What is your opinion on this stance?

El Terrible switched up at times are you talking about Morales? Did he ever looked good while doing that?

El Terrible switched up at times

"Converted" fighters seem to be better at switching. Wonder if it is automatic or just cos they also trained in their "right" stance occasaionally. I don't think I ever seen anyone switching as smooth as Hagler did.

Ortiz and Cotto have better non lead hands than DLH. Hagler and Juan Manuel also fought in the southpaw stance but are natural righties. Lopez is a righty?

Ortiz and Cotto have better non lead hands than DLH. Hagler and Juan Manuel also fought in the southpaw stance but are natural righties.

Marvin Hagler was right handed but fought southpaw cause he said he wanted his stonger hand to be closer to his opponet. Mike tyson was a southpaw that fought orthodox. alot of fighters do it. its a matter of what make u confortable Appreciate the insight, I wasn't aware that both Hagler and Tyson fought opposite. I'm not even sure whether to call it opposite or not anymore, seems like it's just a stylistic preference.

So I've been thinking about this a lot lately. DLH and Cotto are both natural lefties who stand orthodox, Victor Ortiz is a natural righty who stands southpaw. DLH and Cotto have had much success with the left hook and Cotto has a hell of a jab, Ortiz finished mighty mike with a four punch sequence all coming from the right. So a few questions, who else is using or used this opposite theory in the past? What in your opinion(s) could be the weakness in this strategy? Does it take some bite away from the straight left or right when you put your strong hand/pimp hand forward? Is it more effective for a natural left handed fighter to go orthodox than for a right handed fighter to go southpaw? Marvin Hagler was right handed but fought southpaw cause he said he wanted his stonger hand to be closer to his opponet. Mike tyson was a southpaw that fought orthodox. alot of fighters do it. its a matter of what make u confortable

unless you got a good hook it's stupid to do. your most powerful punch will lose pop as the fight goes on because you have to keep jabbing with it and it will tire faster. Interesting point, I hadn't thought of that. Haha better hope that strong hand doesn't get tired.

unless you got a good hook it's stupid to do. your most powerful punch will lose pop as the fight goes on because you have to keep jabbing with it and it will tire faster.

Haha yea I agree that effectivness has more depth to it than just stance. I was thinking more along the lines of a right hander turned orthodox then the left hook would be very prevelant against another orthodox fighter. But what about someone like Victor Ortiz who stands southpaw, I guess I'm trying to figure out if it's easier for the southy to land a right hook or an orthodox to land the left hook basing the question off an orthodox opponent. Then I would have to assume that whoever can land the hook with more regularity would be the fighter who would benefit more from going opposite. Hah wow sorry if I jumbled that all up. u jumbled it up pretty good. the only conclusive thing one can say is that the leading hand should land harder and do more damage.

but ortiz made a lot of damage with that straight left. btw, on the amateurs ive seen this a lot lately. right handed with southpaw stances. but ortiz timed that shot perfectly. arnaoutis didnt see it coming.

dunno off the top of my head... alot of pinoys like going southpaw i remember reading somewhere obviously the straight-cross is weak most likely "effective" depends on more than just your stance Haha yea I agree that effectivness has more depth to it than just stance. I was thinking more along the lines of a right hander turned orthodox then the left hook would be very prevelant against another orthodox fighter. But what about someone like Victor Ortiz who stands southpaw, I guess I'm trying to figure out if it's easier for the southy to land a right hook or an orthodox to land the left hook basing the question off an orthodox opponent. Then I would have to assume that whoever can land the hook with more regularity would be the fighter who would benefit more from going opposite. Hah wow sorry if I jumbled that all up.

but ortiz made a lot of damage with that straight left. btw, on the amateurs ive seen this a lot lately. right handed with southpaw stances.

Damn, haha anyone? It helps a lot because it almost automatically gives you an effect jab. Although having your dominant hand forward will often make you a one handed fighter, see DLH. I think the traditional style is better, as you develop a solid jab to go with your power hand. Just my opinion, though.

So I've been thinking about this a lot lately. DLH and Cotto are both natural lefties who stand orthodox, Victor Ortiz is a natural righty who stands southpaw. DLH and Cotto have had much success with the left hook and Cotto has a hell of a jab, Ortiz finished mighty mike with a four punch sequence all coming from the right. So a few questions, who else is using or used this opposite theory in the past? dunno off the top of my head... alot of pinoys like going southpaw i remember reading somewhere What in your opinion(s) could be the weakness in this strategy? obviously the straight-cross is weak Does it take some bite away from the straight left or right when you put your strong hand/pimp hand forward? most likely Is it more effective for a natural left handed fighter to go orthodox than for a right handed fighter to go southpaw? "effective" depends on more than just your stance

Damn, haha anyone?