Boxing and Kung Fu.

[red5angel]

I agree, no problems! I thin I follow you now.

[Merryprankster]

So, basically, that's where I was going with this R5A:

Many people degrade boxing as somehow relying on physical attributes for effectiveness. However, I think we're both in agreement that:

1. Physical attributes play a big role in a fight.
2. Maximizing use of those attributes is the name of the game and that is done with proper technique.

Based on that, is it safe to say we are in agreement that a boxing punch does not "rely" on physical strength, just like, a Wing Chun punch does not "rely" on physical strength?

I realize the application/execution of the strike might be different, but that's not really what I'm talking about right now.

[Ray Pina]

Ability: how high are you able to jump, how fast can you run, how much weight are you able to lift. This is detremined by ones God given features. What you start off with.

Now, ones ability can be increased with technique, that is skill.

But a 110 lbs pound guy will not be ABLE enough to compete with a 280lbs guy in a pushing match -- unless he has some technology.

The way of competitive boxing, the rules are sort of set up to keep it fair, which outlowas certain tricks or skills one has developed to overcome that difference in God given ability.

As a side note, boxers, because they tape up, have bad wrists.

I would say the same thing about Hung Gar to a point, at least lower to mid level Hung gar; Earth and Water elements, thrown out by a 120 lbs guy, won't be too affective. A 200 lbs guy puts his weight into bringing that around and look out.

Size does matter no doubt. Now, does that mean that I or you can't beat a bigger guy? No, of coarse. I have and do and I'm sure you have and do and will. But that is techique. Different from ability. The bigger men I have fought had the ABILITY to pick me up and power drive me. I did not have the ABILITY to lift them or topple them. But, by skill or techique, being ABLE to not allow their ABILITY to be a factor, score that chin shot, that;s the difference.

Boxing by nature has a lot of trading. A 110 lbs trading blows with a 210 lbs, noway. Not goiung to happen. Of coarse the sun shines on a dog's a$$ every now and then. But for the most part, the smaller man will have to have a lot more skill.

[Merryprankster]

E-fist.

ok. So your point is that a 110 lb guy is going to need more skill than a 220 lb guy if the 110 lb guy is to win.

Is that different in any other art? I mean, I think that's pretty universal.

I don't understand how that applies to boxing technique not being (or being, if that's your particular viewpoint) reliant on strength for effectiveness.

I mean, let's face it... a 110 lb man is going to have a hard time of it with a 220 lb guy no matter what he studies, unless he is VASTLY more skilled than his opponent.

[red5angel]

MP, are you a boxer?
I for one think Boxing is simple as far as martial arts go, but elegant that way. Its even simpler then WC, and WC is simple!
Now dont get me wrong, its simple like chess, easy to learn, hard to master.
I dont think Strength has anything to do with the technical side of boxing. If you had great skill in boxing that may allow you to hold off a larger stronger opponent. This is true in any art. I think if someone is degrading boxing it is probably because they do not truly understand it.
It is easy to stand on the sidelines and say that sucks or that could be done differently but to do it gives you insight into the hidden complexities of anything.

[red5angel]

Sorry for the confusion there MP, just needed to make sure we were on the same page. I see a lot of critical statements being made about martial arts, and a lot of it is really just unfounded guess work.

[Merryprankster]

I do box. Not well, but I box.

Now, I agree with what you've said.

What I'm SPECIFICALLY trying to avoid is the "comparison of weapons."

Boxing is far from a complete art. I would never claim that. It IS, however, a complete PUNCHING art. Sure, there are some punches in other styles you don't see in boxing, but boxing carries with it a complete fight strategy, as long as you are talking about hand strikes. That again, though, is another thread.

And you are right--if somebody thinks strength is what "makes the boxing punch," they don't know much about it.

[red5angel]

MP, I think you may have made that statement a few days ago and I have never heard a more true statement.
As for Boxing, well I dont know enough to know its strategies. I know it has been a sport for a long long time, and that can sometimes lead to a pretty narrow approach.
If someone were to say that boxing were an incomplete art, I am not sure I would agree. It may not have takedowns and grappling, or how to deal with them but like you stated, it has a complete fighting strategy. this to me makes it as complete as it is meant to be. I t accomplishes exactly what it needs to, if it did not then we would be watching ultimate fighting or whatever.
I would even say that it is street effective. I had a friend who was a boxer by hobby. He had a temper and one time I pushed him too far, I was going to tackle him because I could see he was getting ****ed. Giving him a charlie horse usually settled him down (dont ask). Anyway, he jabbed quick and got me right in the lip, put me down! I think in the street a good fighter has a very strong chance, even against someone trained.

[Merryprankster]

Well, I'm not sure that it has a Complete fight strategy, but it's got a complete punching strategy, that's for certain

Yes... boxers are respectable opponents.

[Ray Pina]

I thought we were talking about boxing. My opinion would be the same with Hung Gar and Wing chun as well, even Hsing-I, becayse that stle is very forcefull.

It begins to chnage with Taichi and Ba Gua though, because you should not oppose the force. Of coarse its hard to stop the force of a large man, just as hard as not to have that force reach you, but this is the focus of those arts. That's why they maintain a fighting ability to older age, its not built on ability, speed, stremght, though it helps.

