Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

foreman's power...

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • foreman's power...

    i have a question...

    we all know that weightlifting properly will hlep you gain strength, speed, etc...

    george foreman had crazy strength and didnt lift weights...it was natural and lots of bag work...

    he also didnt rely on speed or anything and was all about power.

    wouldnt he be like 10x better if he used weights? he would hit ALOT harder right?

  • #2
    Foreman did a lot of old-school Dino training, like lifting rocks , chopping wood, (and during his comeback) pulling cars. If anything, I think this kind of training was best-suited towards increasing punch power rather than conventional weight-lifting 'cause it's focused on functional strength and constant explosive motions.

    Comment


    • #3
      all strength is functional........I read something about this somewhere and it explained it very well and to summarize it basically said anyone who believes in functional strength is a moron as it is all functional, now sport specific is a different story.

      Comment


      • #4
        all strength is functional in the sense that strength is strength and doing one thing will help you do another, but i do think there's relative differences in how different exercises impact your functionality.

        And im not a guy who doesnt believe in weightlifting just so you know. But I do think dino training is "more" functional than conventional weightlifting in the way it stresses your body because of the either higher coordination between muscles or the fact that you're performing an activity as you would need to in real life but with resistance.

        So maybe it would be better to qualify my statement as I think that for boxing, Foreman's strength training was more functional than conventional weight-lifting.

        Weight-lifting is good and it does build real strength, but im somewhat old-fashioned and i do think that dino training is better than weight-lifting in a lot of ways altho there are definitely a lot of good exercises with normal weights that are good for boxers and anyone.

        hmmm....
        well to summarize.

        I'm not saying that Weight-training sucks.

        All im saying is that just because Foreman didn't do weights conventionally, doesn't mean he didnt use weights in another way.

        So I think it's bollocks that he would be "10 times better' just 'cause if he used conventional weights.

        Comment


        • #5
          Foreman had unusual training techniques, but he was also extremely heavy handed. A lot of that power is just natural god given.

          Comment


          • #6
            i dont mean if he stopped other stuff...just if he added some weightlifting

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 1_Punch_KO View Post
              i have a question...

              we all know that weightlifting properly will hlep you gain strength, speed, etc...

              george foreman had crazy strength and didnt lift weights...it was natural and lots of bag work...

              he also didnt rely on speed or anything and was all about power.

              wouldnt he be like 10x better if he used weights? he would hit ALOT harder right?



              After 30 years of weightlifting there is no evidence that any boxer has ever increased his hand speed or punching power. If there was any evidence of it we would be able to see the stats on increased knockouts. Modern training in boxing is clearly defective and the decreased performance we see from boxers can be attributed to this unhealthy preoccupation with weightlifting. Young guys today should be more concerned about skills and less concerned about strength.

              Comment


              • #8
                sounds like potatoes needs to checkout this sitehttp://www.rossboxing.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ross is the ****.

                  but anyways, isn't a bit constricting to define weightlifting by barbells and dumbbells?

                  I mean, lifting a rock, that's lifting weight.

                  And it's a kind of weight-lifting that's much closer to approximating how you'll need to move around a guy in the ring(im thinking of the clinch)

                  Rossboxing for example does do weightlifting, but if you go thru exercises he also has a lot of unconventional stuff that doesnt follow the normal def of weightlifting(sit-ups with vests, ab roller, etc . come to mind) and I believe he has a lot of stuff that I would consider more similar to dino training then regular weight-lifting.

                  I dont really think that if Foreman lifted weights he would've been better because he did lift weights, just not the normal kind.

                  Hell, he mugged guys by holding them up by their feet and shaking them for change.

                  Now THAT's weightlifting. Build up the shoulders y'know?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by potatoes View Post
                    After 30 years of weightlifting there is no evidence that any boxer has ever increased his hand speed or punching power. If there was any evidence of it we would be able to see the stats on increased knockouts. Modern training in boxing is clearly defective and the decreased performance we see from boxers can be attributed to this unhealthy preoccupation with weightlifting. Young guys today should be more concerned about skills and less concerned about strength.
                    i agree with you, to a point. weightlifting certainly has a place in training for any sport but boxers in particular should not be gaining alot of muscle for doing so limits their endurance

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP