Telegraphing and Punching: Some Comments to consider for discussion

[billeau2]

I want to clear something up because there are certain issues that get lost in translation. I am actually going to agree that I should qualify my comments on Joe Louis and telegraphing a punch.

First, as an operative framework: Consider Plato's perfect Square... For Plato there is actually a "place" where perfect forms exist, and everything done, conceived of in the immanent world is but an imperfect fascilmile of that perfect form. So geometrically we can make a great square (circle, whatever) and it can be a very precise rendering. What we can never do is create a Geometrically perfect form. Of course Plato generalized this understanding to the human condition... And while I don't want to argue the merits of Plato whole hog, his undertanding is a perfect picture of what I am am discussing with respect to Joe Louis.

I would not argue that Louis had incredible punching form... I would respect any argument that placed Louis as the best... while personally not taking an opinion on such a thing... But certainly Louis is on the short list and maybe the best. So does Joe Louis Telegraph his punches?

Well the answer to that depends lol. If you made a robot that had no affect and trained it to throw a punch? Louis would have certain things he did, no matter how small, that clued one in that a punch was coming. I understand that saying that this means Louis telegraphs is misleading. So let me explain my POV:

Telegraphing is one of those habits that has many different levels from which to understand body mechanics and effectiveness. With that said, NOBODY is a robot and nobody is capable of perfectly untelegraphed intentions. Furthermore, people that understand this study how even a subtle telegraph can give them a read on a technique coming. I say this as someone who has trained people Not to telegraph for over 40 years as a teacher! It is not an absolute, rather it is a process of refining, getting better and better, and consequently giving less of a clue as to when an intention is carried out.

So... did Joe Louis telegraph? Certainly not in a conventional sense where we compare him and Dempsey's hook (another example) to other fighters... BUT to someone who is looking for a read? trying to find a hint? someone who studies the biomechanics, intentions, etc to find such a foible? Well... Its possible that someone could do so, its also possible that Louis' mechanics were so good that no such foible could be found... Its a matter of opinion.

I think Schmelling had a read of some sort on Louis' cross... I understand that this is an opinion. I have my reasons for it. But I also have to be reasonable and qualify this opinion.

Consider the opinion qualified. If people are interested in my specfic reasons? Ill put them in the thread. But for now I just want to be clear about my statement about telegraphing.

[Ronn]

Why are you trying to degrade Joe Louis? smh

[billeau2]

Why are you trying to degrade Joe Louis? smh

LOl what alt are we today? Trolls.... trolls trolls Oy vay!!! they come in threes!

[Ronn]

LOl what alt are we today? Trolls.... trolls trolls Oy vay!!! they come in threes!

Answer this.
Who is more of a "telegrapher"? Joe Louis or Tyson Fury?

[billeau2]

Answer this.
Who is more of a "telegrapher"? Joe Louis or Tyson Fury?

Fury moves very well. He has a great jab that he utilizes multiple ways, but as a puncher he does not have the form or gravitas of an elite puncher. Louis was an elite puncher, one of the best ever.

To give an idea: Lets compare Roy Jones to Louis. Lets say your a counter puncher and want to gain a way to work against either guy. Jones uses his movement prior to throwing a leaping hook to disguise the blow... One of His attributes was pure speed and as long as he could feint someone he could overwhelm his opponent. For example, the disaster that was the James Toney Roy Jones fight... No way Toney could counter Jones.

Louis was not going to overwhelm you with speed, didn't need need to. He would set his shots up, or lure one in, but his delivery depended on Quickness and form... Not pure speed. A fighter who has quickness, and power has form... Doesn't really need pure speed. Louis did not have to try to hit hard.

Fury has weight behind his shots and excellent timing. Closer to Jones... though this would not be a valid comparison lol. Catching someone not expecting a punch can cause success, its how a guy like Fury often operates.

[Ronn]

Fury moves very well. He has a great jab that he utilizes multiple ways, but as a puncher he does not have the form or gravitas of an elite puncher. Louis was an elite puncher, one of the best ever.

To give an idea: Lets compare Roy Jones to Louis. Lets say your a counter puncher and want to gain a way to work against either guy. Jones uses his movement prior to throwing a leaping hook to disguise the blow... One of His attributes was pure speed and as long as he could feint someone he could overwhelm his opponent. For example, the disaster that was the James Toney Roy Jones fight... No way Toney could counter Jones.

Louis was not going to overwhelm you with speed, didn't need need to. He would set his shots up, or lure one in, but his delivery depended on Quickness and form... Not pure speed. A fighter who has quickness, and power has form... Doesn't really need pure speed. Louis did not have to try to hit hard.

Fury has weight behind his shots and excellent timing. Closer to Jones... though this would not be a valid comparison lol. Catching someone not expecting a punch can cause success, its how a guy like Fury often operates.

Do you think Roy's early career success might have had more to do with matchmaking? Glass Roy ducked certain guys for a reason.

