.

[b]Another is to avoid the jab and wait for the big punch to bridge against.

this big punch isn't a slow punch. I don't think you'd be able to easily bridge it, either.

Finally, for a pure boxer, bridge in the clinch. Boxing rules stop the fight in the clinch. This is where they are most vulnerable. Of course MMAs don't care so much about being clinched and this is not a good strategy for those type of fighters.

boxers are by no means vulnerable in the clinch. ever hear the term "dirty boxing"? It refers to using the shoulders, elbows and other nasty things in the clinch. Refs break the clinch up in a bout, but you can bet they are all used to training there. They likely won't be as comfy there as an mma guy, but they won't feel threatened.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Tigrentera
In addition, this is very important, you need to work their legs.

that will be key.

If they try to launch a big volley of attacks on you, get your legs involved and knock them on their a$$ with a trip or sweep.

boxers tend to have a good base, so that may not be as successful as merely kicking their legs. when the boxer throws that right hand, his weight is on his front leg, making it a big, sitting target. kick it.

Boxing is sport and it doesn't involve leg techs or throws, thats how they can get away with these big overcommitted flurry of punches.

mma is a sport that allows leg techs AND throws, and people use flurries of overcommitted punches all the time.

bKung fu strategy is usually way more conservative and cautious because we are always on the look out for sweeps, trips and throws.

I think that depends on the fighter. In both mma and boxing, you have conservative counterfighters. In kung fu, you will have agressive fighters, just like boxing does.

[Tiet Sow]

Hi all----First time post on this site so please try to be nice to me--

As far as The Jab goes, in the past i've managed to get around the jab w/a simple pak/Jik Choy---This would place me on my opponents outside (making it very difficult for him to counter), and also present great kicking or sweeping opportunities---Hope I explained it well enough for all to have an idea of what I mean--

Tom (Tiet Sow)

[Vajramusti]

I posted a reply to Wandering Monk's original post- but probaly pressed the wrong button and it disappeared into cyberspace.
Lots of technique oriented "what would you do" if you were in style A against style B are misleading. Doesnt teach you much.

You need sufficient mastery of wing chun and developing wing chun reflexive motions.
Good boxers are not to be underestimated. They have afew short years of great efficiency brfore levelling off and declining.No two boxers are the same. No two jabs from the same boxer- if he is good- are exactly the same.

Good wing chun folks are not to beundestinated either. Is their biu ma good how is their chor ma. Do they know thegeometry of their motions, Depending on timing-you can attack as soon as their is the faintest beginning of a jab-rather than waiting to confirm- yup thats a jab. Good chi sao gives good timing to motions and all kinds of variation in timing, Pak da, biu da, attacking the punch avoiding the punch, picking upa garbage can cover if one is nearby, or the boxers spit bucket, a stop kick- all can work--- depending on who when what where.

[Tigrentera]

Originally posted by Tigrentera

In addition, this is very important, you need to work their legs.

that will be key.

Glad we agree.




If they try to launch a big volley of attacks on you, get your legs involved and knock them on their a$$ with a trip or sweep.

boxers tend to have a good base, so that may not be as successful as merely kicking their legs. when the boxer throws that right hand, his weight is on his front leg, making it a big, sitting target. kick it.

In my experience boxers don't have AS GOOD a base as kung fu. The kung fu base is meant to be stable but also very mobile. The boxers base is less stable (usually very narrow) and less mobile (once they are committed.) Your point about the front leg sweep is golden. I use that all the time.


Boxing is sport and it doesn't involve leg techs or throws, thats how they can get away with these big overcommitted flurry of punches.

mma is a sport that allows leg techs AND throws, and people use flurries of overcommitted punches all the time.

True. However, there is always that danger when you do that, that someone can take your legs out from under you, it you are doing "boxing style" punching.

There are styles that launch a continuous volley of attacks but they do so from a more stable position.

Not knocking boxing because it can be very effective (as I've learned the hard way several times) but just trying illustrate some differences between kung fu strategy and boxing strategy.


Kung fu strategy is usually way more conservative and cautious because we are always on the look out for sweeps, trips and throws.

I think that depends on the fighter. In both mma and boxing, you have conservative counterfighters. In kung fu, you will have agressive fighters, just like boxing does.

True. I'm just trying to make a broad generalization to help the original poster. The generalization is based on my own experience and other peeps experience may differ.

