Thing that took you ages to learn about boxing...

I'll start. When I first started watching boxing, I figured that the most important thing you could have was power, because I thought that it was all about hurting your opponent. I also saw absolutely no utility in the jab, because it wasn't a punch that could really hurt your opponent. Now I realize that there is nothing more important in boxing than having a great jab. Let's examine how many different styles can be completely neutralized with a jab complete with examples: Speed: If a fighter can time a jab into a speedy fighter, their speed will do them no good, because no matter how quick they are, they are going to have an extremely difficult time being quicker than a fighter with an excellent jab. Examples: Winky Wright vs. Shane Mosley, Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Oscar De La Hoya (when De La Hoya got the jab going, Floyd wasn't doing much). Power: Since a power fighter loads up with almost every punch, the jabber can quickly stick the jab out and fuck up the rhythm of the power puncher. Examples: Winky Wright vs. Felix Trinidad, Mikkel Kessler vs. Librado Andrade, Oscar De La Hoya vs. Felix Trinidad. Volume Punchers: If the jabber gets it going, it will keep the volume puncher at range, and most likely limit them to one punch at a time, which will completely take them out of their game plan. Although the jab can limit the output of a volume puncher, it usually is not a completely dominant performance, no matter how well the jabber does. Examples: Winky Wright vs. Sam Soliman, Nate Campbell vs. Juan Diaz, Oscar De La Hoya vs. Ike Quartey (I think De La Hoya did play the role of the volume puncher in that fight). What other things in boxing took you forever to learn?

Comments (19)

Dynamite_Kid

Something that took me a while to figure out was that feints are more effective than a lot punches. I watched at an early age, so it took a while for me to fully see and understand it. It allows you to change up your timing, but know what you're doing in there. Changes up the other guys timing when it off-sets him. Allows you to counter, when he swings thinking that you're coming in. Allows you to control the pace of the fight if you're able to feint him into allowing you to make the first move. Even if the first move is you allowing him to punch first, it's still you dictating the action. yeah i agree 100% Feints are so important in Boxing especially if u are facing a good counter puncher who relies on timing u ,if u are an offensive fighter u MUST use feints Feints are good for defence aswell cause u can get your oponent to lead to u then counter one of my favourite feints is when Roy Jones Flicks out a lazy jab out then leaps in behind it with a left hook IE Montell Griffin 2 ,Thornton

18y ago

tyson

Boxing is good like that.. Manny Steward despite his flaws as a trainer is an extremely versed guy in the art of modern Boxing. He makes comments occasionally that I can hear Lampley and Merchant audibly reacting to in empty space. New things, things they have never heard - and these guys have heard it all so to speak.. Recently Steward commented how Pavlik throws his jab as a "smokescreen" to block the view of his opponents from seeing the incoming right hand. You could hear the other guys going "...hmm.." in silence. Then there was Manny talking about the now extremely annoying themed "check hook" thing, which he referred to in the 2nd or 3rd round - and Floyd later stutter repeated to Larry Merchant in post fight.. Who was on that? Nobody? Occasionally kiddies on here will say that so-and-so doesn't know shit about Boxing.. There was a time when I used to think I was really clever at this shit - and I guess I am, ahem.. However, I didn't understand how Ron Borges, or Ivan Goldman, or Bert Sugar, or whoever, could be sooo wrong about predicting certain outcomes.. I thought man are they stupid, and man am I smart! But you have to get to a certain level of this shit to understand that there a billion factors involved, every time, and lessons of the past can be very confusing messages in the future.. This game is a mystery. The more you learn, the less you know. The less you know, the more you know. The more you know, the less you learn.. This shit is a motherfucker, basically. Fuck me this is outstanding writing^^ "There is always a factor infinite & unknown" When will these people learn that? :beerchug:

18y ago

Scott9945

Explain your reasoning by that cliche. Do you even know how that statement got started. Casamayor is more skilled than Katsidis so what are you saying. Give past fights to explain your reasoning and I can give you some that put that reasoning to rest. DWiens did a very good job of explaining this. Casamayor is as skilled as any lightweight, but one who would make him use his legs more would expose his age and high mileage. If Casamayor were five years younger it wouldn't matter, but he is at the end of his prime and Katsidis was like a fountain of youth to him. Santa Cruz may have gotten KO'd by Katsidis, since he was stopped by David Diaz. DWiens gave some good examples, and there are plenty more. Like the Ali/Norton/Foreman matches for example. Norton's style always gave Ali trouble, but Foreman walked right through him. So Foreman goes into that fight as a 3-1 favorite and Ali has the right style to make him look foolish.

18y ago

Addison

18y ago

sanga

how the hell did pacquiao become great with his style of fighting? what made ali a great boxer and why hasnt anyone tried to copy his style?

