Blocking useless?

[jobo]

I did huh? Well, I must be suffering from memory loss because I don't remember using those words. Would you mind quoting where I wrote that? Put in a link to my post. Here, use this line:
_________________________________________________________________

well yes you are clearly having memory problems, i said boxing had evolved through what works best in competition and you said,NO its evolved through rule,changes, which is true on the longest scales of time, what came before the,M o Q rules has no comparison with modern boxing at all.

on shorter time scales , let's say half a century, then the effect of rule changes are minimal, as there have been very few of note, certainly non that have changed the fundamentals of boxing as markadly as the queenbury rules.

changes on that time scale are the result of a better under standing of bio kinetics, fitness programs and what actually works and what doesn't in the real world. If standing like a tree with your arms out stretched, trying to block punches worked then that's what they would be doing, ( take note wing Chun)

 

[lklawson]

You can get a publisher to publish your book. You may just get 30 cents from each book sale. You may print book yourself. It may cost you $5000 to print 2000 copies (in Taiwan). You will then have to sale 1 book at a time. There is not much profit in MA book business.

Self-publish, print-on-demand, sites such as Lulu.com and Amazon give viable options.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

I'm entirely unfamiliar with historical rules, Kirk (and only passingly so with modern rules). What made blocking more beneficial within the old rules?

To over simplify it, there were several aspects.

First, the inclusion of stand-up grappling, tripping, and throwing tended to force striking ranges further out. If fighters got in close enough to use, for instance, a modern hook, one of them was grabbing the other and attempting to throw them. Throwing was a very highly sought after spectacle in Broughton and LPR style boxing. The fans absolutely loved it and were particularly fond of any variation of the Cross-Buttock (a hip-toss usually). If you didn't want to grapple, or wanted to control when or how to your benefit, you pushed out the range. Pushing out ranges means more linear punches and more time to see a punch coming and successfully block it.

Second, the lack of modern gloves was a factor in pushing out the range. Gloves (mittens/mufflers) were only used in amateur matches or only in training sessions by professionals. Prize Fighting was strictly no glove. In fact, Prize Fighters were known to speak derisively about the use of gloves in official matches. Even when gloves were used they were very small, light, and hard by modern standards. Interestingly, the gloves used at the time were not particularly prohibitive of successfully grappling & throwing. Additionally wraps were unheard of. The type of gloves used and the lack of wraps offered less-to-no protection against boxers fractures. To protect the hands, boxers of the time were more likely to use a pistol-grip punching technique. These two elements together tended to encourage ranges to push out to a fairly distant out-fighting range for punches.

Third, there was often a derision for circular punches and a preference for linear punches. While circular punching did exist (such as the "rounding blow" which figures prominently in Mendoza's lessons) it was often derided as a unskilled an unsophisticated "swing." Particularly in the LPR and follow on era (before MoQ was fully accepted), many Prize Fighters believed that only untalented or poorly trained boxers used "swings" while straight blows such as the Left Lead or Lead-off and the Straight Rear, were considered precision blows and the mark of a skilled boxer. This position is most clearly stated in "The Straight Left and how to Cultivate it" (you can download the PDF free from my lulu site).

Fourth (though not last), Broughton and LPR rules had no limits on the number of rounds, the length of rounds, nor even the length of a match. Matches lasting dozens or even hundreds of rounds were common, and they could go on for hours (or even more than a day in at least one case I found). Prize Fighters were in it for the long haul. Getting thrown to the ground, particularly on the surfaces they were wont to fight on, was very degrading on the boxer's performance and ability. And getting pummeled by punches was also very degrading to the long term performance. Punches that land add up. One famous match had the odds-on favorite (and more famous) boxer losing because of taking "Choppers" (a kind of downward striking back-fist or hammer-fist) to the eyes and nose. Both of his eyes closed up and he was fighting blind. Unsurprisingly, he lost. In order to avoid the short term punishment and stay in the fight for the long haul, boxers wanted to be at as far a distance from their opponent as reasonably possible in order to see, and prevent, as many punches and grapples as possible, while still being close enough to throw their own punches or grapple if they wanted.

As the MoQ rules became more and more accepted, removing the incentive of grappling, adding time limits and round limits, and slowing adding more protective gear (gloves and wraps), the worries about long-term fights became less, the possibility of scoring true knock-out blows became greater, and the viability of no-grappling in-fighting techniques became more and more clear, the need for extended out-fighting positions fell and with it the viability of blocking techniques.