Its like guerilla warfare. Numbers does not matter. Now, if you line them up head to head, ala, revolutionary war. Then numbers matter.

But if you are not there, it doesn;t matter. Of coarse, easier said then done, and I am not there. I have felt it through my teacher, who is older and smaller then myself. If I could be that good of a fighter when I am 60, I'd be a very happy man.

[apoweyn]

evolutionfist,

i see what you mean about ability vs. skill. that was a question of vocabulary.

cheers.


stuart b.

[Merryprankster]

Next time I parry a punch, rather than absorbing the shot, take the angle and counter, I'll remember it's force on force.

The reason these guys maintain their fighting ability is because, unlike boxers, they don't look to compete all the time. Competing is rather hard on the body. I'm not saying a good Tai Chi or Ba Gua man can't fight, I'm saying that they don't train for it day in and day out, fighting every few weeks. That's the reality of MOST good boxers, not the one or two fights a year thing.

Wrestling and Judo work on using leverage, timing and proper body mechanics to attack and counter by redirecting attacks all the time. But they are usually not competitive past their mid 30's.

It has everything to do with the wear and tear of competition, the degredation of your body's capabilities from age.

Create a competitive Ba Gua or Tai Chi circuit with the same level of talent and number of competitors, and I guarentee that the same physical problems would surface.

But, to steer this back, are you saying that boxing technique is just as strength based as other "forceful" styles? I'm just trying to clear it up.

[Mr. Nemo]

"Create a competitive Ba Gua or Tai Chi circuit with the same level of talent and number of competitors, and I guarentee that the same physical problems would surface."

Merryprankster is correct. This is the key point, I feel.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Boxing's power--NOT fundamentally attribute based.

Ok, what I mean by the thread title is this: You read a LOT of stuff about how western boxing and competitive arts in general, rely on physical attributes for performance.

This is, at best, wildly inaccurate, and at worst, utter crap.

I believe the reason that this perception exists is because boxing,
wrestling, etc, are practiced as competitive sports. At high levels of competition, the skill level is high. At this point, physical attributes "make or break." Your technique will only get you so far without honing your physical attributes to complement your personal style. So, physical attributes tend to be emphasized as much as skill. Because this physical conditioning is so vital to competitive success, some people make the incorrect leap that "it's more about physical attributes," forgetting the
long, long hours engaged in repetitive drilling at different speeds to hone technique, timing, flow, etc.

All else equals, the big guy wins. I've heard this from all my CMA teachers.

Now, the above is more of an aside, and probably worthy of its own separate thread. But it leads into the next point:

The power in boxing is no more fundamentally attribute based than the power generated in any strike from any art.

I will use as my example, a straight right thrown by an orthodox fighter.

The straight right begins at the rear foot. The foot pivots on the ball of the foot, pushing on the ground, generating torque in the rear leg. This opens up the hip so it is more or less square to your opponent, then the shoulders come around. The spine should be naturally straight, neither bent over at the waist, hunched badly, nor unnaturally stiff. While this is happenning, the right arm is being extended and turned over. At the end of
the movement, the structure created is more or less stiff. That is, a direct push on the fist will be transferred all the way through your body to the rear foot on the ground. I realize that some argue about the palm down or vertical fist. Different argument for a different thread.

I can personally tell when I have executed it really well when, at the moment of contact, I feel a big "push" in the ball of my rear foot.

The strength is rooted in the foot, launched by the legs, directed by the waist, passed through the shoulder, and expressed through the fingers.

Now, does the power come from all the massive amounts of strength I'm using? The answer is no. The use of strength (using too much "shoulder") can compensate somewhat for improper structure, but you will rapidly tire (not to mention be slow). Instead, the power of the straight right comes from
two things--speed of execution, and proper structure at the moment of impact.

The classics warn us against the use of clumsy strength.

Proper structure, as outlined above, comes from proper body alignment, which in turn, creates "stiffness" from the floor to the fist. This structure is stable and does not give. If the structure is not stiff, then it gives at the moment of impact, and power is not transfered to the target as efficiently as it might be, depending on the amount of give.

Qi passes through the body as a string through the 9 curved pearl

Speed comes from looseness in the body. If you are tight, you move slowly. It's that simple. So, in order to optimize your speed, you have to remain relaxed and loose...until the moment of impact, when everything is nice and stiff.

The body is soft, like a baby. The power is like the cracking of a whip

So, the power in the punch comes from how quickly you can align your body to attain that rigid structure. And that speed comes only from being relaxed until the moment of impact. It's not a matter of muscle strength or just banging away. It's proper body mechanics.

Internally practice the Qi, Externally practice movement

When the internal and the external are united, this is the six directions. When the six harmonies are mastered, thsi is the six ferocities.

The above was not meant to say that all punching mechanics are fundamentally the same at their core (I happen to think they are, but that's a different topic). It does however, demonstrate that the power generation is NOT due primarily to attributes, and rather on executing the proper technique in a bio-mechanically efficient way.

[Merryprankster]

Oh wow. You mean power generation is analgous. geez.