PDA

View Full Version : Jack Dempsey's "Championship Fighting"



anerlich
10-28-2005, 10:27 PM
Victor, you asked:

Championship Fighting – Explosive Punching and Aggres(s)ive Defence

By Jack Dempsey

This book is a classic of Western Boxing. The liner blurb on my copy describes it as “the most thorough study ever made by any prominent fighter of his own techniques.” Bruce Lee’s Tao of Jeet Kune Do includes much material based on the book and its approach.

While I have practiced Wing Chun for over sixteen years, I started my martial arts training in an eclectic system. My then instructor, David Crook, whose father was a British Army boxing champion and judo instructor, and himself attained dan ranks in Goju karate and Ju Jitsu prior to taking up CMA, impressed on me the value of different martial arts, and, more importantly, the value of an open mind. . Seeking out the parallels and differences between arts is a fascinating subject for me. I believe it is the teacher, not the particular art, that is of paramount importance, and that most arts share a good deal with others. I believe this to be true of Traditional Wing Chun and the technical approach to boxing described in Jack Dempsey’s book.

While (too) many dismiss boxing as “only a sport”, because their concern is allegedly for “real fights”, JD takes pains to describe his perceptions of the differences and similarities between “Fist-Fighting and Boxing”, and why his heavy emphasis on knockout blows with either hand is the best defence, be it in the ring or elsewhere. He briefly discusses strategies for the pavement arena.

The large majority of the book is on how to punch correctly and punch hard (I count thirteen chapters on punching, four on defence, out of a total twenty-five). JD expounds on the primacy of straight punching, using a vertical fist, striking with the bottom three knuckles, the “power line” of the “pure punch” going through the knuckle of the ring finger, to maximise both the impact power of the punch and the structural integrity of the striking limb. Both jab and cross are one shot KO’s in JD’s method, none of those light pepper jabs to score points. No one keeps score in a real fist fight.

... cont'd

anerlich
10-28-2005, 10:28 PM
Stance and footwork are similar to what TWC would be were there no neutral stances, and you fought predominantly or exclusively on one side, except that the boxer will tend to “sit down” on that punch a little more, perhaps rising his rear heel. More complex footwork such as the T step and exchange step are missing, though arguably they are unnecessary for a one-sided fighter.

A practitioner from a back foot weighted lineage would probably find the stepping and footwork discussions less useful than a person from TWC or other “50/50” lineages, but the discussion of the punch itself is universally applicable.

The hook, and the making of it into a “pure punch” are discussed after the lengthy dissertation on the straight punch and its supremacy. The body movement behind the elbow strikes in the TWC Bil Jee share much with JD’s approach to the hook; indeed he encourages the student to learn the correct hooking mechanics by throwing elbow strikes first, and then opening the elbow slightly to allow the hook punch to follow a similar path. In the TWC form and the relevant dummy sets elbows are performed in more of a downward angle, but otherwise similar mechanics apply.

While strategy in defence varies somewhat – A WC practitioner would seek contact with an opponent’s limbs in order to control him, while a boxer would regard evasion and counterpunching as technically superior. Much is made of WC’s structural superiority due to “simultaneous defense and attack”, but accomplished boxers were counterstriking on the slip and on the weave before the West even heard of Wing Chun. An old Kung Fu saying has it that “Beginners block and then hit, intermediate students block and hit simultaneously, masters just hit” – and it could be argued that evading a punch while counterstriking is more efficient (that WC catchword) than, say, parrying with one hand and striking with the other. JD himself regards blocking as least efficient, deflection (another WC catchword) as superior, and evasion and counterpunching as the superior strategy.

cont'd...

anerlich
10-28-2005, 10:29 PM
But he describes both blocking and deflection in considerable detail. Look here and you can see the energy of pak, larp and garn in the prescribed parries. There’s more Wing Chun in that there boxing …

JD is an articulate and thoughtful writer, and uses many an interesting turn of phrase or anecdote from his own career and those of his predecessors and contemporaries to illustrate his points. The information on training is of course dated and lacks the scientific background of modern sport science, but that criticism is applicable to a sizable section of TCMA practitioners and is this of minor relevance in my opinion.

It is my belief that most WC practitioners, whose tuition generally comes from an Eastern-oriented mindset and conceptual base, would benefit from the detailed analysis of how to strike powerfully and effectively using a technical base close to their own, from the viewpoint of a twentieth century Western master of pugilism.

