From pure physics point of view the most powerful punch is the straight cross, because of the leverage and because more stable body and arm position at the impact.
you raise a good point about the stable solid arm and body position at impact, but how is the leverage any better than the leverage of any other right handed punch they all have the same core mechanics that fuel a different arm position.........
pure physics point of view I would back the overhand. It utilizes most of your pulling muscles and is based on implosive power.
that's you tube science not real science, there are no explosions or implosions in boxing,
all muscles are pulling muscles, all muscles work when the muscle fibres contract or shrink/shorten, pulling the bones into whatever movement you do, even a push
id back the over hand long hook because it travels the longest distance, fact,
which allows it to build up more speed fact,
and you transfer the same bodyweight/slightly more due to the coming down with gravity arc, as well as the transfer of weight from foot to foot, fact
more weight and more speed = more power, fact
no, the straight has the arm locked, at the appropriate distance there is little to no give and it's resting on your shoulder, a right hook/overhand doesn't have the shoulder to fall back on.
helm u answer this, the brain dead trolls r tryin to get me lol,
Thanks Lil willy billy!
Your expertise and tremendous insight are just amazing. You certainly never had them itty bitty baby hands wrapped.
The hardest shots you throw are on your play station.
Best Regards,
Zaroku
haha the troll is now mad himself, you crack me up boy
The punch you don't see. The one that comes over or under your defense.
Hence boxers wanting different color gloves, one reason.
you guys don't have the brain power to become trolls, try something a little more your level, like finger painting, lol stupid retard/s
The punch you don't see. The one that comes over or under your defense.
Hence boxers wanting different color gloves, one reason.
you guys don't have the brain power to become trolls, try something a little more your level, like finger painting, lol stupid retards
No, the straight has the arm locked, at the appropriate distance there is little to no give and it's resting on your shoulder, a right hook/overhand doesn't have the shoulder to fall back on.
indeed it does, but the higher the speed the less structure is needed to deliver the power, that's partly why a mace on a chain hits harder than a mace on a pole
remember the chain mace has 0 structure behind it, the same weight also, but because its going much faster it causes a lot more damage
Yes the body movement is similar, but with the straight punch you can use your full leverage without losing balance and suffering the recoil.
Try to go against a wall and push with your fist or your palm against the wall while standing like you are trowing a right cross, you are able to push with your body weight very efficently
Now turn yourself a bit (or find a corner which protrudes out) and try to do the same with the hook position, it is more difficult to push against the wall and you tend to lose balance because you have no leverage on your side that can absorb the recoil and push against it
That means that with a right cross you can transfer almost all the kinetic energy to your target while crushing into it with your body weight and your back foot, while with the hook when you hit the target some of the energy comes back at you like a little recoil. (action - reaction)
I think I see what you mean, so its basically your body structure and its use of the ground that transmits the force produced more efficiently, and its this efficiency ie little loss of power that makes it the hardest punch in your estimate, since all right sided punches have a similar amount of force to begin with, the one that transmits that force with minimal wastage is the most powerful punch.
Do you mean coming forward with the punch almost like a step without taking a step, or do you mean forward drive from the rear leg/
I have a counter idea.
I think at high speeds and at a high level of power the kinetic energy behaves differently than it does at slow speeds for example when you push against a wall. I think/ know that power is transferred more efficiently at higher speeds so you don't need such a good structure behind the punch, I never find myself coming off balance when I throw a powerful hook although I do if I try to push in a hooking motion against the heavy bag.
On top of that the straight right is turning rotational force into linear force and I think some energy is lost there. Where as the hook is purely rotational.
Lastly theres a much longer time for the hook to build up speed, and more weight behind it if its the overhand version.
So I respectfully disagree, although who knows who is right. I look forward to your come back ]]]
Most power would be the punch landing with the highest speed, which is the right hand.