Louis had great technique and natural power. But it is funny you mention speed.
Which was Louis's kryptonite. He was somewhat exposed against Conn.

How do you think Furys style would fare against someone like Yoka?

[billeau2]

Do you think Roy's early career success might have had more to do with matchmaking? Glass Roy ducked certain guys for a reason.

Louis had great technique and natural power. But it is funny you mention speed.
Which was Louis's kryptonite. He was somewhat exposed against Conn.

How do you think Furys style would fare against someone like Yoka?

1. On the contrary, Roy managed to fight fellow greats while relatively young... Hopkins, Toney a twilight McCallum... But eventually as he lost a step he became vulnerable... Tarver was so angry he walked right through Roy's feints lol. I think Roy was great but I don't put him on the short list others do... I think he would have had a problem with guys who could tough it out and deal with his speed to tap that chin.

2. You think he was exposed against Conn? I mean its not an unreasonable opinion to suppose he was having a time of it... Conn was also a lot more than just "fast." He was a great mover and very tough.... technically sound... Thing is, I always maintain that punchers have to master probability and patience. A puncher has to know that no matter what happens, he will get so many bites at the apple during a contest. Joe Louis walked into every fight confident that he would get an opportunity to unload a certain amount of times... and that it may take a while... even into the later rounds... but, that when that chance came, he would take advantage of it.

To me? the fact that it took Louis the later rounds and he could not hit Conn early is one of the best arguments for the championship rounds lol. 15 rounds! Anything less you put the puncher at a great disadvantage.

I have not watched a lot of Yoka to be honest. But I think guys who come up through the Amateur ranks are limited. There are exceptions. The Cubans always have had technical chops to spare... And great fighters rise above... Usyk may reset back to basic amatuer positions, but he has mastered head, body movements, angles, and timing in a way that supercedes that basis.

All the guys coming up have to go through each other and not get exposed... Deal with setbacks, like Dubois, etc... They look great until they deal with adversity.

[them_apples]

I want to clear something up because there are certain issues that get lost in translation. I am actually going to agree that I should qualify my comments on Joe Louis and telegraphing a punch.

First, as an operative framework: Consider Plato's perfect Square... For Plato there is actually a "place" where perfect forms exist, and everything done, conceived of in the immanent world is but an imperfect fascilmile of that perfect form. So geometrically we can make a great square (circle, whatever) and it can be a very precise rendering. What we can never do is create a Geometrically perfect form. Of course Plato generalized this understanding to the human condition... And while I don't want to argue the merits of Plato whole hog, his undertanding is a perfect picture of what I am am discussing with respect to Joe Louis.

I would not argue that Louis had incredible punching form... I would respect any argument that placed Louis as the best... while personally not taking an opinion on such a thing... But certainly Louis is on the short list and maybe the best. So does Joe Louis Telegraph his punches?

Well the answer to that depends lol. If you made a robot that had no affect and trained it to throw a punch? Louis would have certain things he did, no matter how small, that clued one in that a punch was coming. I understand that saying that this means Louis telegraphs is misleading. So let me explain my POV:

Telegraphing is one of those habits that has many different levels from which to understand body mechanics and effectiveness. With that said, NOBODY is a robot and nobody is capable of perfectly untelegraphed intentions. Furthermore, people that understand this study how even a subtle telegraph can give them a read on a technique coming. I say this as someone who has trained people Not to telegraph for over 40 years as a teacher! It is not an absolute, rather it is a process of refining, getting better and better, and consequently giving less of a clue as to when an intention is carried out.

So... did Joe Louis telegraph? Certainly not in a conventional sense where we compare him and Dempsey's hook (another example) to other fighters... BUT to someone who is looking for a read? trying to find a hint? someone who studies the biomechanics, intentions, etc to find such a foible? Well... Its possible that someone could do so, its also possible that Louis' mechanics were so good that no such foible could be found... Its a matter of opinion.

I think Schmelling had a read of some sort on Louis' cross... I understand that this is an opinion. I have my reasons for it. But I also have to be reasonable and qualify this opinion.

Consider the opinion qualified. If people are interested in my specfic reasons? Ill put them in the thread. But for now I just want to be clear about my statement about telegraphing.

in my opinion a telegraph is ANY indicator on what you are going to do. So many trainers focus on getting rid of basic subconscious flinches that became bad habits. Thats the bread and butter telegraph. Ill add a few more.

Throwing a wide shot for example, is NOT a telegraph if the previous 6 ounches you threw were short and concise. Throwing a deliberately slow shot is not a telegraph if it was intended to bait the oponent into slamming into a hard counter.

1) being too to tight and “exploding”. Its basically telling everyone you are fast. Example: Canelo and Amir Khan. Mayweather exposed Canelo for this. Both these guys are fast but have low connect percentages (if you watch closely and ignore compubox). I liken it to a wind up toy.