There's more detail and fleshing-out which can be done, of course. A whole book could be written just around the social condemnation of pre-MoQ boxing, how MoQ was partially intended to "civilize" the art and make it socially acceptable, and what the consequences to the sport's techniques were. But this should be a decent enough 50,000 foot view.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

well yes you are clearly having memory problems, i said boxing had evolved through what works best in competition and you said,NO its evolved through rule,changes, which is true on the longest scales of time, what came before the,M o Q rules has no comparison with modern boxing at all.

What you wrote was:

Blocking useless?
"there is a,fundamental denial on here, that the," tradition" of tma means that they are at a significant disadvantage to any fighting system that has progressed since The 1800s . Posting up pictures of old time boxers using similar techniques, only underlined the fact that boxing has progressed and tma by defintion has not.

much of the very fundemental on which tma is based are,at best,inefficient and more likely deeply flawed against a fast and mobile opponent. I'm taking the very basics like stance, flat footedness, ( rooting ) hand position, punching techneque forward only movement, body rigidity. The lot really,

if you want to see what works look at boxing, MT, bjj anything that is refined in contests, even full contact karate looks little like traditional karate, Because standing in a daft stance with you feet rooted, refusing to back up and you hands pulled back under your arm pits is a,sure way of getting a punch on the nose"

There's a difference between what you wrote then and what you are writing now.

Oh, and you still have a fundamental misunderstanding. What "works in competition" is defined by the rules of the competition. If the rules change so do what works. This is pretty basic. You must see this.

on shorter time scales , let's say half a century, then the effect of rule changes are minimal, as there have been very few of note, certainly non that have changed the fundamentals of boxing as markadly as the queenbury rules.

Annnd?

If standing like a tree with your arms out stretched, trying to block punches worked then that's what they would be doing,

OK, so you have more than one fundamental misunderstanding about pre-MoQ boxing. That's not how the fought. They were very mobile. They used a lot of footwork and frequently "milled" their arms.

Here's some old footage of icon John L. Sullivan demonstrating "milling."

Here's Corbett and Cushing showing both milling and how boxers didn't just stand "like a tree with ... arms out stretched."

 

[JowGaWolf]

In CMA, when you move your hand out (such as a punch or a block), you should never come back empty-handed.

Depends on the type of punches you are using. Hung Ga, Jow Ga, Choy Li Fut, and Choy Ga all have punches that would not follow this rule. Punch combinations in general don't follow this rule. One fist goes out and as it's coming back in, another one is firing. The faster the punch can return the sooner the other punch can fire.

Can one strike and then pull with the striking hand? of course. There's nothing wrong with that. It works. It's just not a NEVER scenario for punching. Tiger claw works as you described.

You should find this interesting. I don't know too much about karate, but this article traces a few "blocking" techniques from Funakoshi down into MMA. (Funakoshi may know a few things about karate) Anyway, its a different look at some of the down blocks in karate.

Lyoto Machida: Old-School Karate

Awesome videos on that page. I like this one. you can clearly see the block in the
Lyoto Machida Karate best Ippon video.

 

[JowGaWolf]

milling

I see modern day fighters still use milling. The difference is that it's a shorter and more active form of milling, but the motion is the same. A circular motion where you don't know which hand is going to be the power punch and which hand is going to be the jab. You tend to see it with people who have a decent balance of punching power between left and right arms.

People who tend to favor certain punches with certain arms will do less of it.

 

[jobo]

What you wrote was:

Blocking useless?
"there is a,fundamental denial on here, that the," tradition" of tma means that they are at a significant disadvantage to any fighting system that has progressed since The 1800s . Posting up pictures of old time boxers using similar techniques, only underlined the fact that boxing has progressed and tma by defintion has not.

much of the very fundemental on which tma is based are,at best,inefficient and more likely deeply flawed against a fast and mobile opponent. I'm taking the very basics like stance, flat footedness, ( rooting ) hand position, punching techneque forward only movement, body rigidity. The lot really,

if you want to see what works look at boxing, MT, bjj anything that is refined in contests, even full contact karate looks little like traditional karate, Because standing in a daft stance with you feet rooted, refusing to back up and you hands pulled back under your arm pits is a,sure way of getting a punch on the nose"

There's a difference between what you wrote then and what you are writing now.