Unfortunately “Championship Fighting” is out of print and has been for a long time. Expensive copies are available on Ebay and elsewhere. However, a transcript of the chapters three through nineteen, which include the entire discussion on punching, is available on the web at

http://www.lousy.org/budo/local/dempsey/dempsey.html

Unfortunately these pages do not include the splendid pen and ink drawings that accompanied the original.

sihing
10-28-2005, 11:23 PM
Just to respond to the evasion vs. parry/strike method, IMO since my method of WC is very strongly based on TWC, we do allot of evasion in our movements, but combined with parrying also, with the idea behind the parry being 1) to stay in contact to feel the opponents next movements all the while controling in any signifigant way the opponents limbs, and 2) back up in case the evasion footwork was not sufficient. For example, the standard Pak da technique movement involves more than just a Pak sao and punch, but employs footwork to also enable one to evade the blow simulataneously while using Pak sao to deflect and interupt the opponents strike and retraction of the strike. At any time I could disgard the pak sao all together and just strike and evade, if I chose to do so, but IMO the added movement is there for my safety and risk management.

I agree with the idea of "Stop Hitting" as the attack comes towards us as the ultimate way of defense, Jeet Kune Do in essence, with simultaneous striking and defending as the second best way of defense. Unfortunately "Stop hitting" is not always possible and requires a high level of perception/timing skills.

James

chisauking
10-29-2005, 03:32 AM
All the good wing chun fighters had always attack directly, without the need to make contact first. It goes without saying, that the contact reflex response only comes into play if a direct attack is intercepted. Of course, most would know that a direct hit is not always possible, although we should subconsciously aim for it.

Ultimatewingchun
10-29-2005, 07:37 AM
Andrew:

First of all, thanks for the thread. Secondly...thanks for an EXCELLENT thread so far. ;)

I downloaded the material that is available, and will start reading it over this weekend.

There's a whole bunch of things you've written so far that I'd like to comment on; but for now, I'll just mention a few:

the idea about just hitting and allow your defense to be evasion - as being superior to simultaneous block-and-hit...and this being superior to first block, and then hit.

While I agree with the hierarchy listing, and that the first option is the best, I'm sure you agree that it's not always an option, and so the other strategies and tactics have to be part of one's arsenal...

especially so in a NHB situation, wherein your opponent might be going for a tie-up, a grab, a shoot to the legs, a mid body takedown, etc. - and it might be difficult if not impossible to stop his attempt to take the fight to the clinch (or near clinch) mode.

Loved the part about the vertical straight punch being the best punch, and the importance of having real knockout power in virtually every punch you throw.

I have a Jack Dempsey fight on video somewhere - got to look at it again!

Will have more to say later.

Again - awesome thread!!!:cool:

Airdrawndagger
10-29-2005, 08:07 AM
Thanks for sharing the ideas in JD book.
I agree, many martial arts share common bonds between them. Especially when people of different styles glove up and spar. Then everyones style becomes kickboxing!

Seriously though,
With any analisis of any style you have ideals and you have reality. The difficulty lies in closing the gap between the two. That should be the challenge for any practitioner of any style.

Train Hard.

Ricky
aka AirDrawnDagger
Jacky Tsang Ving Tsun

Taff
10-29-2005, 09:13 AM
Unfortunately “Championship Fighting” is out of print and has been for a long time. Expensive copies are available on Ebay and elsewhere. However, a transcript of the chapters three through nineteen, which include the entire discussion on punching, is available on the web at

http://www.lousy.org/budo/local/dempsey/dempsey.html

Unfortunately these pages do not include the splendid pen and ink drawings that accompanied the original.

Unfortunately, none of the links on that page seem to work.

IRONMONK
10-29-2005, 12:01 PM
you can download chapters(scanned pages from the book) from this site:

http://www.fulcrumfitness.com/public/dempseybook/

anerlich
10-29-2005, 07:28 PM
Unfortunately, none of the links on that page seem to work

Sorry about that, he seems to be linking incorrectly back to Stickgrappler's page, where the transcript was originally.

If you change the link and put the chapter numbers after like


http://www.lousy.org/budo/local/dempsey/dempsey3.html

thru

http://www.lousy.org/budo/local/dempsey/dempsey19.html

that should work.

Victor, I agree with regards to what is best and what you need when what is best ain't available. That's why JD recommends the 3 "layers".

James is right about evasion in WC, esp. with the pak sao. One potential problem her against a boxer is if you try to go to the outside of a jab with a lazy pak sao, esp. one that drops down after contact, that gives him an almost perfect setup for the lead hook off the jab. Not saying it can't be done, only that it has to be done properly.

csk: I agree with you, but I read a fairly long article by Keith Kernspecht once that advocated that responding to the other guy's attack was in fact a superior strategy. I guess there's a fair bit of syntactic hair splitting we could go into as to what constitutes a "direct attack".