2) looking where you punch

3) turning your shots over too soon, the shot is turned over at maximum extension, not a second sooner. So many fighters do this and lose huge amounts of real power.

4) throwing the same combinations over and over (modern day pad work is a great way to create a fighter that telegraphs everything. No thought process no understanding just a dance routine of punches.) mayweather makes a fool of most fighters today because they throw the same robotic combinations every time. Maidana didn’t though and it was an ugly night for May.

5). Stepping in with an aggressive front foot. Don’t let your feet give yourself away. Footwork should be subtle don’t lift the feet too much off the ground. Whitaker and Joe Louis both had great footwork fundamentals.

for sure though. As OP stated. Louis is a high level puncher with subtleness in everything - certainly not a telegrapher.


my personal faves though:

Ali, Duran and Moore. They all punched differently but were very adapt and not letting you know what they were gonna do.

edit: one more

every punch except for the jab is always telegraphed to some degree because they use body mechanics. The jab is an arm punch. Its up to the fighter to get the mechanics down to the bare minimum and optimal coordination. 9 times out of 10 the fighter over torques his shots and his body mechanics are actually only bringing his punch onto contact but not increasing any type of power. The power line is a very short pocket of coordination that very few boxers mastered and almost 0 today have even the slightest clue. Each fighter has his own frame / build so it varies from fighter to fighter. Some will have better natural leverage to begin with.

[billeau2]

In my opinion a telegraph is ANY indication on what you are going to do. So many trainers focus on getting rid of basic subconscious flinches that became bad habits. Thats the bread and butter telegraph. Ill add a few more.

Throwing a wide shot for example, is NOT a telegraph if the previous 6 ounches you threw were short and concise. Throwing a deliberately slow shot is not a telegraph if it was intended to bait the oponent into slamming into a hard counter.

1) being too to tight and “exploding”. Its basically telling everyone you are fast. Example: Canelo and Amir Khan. Mayweather exposed Canelo for this. Both these guys are fast but have low connect percentages (if you watch closely and ignore compubox). I liken it to a wind up toy.

2) looking where you punch

3) turning your shots over too soon, the shot is turned over at maximum extension, not a second sooner. So many fighters do this and lose huge amounts of real power.

4) throwing the same combinations over and over (modern day pad work is a great way to create a fighter that telegraphs everything. No thought process no understanding just a dance routine of punches.) mayweather makes a fool of most fighters today because they throw the same robotic combinations every time. Maidana didn’t though and it was an ugly night for May.

5). Stepping in with an aggressive front foot. Don’t let your feet give yourself away. Footwork should be subtle don’t lift the feet too much off the ground. Whitaker and Joe Louis both had great footwork fundamentals.

for sure though. As OP stated. Louis is a high level puncher with subtleness in everything - certainly not a telegrapher.


my personal faves though:

Ali, Duran and Moore. They all punched differently but were very adapt and not letting you know what they were gonna do.

edit: one more

every punch except for the jab is always telegraphed to some degree because they use body mechanics. The jab is an arm punch. Its up to the fighter to get the mechanics down to the bare minimum and optimal coordination. 9 times out of 10 the fighter over torques his shots and his body mechanics are actually only bringing his punch onto contact but not increasing any type of power. The power line is a very short pocket of coordination that very few boxers mastered and almost 0 today have even the slightest clue. Each fighter has his own frame / build so it varies from fighter to fighter. Some will have better natural leverage to begin with.

Yes (the bolded) thats exactly what it is... And most people, including people who want a "gotcha" so bad... have a hard time understanding that there are levels to telegraphing. lol. I liken it to studying the Civil War in Kindergarten versus in a graduate class with scholars studying American History. Same topic, very different discussions regarding levels and complexity.

Most people draw the hand back when striking... but this is a very basic bad habit. Flinching is another big one.

Great observations. A lot of what mechanics universally achieve at higher levels is a grounding from the point of contact through to the earth below a figher's feet. In grappling this is achieved by locking the joints communitively so one can affect opponent from opponent's outer appendages (wrists, even fingers). With a punch so much has to fall in line... HEY! that front kick the guy did this weekend, that is a great example! His foot was driven more by the step, not by flexing the knee, he caught the opponent at the end of the kick's exstension, and his back hip was open enough on contact that the power did not stop/lock at the front leg's hip. most people either kick by flexing the knee making it a leg movement and little else, or, don't open the back hip up which locks the kick and stops transmission at the hip...

[QueensburyRules]

I want to clear something up because there are certain issues that get lost in translation. I am actually going to agree that I should qualify my comments on Joe Louis and telegraphing a punch.............

Consider the opinion qualified. If people are interested in my specfic reasons? Ill put them in the thread. But for now I just want to be clear about my statement about telegraphing.

- - U telegraphing U meandering, wandering, ever searching, nay, beseeching the Holy Grail of The One & Only Truth again?