Oh, and you still have a fundamental misunderstanding. What "works in competition" is defined by the rules of the competition. If the rules change so do what works. This is pretty basic. You must see this.


Annnd?

OK, so you have more than one fundamental misunderstanding about pre-MoQ boxing. That's not how the fought. They were very mobile. They used a lot of footwork and frequently "milled" their arms.

Here's some old footage of icon John L. Sullivan demonstrating "milling."

Here's Corbett and Cushing showing both milling and how boxers didn't just stand "like a tree with ... arms out stretched."

and you said that boxing had only evolved through rule changes, which is just untrue

and you cant produce film of pre MoQ rules as the moving picture thing hadn't been invented,so you have no idea how they move

 

[lklawson]

Here's Corbett and Cushing

Slight correction: Corbett and Courtney.

 

[lklawson]

and you said that boxing had only evolved through rule changes, which is just untrue

I wrote 'only'? Quote it. Post the link.

and you cant produce film of pre MoQ rules as the moving picture thing hadn't been invented,so you have no idea how they move

You doofus, John L. Sullivan was a Prize Fighter and fought many of his matches under London Prize Ring rules, often illegal bouts. As I wrote several times now, there was a fairly long period after which the Marquess of Queensberry rules were published until all professional boxers finally adopted them. Some where over a half-century by most accounts. The MoQ was published in 1867 and the last officially sanctioned Heavyweight title (which John L. Sullivan fought) was 1889. And there was some indefinite period after that where LPR was still fought in unofficial and unsanctioned matches.

Look, if you can't be bothered to actually read what I wrote, can't be bothered to check your facts, can't be bothered to engage in logical and intelligent discourse, then I can't be bothered to continually correct your errors.

 

[jobo]

I wrote 'only'? Quote it. Post the link.

You doofus, John L. Sullivan was a Prize Fighter and fought many of his matches under London Prize Ring rules, often illegal bouts. As I wrote several times now, there was a fairly long period after which the Marquess of Queensberry rules were published until all professional boxers finally adopted them. Some where over a half-century by most accounts. The MoQ was published in 1867 and the last officially sanctioned Heavyweight title (which John L. Sullivan fought) was 1889. And there was some indefinite period after that where LPR was still fought in unofficial and unsanctioned matches.

Look, if you can't be bothered to actually read what I wrote, can't be bothered to check your facts, can't be bothered to engage in logical and intelligent discourse, then I can't be bothered to continually correct your errors.

let's try this from another angle, do you accept that boxing has evolved fir reasons other than rule changes, if so, there is no disagreement to discuss, if not then we are at least clear on what your position is

 

[lklawson]

let's try this from another angle, do you accept that boxing has evolved fir reasons other than rule changes, if so, there is no disagreement to discuss, if not then we are at least clear on what your position is

I accept that there have been some changes in boxing technique which may have resulted from something other than rules, but maintain that the biggest, most dominant reason for changes in boxing technique, either directly or indirectly, is changes to the rules.

Examples of techniques and changes which arose not necessarily because of rule changes include the very deep "American Crouch" and "Kid" McCoy's signature Corkscrew Punch.




Edwin Haislet's Boxing - pp23 Fig 28 Straight Right to Body

 

[jobo]

I accept that there have been some changes in boxing technique which may have resulted from something other than rules, but maintain that the biggest, most dominant reason for changes in boxing technique, either directly or indirectly, is changes to the rules.

Examples of techniques and changes which arose not necessarily because of rule changes include the very deep "American Crouch" and "Kid" McCoy's signature Corkscrew Punch.




Edwin Haislet's Boxing - pp23 Fig 28 Straight Right to Body

I accept that there have been some changes in boxing technique which may have resulted from something other than rules, but maintain that the biggest, most dominant reason for changes in boxing technique, either directly or indirectly, is changes to the rules.

Examples of techniques and changes which arose not necessarily because of rule changes include the very deep "American Crouch" and "Kid" McCoy's signature Corkscrew Punch.




Edwin Haislet's Boxing - pp23 Fig 28 Straight Right to Body

so you agree that boxing has evolved other than following rule changes, good, itt does beg the question why you have been arguing with something you accept as true,

 

[lklawson]

tt does beg the question why you have been arguing with something you accept as true,

I've been wondering the same of you.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

To over simplify it, there were several aspects.