BTW, I'm not advocating JD's work as superior to, or a replacement for, WC techniques and strategy. IMO it provides interesting parallels and a different viewpoint for looking at what we do in a broader sense.

sihing
10-29-2005, 11:20 PM
Sorry about that, he seems to be linking incorrectly back to Stickgrappler's page, where the transcript was originally.

If you change the link and put the chapter numbers after like


http://www.lousy.org/budo/local/dempsey/dempsey3.html

thru

http://www.lousy.org/budo/local/dempsey/dempsey19.html

that should work.

Victor, I agree with regards to what is best and what you need when what is best ain't available. That's why JD recommends the 3 "layers".

James is right about evasion in WC, esp. with the pak sao. One potential problem her against a boxer is if you try to go to the outside of a jab with a lazy pak sao, esp. one that drops down after contact, that gives him an almost perfect setup for the lead hook off the jab. Not saying it can't be done, only that it has to be done properly.

csk: I agree with you, but I read a fairly long article by Keith Kernspecht once that advocated that responding to the other guy's attack was in fact a superior strategy. I guess there's a fair bit of syntactic hair splitting we could go into as to what constitutes a "direct attack".

BTW, I'm not advocating JD's work as superior to, or a replacement for, WC techniques and strategy. IMO it provides interesting parallels and a different viewpoint for looking at what we do in a broader sense.

Well for a couple of guys that usually end up buttin heads when it comes to things WC, I'm glad to hear some agreement on this thread. Good discussion Gentlemen...

James

anerlich
10-30-2005, 03:39 AM
Well for a couple of guys that usually end up buttin heads when it comes to things WC, I'm glad to hear some agreement on this thread.

Same here.

lawrenceofidaho
10-30-2005, 02:02 PM
csk: I agree with you, but I read a fairly long article by Keith Kernspecht once that..........
FWIW, Keith Kernspecht extensively refers to Dempsey in his book "On Single Combat" in regards to; structure, alignment, etc. of vertical fist punches and their effective qualities.

Escrima Master, Rene Latosa, also borrows from Dempsey's thought in regards to power generation, mechanics, etc.

IMO, all WT / Latosa Escrima folks should refer to Dempsey's work to fully understand their systems (and so should anyone else who wishes a well-rounded combative education.)

-Lawrence

Edmund
10-30-2005, 05:21 PM
I have a Jack Dempsey fight on video somewhere - got to look at it again!


Be interested to hear your thoughts because I've caught some old footage of him on ESPN and I gotta say it didn't look to me like he threw very straight usually.

Ultimatewingchun
10-30-2005, 08:02 PM
Just watched a boxing documentary I have; in particular, I looked at the segment all about Jack Dempsey. Saw segments of a whole bunch of his fights...against Jess Willard, against Georges Carpentier, against Jack Sharkey, and both his fights against Gene Tunney.

First of all, the guy was ferocious. But Edmund is right - he throws very few truly straight lead hand punches, and almost none of them with a vertical fist. Yes...an occasional horizontal straight lead punch from a distance - like a VERY stiff jab...but MOSTLY he throws lots of hooks, fairly straight horizontal rear crosses, uppercuts, and overhand looping bombs with either hand - usually from a crouch, and with very evasive bobbing and weaving tactics while almost always trying to come in.

His style was clearly very similar to (and perhaps even copied by?) the likes of some great boxers who came after him, such as Marciano, Tyson, Frazier, Duran, etc.

The only man I mentioned who beat him was Gene Tunney (in both fights); and curiously enough, it was Tunney who punched much straighter than Dempsey, but with a lot more evasive and up-on-his-toes type of footwork. (Makes you wonder where Ali got some of his ideas from?! And I should mention the fact, for what it's worth, that Bruce Lee read all of Tunney's boxing books, refers to his material quite extensively in the Tao of JKD; and if my memory serves me right - Bruce also spent some time discussing boxing with Tunney's son).

Tunney seemed to be able to use footwork and a stiff straight lead of his own to neutralize Dempsey's circular attacks from a crouch (lead hooks, overhand crosses, and uppercuts) by stepping in and punching FIRST - and often then tying Dempsey up. (Creating a bridge?! ;) ).

Just some thoughts.

anerlich
10-30-2005, 08:51 PM
good post Vic.

BTW, the Gene Tunney website is great:

www.genetunney.com

Mr Punch
10-31-2005, 07:10 AM
Cheers Anerlich, that Tunney site looks good.

I love the Dempsey one. This one (http://www.sandowplus.co.uk/Macfadden/MuscleBuilder/Feb25/mb-Feb25-01.htm) is nowhere near as good but has an article about Dempsey's weight training faves. Enjoy (especially the pics and headlines!)

lawrenceofidaho
11-02-2005, 10:31 PM
Here's Dempsey demonstrating the line of the vertical fist punch....... -L