Anyone he spars with he is going to have to size up on his own.
Because as we all know...it is as much about the fighter as it is about the style that he practices.

;)

[brothernumber9]

Trying to stick to the original question.

On "seize those which are incoming, help those leaving leaves"

boxers grab each other all the time especially if they are in trouble and need to stop the opponent's momentum or attack, sometimes simply because both opponents move forward at the same time and collide each others' space.
Boxers have severe limitations on following up after seizing/clinching, in their venue, so seizing although not entirely easy is applicable for a CMA. Although boxers move constantly, most boxers are trained to avoid moving backwards, and in some camps constantly move forward, thus leading to the above clinching/seizing. Therefore it makes the "helping those leaving..." more difficult, eventhough the concept is applicable to simple techs as well as whole body movements.

"If no bridge exist, build your own"/ no bridge-offer bridge
hit them before they hit you, or put something out there to make them react how you want them to. Really doesn't change against a boxer or whoever.

[Tigrentera]

"If no bridge exist, build your own"/ no bridge-offer bridge
hit them before they hit you, or put something out there to make them react how you want them to. Really doesn't change against a boxer or whoever.

That's right...

The best defense is a good offense. ;)

[WanderingMonk]

wow, lot's of good suggestions. thanks.

basically, the question was put out because the fighting strategy in the modern world is a bit different than in the past. Just want to know how people are interpretating the old maxim in the light of changes in fighting strategies.

some points:

agree on attacking the legs. attack where it is undefended.

as to the jab, I tend to get distract by them. boxers got fast hands.



If you are not so fast then you need to step off the line of attack and hit from an off angle.

agree, triangular step to the side with a pak.

trapping still is really difficult. need to draw the opponents to over comit before proceeeding.

[Tigrentera]

as to the jab, I tend to get distract by them. boxers got fast hands.

You might also use a "counter jab" to block an incoming jab. It seems to work really well, as it can be equally as fast and if you wedge it to the inside of the opponents jabbing hand, it penetrates the others guard.....setting you up to knee, elbow, or throw.

Some styles might refer to this a Chyun Kiuh or "Penetrating Bridge." It is a "leaky defense" where by you are blocking but at the same time you are penetrating through the defense..... bringing your hands closer to your opponent.

Have fun!!!
;)

[Buby]

Smash it with a soy quil (we do it similar to a boxers parry), using yau kung(soft fast) type of energy. Just remember not to cross your center, cause if he fakes and doubles up with the jab then you're eating his jab. If you don't cross your center then you can react to the fake.

Or just close off your center!


Buby

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Tigrentera

In my experience boxers don't have AS GOOD a base as kung fu. The kung fu base is meant to be stable but also very mobile. The boxers base is less stable (usually very narrow) and less mobile (once they are committed.) Your point about the front leg sweep is golden. I use that all the time.

the narrowness of the stance doesn't make them more susceptible to a takedown. bjj guys, judoka, etc. use narrow stances. the narrow base allows for mobility, making it easier to step out of, evade, etc. takedowns.



True. However, there is always that danger when you do that, that someone can take your legs out from under you, it you are doing "boxing style" punching.

There are styles that launch a continuous volley of attacks but they do so from a more stable position.

the position is not unstable at all unless you overcommit. Doing so is a mistake of the boxer, not the style.

[Yum Cha]

Bridging against a jab.

The hard bridging attacks against the jab are, as Buby wisely observed, dangerous if the boxer fakes, and doubles up, or turns the blocked jab into a circular attack. Game over, jap, second jab hits, big right, goood NIGHT!

The secret to bridging a boxer's jab, IMHO, is to bridge above the elbow with Chum lik (sinking power) which folds the jab at the elbow, making it harder to retract and securing your bridge as you press in. Obviously, you don't want to do this from the center gate, rather one of the side gates. Likewise, you don't "hold" the bridge, you cross it.

To try and extrapolate the hundereds of things you could do against the hundereds of possible counters is folly. But sinking that original bridge against a boxers jab is a way to get another shot for "Free".

Also, Boxers tend to be quite happy coming up the middle at you, and I've found that giving them the middle, they can't resist, and a crossed-arm trap, again with Chum Lik, followed by a rising strike can put them on the defensive, at best catching them under the jaw, or on the "button"

As for close in fighting, with glove training, boxers short power is longer than KF short power, and if bare handed and you have their hands beneath yours, you can have your way with their neck, jaw, face, eyes, ears, etc, if of course, you have short power and know what to do with it.