However its more complicated than that, thats going to be the highest power, but say a hook that lands differently and causes the head to rotate, that may cause more damage to the brain with less actual power.
what makes you think the right hand is landing at the highest speed/
It is not going to be the same punch for every boxer. I think on average the hardest punch is a straight right for a right hander or a straight left for a left hander. Hearns was a good example of a powerful straight right and Pacquiao has a great straight left but his left hook that almost killed Hatton is just as hard. A left hook from the right handed stance can be as hard as any punch. Cotto and the king of left hookers, Trinidad had murderous left hooks from the right handed stance and Oscar did also. They were all converted south paws.
great answer and example, that left hook with a slip almost killed hatton, but did pacmans straight left devastate anyone in the same way, the answer is no, isn't that evidence that suggests the rear hook is more powerful, esp since the straight left is such a often used and important punch for a southpaw and manny
Freddie says it hits with equal power to the straight left but I think he said that to sound correct, ie many experts tout the straight as the most powerful shot if its thrown properly which manny obviously does, I think he knows it hit harder but wants to keep with the groups way of thinking
As you get higher level your torque generating footwork gets less and less exaggerated. All you really need to add some weight transference is an imperceptible shift.
That's why in tai chi/Kung fu they teach the beginners large exaggerated movements but you see all the masters using very imperceptible movements, comparatively.
It's all about efficiency of energy and movement. You learn the idea, then you learn to do the same thing with less and less movement as you gain proficiency. In the end, an exaggerated foot twist does nothing but make it harder to maintain your root (from which your power is derived) as you transition into another attack.
if you don't turn your rear foot to a large degree you cant use your leg on the cross so it has less power,
im pretty sure leaving the leg /foot rotation out out transmits less power on other punches like the left hook, but maybe leaving it in place allows for better rooting and power, I will have to try it
boxing and kung fu are hard to compare they are using smaller movements because they can get the job done with less motion, in boxing boxers are very resilient and you need a shed load of power to put some people away, others u simply cant put away, even with full power shots directly to the jaw, they are doing it for different reasons, you cant use a small motion in boxing if u want to put them out because they use a different way of punching, point scoring yes, finishing no
I'm not really sure what you're asking, maybe post pictures?
Most of your power will come from your hamstrings and turning your lower back, not feet per se. The role of your feet in boxing is mobility so those punches are actually able to hit something.
Maybe in a bag punching competition some new stance would be popularized but these guys have to use them for moving.
got it so its for tactical reasons ie mobility, how come no 1 ever talks about this, its like something obvious that every pro does that absolutely no one talks about or knows about, I mean u don't really know that was just a guess wasn't it, you can rotate the feet fully and still be just as mobile and u need to fully rotate the feet to get the most out of your legs
b4 another guesser masquerading as an expert told me its because they didn't want to add power to an incoming shot, but that's simply not true because a lot of th time they use full power full torque of the shoulders
The larger you are, the less coordinated and flexible you're likely to be. You didn't see Andre the Giant doing backflips off the top ropes. Same reason.
Andre didn't do back flips much like butterbean cant, because gravity has a dramatic affect on you when you are that heavy.
Hip rotation shouldn't be a problem tho
This is the biggest complaint I see from fans of the popular divisions(147, 126) regarding the big boy divisions. They don't realize the big guys just can't do the same things as a 150 pound man, it's just not possible. They equate that with them being **** fighters. Real shame.
I think theres an element of truth to both sides, ie heavy guys are less common and so there is a weaker pool of talent and they arnt as able p4p alot of the time
you raise a point few people consider tho that was interesting
As a tall guy, I can say that it does matter. I've had more than one coach say I have unusually good flexibility for my height but I still can't turn as explosively and as quick as a shorter guy in my same weight class. Notice how small boxers tend to get in the pocket, work angles, and get out with incredible hip rotation that you simply never see above 155lbs? The longer your frame, the greater affect on the speed of your rotation.
Could Valuev have been better? Sure. But, expecting much more of him is overlooking how hard it is for most giants to be flexible and quick. He was never going to be a 7' Pacquiao, no matter who trained him.
Flexibility has little to do with being able to rotate, you don't much/any, as for being flexible, I don't think it has that much to do with size you get stiff small men, flexible big men and all sorts inbetween
u trollin me