First, the inclusion of stand-up grappling, tripping, and throwing tended to force striking ranges further out. If fighters got in close enough to use, for instance, a modern hook, one of them was grabbing the other and attempting to throw them. Throwing was a very highly sought after spectacle in Broughton and LPR style boxing. The fans absolutely loved it and were particularly fond of any variation of the Cross-Buttock (a hip-toss usually). If you didn't want to grapple, or wanted to control when or how to your benefit, you pushed out the range. Pushing out ranges means more linear punches and more time to see a punch coming and successfully block it.

Second, the lack of modern gloves was a factor in pushing out the range. Gloves (mittens/mufflers) were only used in amateur matches or only in training sessions by professionals. Prize Fighting was strictly no glove. In fact, Prize Fighters were known to speak derisively about the use of gloves in official matches. Even when gloves were used they were very small, light, and hard by modern standards. Interestingly, the gloves used at the time were not particularly prohibitive of successfully grappling & throwing. Additionally wraps were unheard of. The type of gloves used and the lack of wraps offered less-to-no protection against boxers fractures. To protect the hands, boxers of the time were more likely to use a pistol-grip punching technique. These two elements together tended to encourage ranges to push out to a fairly distant out-fighting range for punches.

Third, there was often a derision for circular punches and a preference for linear punches. While circular punching did exist (such as the "rounding blow" which figures prominently in Mendoza's lessons) it was often derided as a unskilled an unsophisticated "swing." Particularly in the LPR and follow on era (before MoQ was fully accepted), many Prize Fighters believed that only untalented or poorly trained boxers used "swings" while straight blows such as the Left Lead or Lead-off and the Straight Rear, were considered precision blows and the mark of a skilled boxer. This position is most clearly stated in "The Straight Left and how to Cultivate it" (you can download the PDF free from my lulu site).

Fourth (though not last), Broughton and LPR rules had no limits on the number of rounds, the length of rounds, nor even the length of a match. Matches lasting dozens or even hundreds of rounds were common, and they could go on for hours (or even more than a day in at least one case I found). Prize Fighters were in it for the long haul. Getting thrown to the ground, particularly on the surfaces they were wont to fight on, was very degrading on the boxer's performance and ability. And getting pummeled by punches was also very degrading to the long term performance. Punches that land add up. One famous match had the odds-on favorite (and more famous) boxer losing because of taking "Choppers" (a kind of downward striking back-fist or hammer-fist) to the eyes and nose. Both of his eyes closed up and he was fighting blind. Unsurprisingly, he lost. In order to avoid the short term punishment and stay in the fight for the long haul, boxers wanted to be at as far a distance from their opponent as reasonably possible in order to see, and prevent, as many punches and grapples as possible, while still being close enough to throw their own punches or grapple if they wanted.

As the MoQ rules became more and more accepted, removing the incentive of grappling, adding time limits and round limits, and slowing adding more protective gear (gloves and wraps), the worries about long-term fights became less, the possibility of scoring true knock-out blows became greater, and the viability of no-grappling in-fighting techniques became more and more clear, the need for extended out-fighting positions fell and with it the viability of blocking techniques.

There's more detail and fleshing-out which can be done, of course. A whole book could be written just around the social condemnation of pre-MoQ boxing, how MoQ was partially intended to "civilize" the art and make it socially acceptable, and what the consequences to the sport's techniques were. But this should be a decent enough 50,000 foot view.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Thanks, Kirk. That's a great overview. Much there I didn't know.

 

[drop bear]

So, nothing then.

Huh? Which book am I trying to sell? All of the books I referenced are available as free PDF downloads. Follow the link. Look around. I see you're not really putting much effort into this. I take it that this means you're not really interested in the discussion but just want to stir the pot.

Nothing you can explain anyway. Because it runs counter to your conclusion.

This is your link.
The Straight Left and How to cultivate it by Jim Driscoll (Paperback) - Lulu

 

[drop bear]

To over simplify it, there were several aspects.