Boxers are deadly on the counterpunch, jumping back and stinging you on the way. Boxers that don't want to engage are very hard to chase down. Boxers that are well skilled will not give you a free chance to bridge, most likely you'll have to pay a toll to get close enough. The best strategy against boxers in my experience, is to feign weakness, and fight them when they come in for the kill.

As for leg strength, like any "bouncing" fighter, even the lightest interfering nudges and pokes at their feet puts their footwork off and then they have to recover, this presents another opportunity to break their defense.

I'm not scared of kickers for the most part, but boxers are the most formidible opponents I've ever played with. Never underestimate their ability to take hits, or deliver solid strikes.

[hasayfu]

SevenStar responded to my post (comments in bold):
(Re: my lack of boxing experience)having said this, do you really want to do this:
Sure. I know my limits and put them out there. I like to discuss openly.

(Re: following a jab) I wouldn't, unless I were changing my level, lowering to avoid that oncoming cross. Even still, you don't want to anticipate, or you may run right into something else.
Bridging is not anticipating. If I'm coming in, it's because I have some control. Like Yumcha said, press/sink the arm. Lot's of retracting energy to bridge with but you need to be good to pull it off. So that "something else" should be felt or controlled. I speak of this from experience but I fully admit these are not world class boxers. Then again, I am not a world class HG guy.

this big punch isn't a slow punch. I don't think you'd be able to easily bridge it, either.
The jab is not hard to bridge because it is fast. It is hard to bridge because there is not a steady direction of energy. It comes out and then goes back. The big punch, by definition, is more committed and gives something to work with.

One note, jabs are not really that new. Leopard strikes have a similar characteristic. Meant to go in and come out quickly. What's new is the connection to the light footwork.

boxers are by no means vulnerable in the clinch. ever hear the term "dirty boxing"? It refers to using the shoulders, elbows and other nasty things in the clinch. Refs break the clinch up in a bout, but you can bet they are all used to training there.
I'll defer to your knowledge there. The boxers I've worked with do not train this since it is illegal and the Ref will call them on it but these are more friendly boxers. Seeing pure boxers in MMA comps lead me to believe otherwise as well.

Let me end by saying, fighting is very individual. I'm in no way implying that I can beat any boxer. In fact, the ones that I've gotten good shots on have also done their share of damage back. The original question was just about whether the bridging concepts of old still apply with today's boxer. The answer is yes and as always, it's up to the skill of the fighter.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by hasayfu

Bridging is not anticipating. If I'm coming in, it's because I have some control. Like Yumcha said, press/sink the arm. Lot's of retracting energy to bridge with but you need to be good to pull it off. So that "something else" should be felt or controlled. I speak of this from experience but I fully admit these are not world class boxers. Then again, I am not a world class HG guy.

you misunderstood what I was saying here. I wasn't talking about bridging at all with the anticipation comment. I said "I wouldn't, unless I were changing my level, lowering to avoid that oncoming cross."... the anticipation comment was in reference to that. Don't lower your level in anticipation of a right cross, because you may run into another strike, or make yourself even more susceptible to his cross.


One note, jabs are not really that new. Leopard strikes have a similar characteristic. Meant to go in and come out quickly. What's new is the connection to the light footwork.

true.

[Pork Chop]

Pretty intelligent thread.
I like Yum Cha's post.
Some of the others were good as well.
Some of the others I didn't dig too much.
It's kind of interesting to see who's actually spent a significant amount of time with the people they're making observations about.

Yum Cha's answer to the jab (chum lik) is very similar to the southpaw's approach to handling an orthodox boxer; just gotta be careful for the fake coz he can catch you committing to that action.

It's pretty easy to see from taped footage that parrying does work in boxing; but that parrying requires a soft touch, not a hard slap.
I could see a lot of kung fu bridging working with jabs, if it were trained in that soft, fast, relaxed manner. In otherwords, committing may slow you down too much, but you may be able to accomplish what you want with a more delicate touch.

With the more committed punches, yah, you've got more rooted force to work with, so a more committed bridge would be more successful.

I could go into more specifics; but I'm not really trying to sit on a soap box & tie up too much board space. I will say Boxing has a lot on reading the commitment in the other guy, so staying as non-committed as possible for as long as possible, will be more successful.

I think more importantly you guys are starting a dialogue. It'd be dope to see more go out and play with some boxers for themselves- that'll only make us all better. :)