18y ago

Fox_McCloud

Explain your reasoning by that cliche. Do you even know how that statement got started. Casamayor is more skilled than Katsidis so what are you saying. Give past fights to explain your reasoning and I can give you some that put that reasoning to rest. I think he meant that Casamayor looked about 3 years younger than he is because he played the role of the counterpuncher against the straight ahead fighter. If he fought a skilled fighter like Nate Campbell, Casamayor would likely look like shit and lose a wide decision. The reason that styles make fights can be proven is the whole welterweight linear championship line... Oscar De La Hoya loses to Shane Mosley (twice) Shane Mosley loses to Vernon Forrest (twice) Vernon Forrest loses to Ricardo Mayorga (twice) Now, was that whole line reflected when De La Hoya fought Mayorga for the title? It was the controlled aggression that Oscar used to beat Mayorga that proves that it is styles that do influence fights, and quite a bit, because that bloodline of the championship would see to indicate that Mayorga would have crippled Oscar within a couple of rounds.

18y ago

Scott9945

I like to say fighters make fights. Because just because a fighter uses a particular style that many think will be effective it doesnt mean that fighter will win. Katsidis was winning on two cards despite being knocked down multiple times, he lost not because of his style but because he was reckless at a time when it mattered most or he more than likely would have won. Casamayor looked like crap against Santa Cruz for many reasons, first, he was off for a long time, second, Santa Cruz has way bigger and had extremely long arms, third, he was a sparring partner for Casamayor many times and knew Casamayor, fourth, Casamayor didnt get up for him since he KNEW him from sparring. Casamayor is close to shot, despite what the frontrunning media would have you believe. If Katsidis didn't fight with a hyper aggressive style, Joel would be an ex-champion today. There are always other reasons for a fight result, but the bottom line is that styles make fights.

18y ago

Fox_McCloud

I thought it was easy to train hard and overpower or out-grit your opponent. Then I faced skill. Lesson learned. Then I thought speed would kill. Then I met Timing. Lesson learned again. After that, I figured careful pressure and stalking was the way forward. Say hello to Jab. Ali made me believe fancy footwork was the shit. Still hate the Bodywork-fucker. Then I figured natural talent was the real difference between me and everyone else. Good morning, Experience! Shit, swarming and outworking was the real answer! Never want to meet Mr. Counter again... I figured counter-style would be tha bomb. Holy shit, never thought there would excist someone called Feint! After all my failings, I got injured and fucked off into Bolivian (:D) for 4 years. Meanwhile, I had learned my lesson... Intelligence is the name of the game. I wish I could give you karma. Great post.

18y ago

tyson

18y ago

Antonio

Cutting off the ring.

18y ago

Scott9945

Styles make fights. Don't let anyone tell you different. Most recent case, a presumably washed up Casamayor taking out unbeaten tiger Katsidis. A lanky counterpuncher like Santa Cruz made Casamayor look old. Hard charging Katsidis played right into his strengths. Boxing history will show countless examples of similar scenarios.

18y ago

shadeyfizzle

That feints...when learned properly are the most dangerous thing boxing. Even moreso than a good jab. To truly appreciate good feints...you have to actually step into a ring. Growing up watching boxing i never understood why sometimes a fighter would half-extend his arm and pull it back as if he was thinking about throwing but never commited to it. Over the years i learned it was a half-ass feint..but even the ones that looked like good fakes on tv..i never understood why you wouldnt commit to a punch because i saw it as a waste of energy. But after spending some time in a gym i got my answer...and boy was it ever an answer. A halfass feint pretty much do nothing but disrupt your opponent's timing for a split second. A good feint thrown with bad intentions however does so much more. With how fast your heartrate is..and the speed that body parts are moving..especially in later rounds..good feints will make it seem that your opponent's punch output has doubled or tripled and that although seemingly impossible..that he is fighting with 6 hands cuz you have no idea which punches are real anymore and what direction it is coming from. I dont care what style you have..whether it's speed,volume,power, counterpuncher...whatever!! You are not gonna win a boxing match with an opponent with 6 hands and is able to hit you with all of them. It is the hardest thing to learn in boxing and is the most underutilized/underdeveloped technique in boxing even at the highest levels

18y ago

Boogie_Nights

HEART AND WILL, 90% is inside, the other 10% is the whole physical gear

18y ago

T97

lol i thought that title fights were rare! :D :rofl: That was a dumbass one lol

18y ago

rj_ct

1. gatti isn't/wasn't god (yeah, fuck you. dude was my idol and is still my favorite fighter, SO BACK OFF). 2. pound for pound means nothing. 3. ring ratings mean nothing you learn new stuff about this sport all the time.

18y ago

THe_TRiNiTY

18y ago

The_Next_Champ

i overlooked the mental factor.......you have to b controlled when u get hit

18y ago

BattlingNelson

No views... at all... :( One overlooked part is footwork, because you dont really see it. Great footwork puts you in position to punch your opponent and giving him angles where he cannot be effective. Great footwork easily neutralizes power so if I should choose a special capacity in the ring I'll take footwork over power any day.

18y ago

Fox_McCloud

No views... at all... :(

18y ago