First, the inclusion of stand-up grappling, tripping, and throwing tended to force striking ranges further out. If fighters got in close enough to use, for instance, a modern hook, one of them was grabbing the other and attempting to throw them. Throwing was a very highly sought after spectacle in Broughton and LPR style boxing. The fans absolutely loved it and were particularly fond of any variation of the Cross-Buttock (a hip-toss usually). If you didn't want to grapple, or wanted to control when or how to your benefit, you pushed out the range. Pushing out ranges means more linear punches and more time to see a punch coming and successfully block it.

Second, the lack of modern gloves was a factor in pushing out the range. Gloves (mittens/mufflers) were only used in amateur matches or only in training sessions by professionals. Prize Fighting was strictly no glove. In fact, Prize Fighters were known to speak derisively about the use of gloves in official matches. Even when gloves were used they were very small, light, and hard by modern standards. Interestingly, the gloves used at the time were not particularly prohibitive of successfully grappling & throwing. Additionally wraps were unheard of. The type of gloves used and the lack of wraps offered less-to-no protection against boxers fractures. To protect the hands, boxers of the time were more likely to use a pistol-grip punching technique. These two elements together tended to encourage ranges to push out to a fairly distant out-fighting range for punches.

Third, there was often a derision for circular punches and a preference for linear punches. While circular punching did exist (such as the "rounding blow" which figures prominently in Mendoza's lessons) it was often derided as a unskilled an unsophisticated "swing." Particularly in the LPR and follow on era (before MoQ was fully accepted), many Prize Fighters believed that only untalented or poorly trained boxers used "swings" while straight blows such as the Left Lead or Lead-off and the Straight Rear, were considered precision blows and the mark of a skilled boxer. This position is most clearly stated in "The Straight Left and how to Cultivate it" (you can download the PDF free from my lulu site).

Fourth (though not last), Broughton and LPR rules had no limits on the number of rounds, the length of rounds, nor even the length of a match. Matches lasting dozens or even hundreds of rounds were common, and they could go on for hours (or even more than a day in at least one case I found). Prize Fighters were in it for the long haul. Getting thrown to the ground, particularly on the surfaces they were wont to fight on, was very degrading on the boxer's performance and ability. And getting pummeled by punches was also very degrading to the long term performance. Punches that land add up. One famous match had the odds-on favorite (and more famous) boxer losing because of taking "Choppers" (a kind of downward striking back-fist or hammer-fist) to the eyes and nose. Both of his eyes closed up and he was fighting blind. Unsurprisingly, he lost. In order to avoid the short term punishment and stay in the fight for the long haul, boxers wanted to be at as far a distance from their opponent as reasonably possible in order to see, and prevent, as many punches and grapples as possible, while still being close enough to throw their own punches or grapple if they wanted.

As the MoQ rules became more and more accepted, removing the incentive of grappling, adding time limits and round limits, and slowing adding more protective gear (gloves and wraps), the worries about long-term fights became less, the possibility of scoring true knock-out blows became greater, and the viability of no-grappling in-fighting techniques became more and more clear, the need for extended out-fighting positions fell and with it the viability of blocking techniques.

There's more detail and fleshing-out which can be done, of course. A whole book could be written just around the social condemnation of pre-MoQ boxing, how MoQ was partially intended to "civilize" the art and make it socially acceptable, and what the consequences to the sport's techniques were. But this should be a decent enough 50,000 foot view.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

None of your examples are modern examples. The consistent argument is still time.

Sorry.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Had to look up "Kid" McCoy. Man those feints would get you floored these days. I remember doing similar feints as a kid in the $80s. I forgot what it was called but it was the same principle; suddenly stick your face directly in your opponent's face to make your opponent jump in fear of being hit. It was often done to intimidate but it could also be done to trigger a punch.

 

[TMA17]

The style of boxing has changed over the years. Should this also apply to other traditional arts? Is keeping some TMA’s “traditional” why some are less effective? My thinking is probably only in a ring/sport environment.

 

[drop bear]

The style of boxing has changed over the years. Should this also apply to other traditional arts? Is keeping some TMA’s “traditional” why some are less effective? My thinking is probably only in a ring/sport environment.

If is not a competitive environment you kind of wouldn't know.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The style of boxing has changed over the years. Should this also apply to other traditional arts? Is keeping some TMA’s “traditional” why some are less effective? My thinking is probably only in a ring/sport environment.

All MA should evolve. We know more now than we did 50 years ago (much less 200 years or more). And people act differently than they did in the past, so different attacks and situations are culturally likely.