Gloves vs Fist. Which one wins for you

[KangTsai]

If I want to fight, sure, bare knuckle. To train power on bags etc, gloves- strictly 16oz or more for the weight.

 

[KangTsai]

Do boxers break their hand more often than MMA fighters?

Have you heard of what a boxer's fracture is? Very common injury apparently. The only "injuries" I got from punching were some grazed knuckles.

 

[KangTsai]

Not sure. A lot of factors at play there.

I'm sure many actual injuries come from groundwork training.

 

[Juany118]

And so instead of finding an expert on the subject you went for the history books?

Isn't that kind of the equivalent of training via you tube?

First the style of punching is THE style of punching for my WC anyway, in part for the reason involved. The part about old school bareknuckled western boxing sharing the same point is simply to illustrate that it is a valid observation. All to often when something is mentioned only in Eastern TMA's people reflexively dismiss it as pseudoscience regardless of the truth.

Secondly I noted a link early to a comment from a published expert in Western Martial Arts who participates on these forums, so an expert confirmed what I already was taught and learned on my own.

Third all the history does is show you that the method was used, successfully for the noted reason. Validation is important and such validation only occurs over periods of time, which means looking at history.

Finally your dismissal of the technique because it's old is actually kinda silly. In the last hundred or so years (hell in the last many thousands) homo sapiens have not evolved physically and so the biomechanical benefits of such a punch structure, in order to mitigate potential injury, still exists.

 

[Juany118]

When people have the capacity to understand my posts.

We understand. Via this understanding we also know that you are a massively defensive person and reflexively become obtuse and passive aggressive, sometimes even blatantly insulting, if someone expresses a preference for a different methodology than you do. You come off as if you are assuming that a difference of opinion automatically = a criticism of your opinion and/or methodology. It gets tiresome because while you might not see it what it amounts to is you starting an argument for argument's sake.

 

[Ironbear24]

When people have the capacity to understand my posts.

People understand them. Which is why we come to the conclusion of you acting obtuse. Do you ever stop and think why every thread you post ends up an argument?

 

[Ironbear24]

I'm sure many actual injuries come from groundwork training.

Pregnancy. All the more reason to glove it.

 

[drop bear]

We understand. Via this understanding we also know that you are a massively defensive person and reflexively become obtuse and passive aggressive, sometimes even blatantly insulting, if someone expresses a preference for a different methodology than you do. You come off as if you are assuming that a difference of opinion automatically = a criticism of your opinion and/or methodology. It gets tiresome because while you might not see it what it amounts to is you starting an argument for argument's sake.

Thanks for the assessment dr Phil.

 

[lklawson]

The largely accepted reason for the classical boxing stance was the prequeesnbury rules which allowed grappling, throws, and low kicks.

No kicks. Though you could do throwing and "tripping up." De Ashi Harai, for instance would be acceptable under some rules, as long as the "ref" and the fans didn't think it looked like a kick.

Don't piss off the fans. If they think you're being unmanly or cheating, they'll crash the ropes and the green and you'll get beaten to death. Literally.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Everything you say is correct, but on another thread I believe it was @lklawson spoke of what he called the "pistol grip" punch for ungloved/untaped punching.

The reason for this in my understanding is that everything just naturally lines up in a more solid structure at the wrist to avoid injury. If you strike with the fist horizontal you either need it taped or the fist needs to be canted to line it up properly. Tbh I thought that was just a WC theory until is contribution in the older thread but he could likely explain why he recommended it better from a Western Martial Arts perspective as he is an expert in that realm where as I am not.

That's pretty much the gist of it. Look at any of the old boxing manuals and this is what they teach. Even the Dempsey manual, which really isn't all that old, teaches pistol grip punching.









Bunch more: Album: Kirk

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

They point to classical boxing as confirmation for confirmation but the truth is classical boxing differed widely in approach,

For linear punches? No, not particularly.

either way it's an antiquated punching method.

Just like the wheel is antiquated because it was invented a really long time ago.

 

[lklawson]

I took a deeper look at the Wing Chun punch and their method of punching prevents a certain type of arm lock because the elbows are down. In addition it makes throwing a rising elbow that much faster. I'm wondering if this is the reason as things in close quarters happen faster. Also the type of punching that they are doing is a much shorter punch then when using a horizontal fist. These things seem more practical than some of the many excuses I've heard. But then again that's just me looking at the punch from the outside. I don't practice Wing Chun so I can be wrong about the why they use a vertical fist? but what I said about the punch are true.

There used to be a guy 30+ years ago who suggested, in a Black Belt Mag article, that WC's oral history is 100% made up and that it didn't exist until contact with English traders who proceeded to kick their butts using English Boxing. They swiped the basic stance and punches of English Boxing, added some kung-fu-ish stuff to it, created a palatable "history," and named it Wing Chun. I don't know how true it is but it's a fun theory.

Round punches and "swings" did tend to turn over the fist to horizontal, frequently. Driscol's "The Straight Left and How to Cultivate It" illustrates that there was some derision to the using a round blow ("swing") though it seems to have been used a lot anyway.

Some times I wonder if old bare knuckle photos are like most fight related photos; It's just a pose and not necessarily a technique that shows how things were done. Could it bet that it's just a pose to make the image look more fantastic? No different when boxers today pose for the camera. If grappling was allowed then having that hand so far back doesn't help the grappling game. But if I was going to pose for a picture, back then, I would probably pose the same way because those poses allow me to flex my muscles for the better photo. I wonder if in some of the pictures where they are curling the fist towards their body, if they aren't actually flexing their muscle like a bicep curl. Try the same pose with the vertical fist and then watch your what happens to your bicep as you turn your hand upward, now flex.
As for the arm being to the side close to the body, you can do the same thing

If anyone does a google image search fore "old bare knuckle photos" then what I say starts to at least looks like it makes sense. I could still be wrong as I'm not a historian on bare knuckle fighting. We do fighting poses in front of cameras today that aren't accurate so I don't see why someone back then wouldn't do the same. I think things may have been different if they were taking photos for instructional purposes.

Nah. That's pretty much how they fought. The photos are static, yes, that's true. But we are blessed with some rare instances of movie footage of the style. The primary difference from the static photo is that they'd "mill" their fists in order to prevent telegraphing.

I'll see if I can dig it up.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[drop bear]

First the style of punching is THE style of punching for my WC anyway, in part for the reason involved. The part about old school bareknuckled western boxing sharing the same point is simply to illustrate that it is a valid observation. All to often when something is mentioned only in Eastern TMA's people reflexively dismiss it as pseudoscience regardless of the truth.

Secondly I noted a link early to a comment from a published expert in Western Martial Arts who participates on these forums, so an expert confirmed what I already was taught and learned on my own.

Third all the history does is show you that the method was used, successfully for the noted reason. Validation is important and such validation only occurs over periods of time, which means looking at history.

Finally your dismissal of the technique because it's old is actually kinda silly. In the last hundred or so years (hell in the last many thousands) homo sapiens have not evolved physically and so the biomechanical benefits of such a punch structure, in order to mitigate potential injury, still exists.

And so only the minor issue of bare knuckle boxers fighting in a modern boxing style. Rather than the one you are suggesting to deal with.

 

[Juany118]

And so only the minor issue of bare knuckle boxers fighting in a modern boxing style. Rather than the one you are suggesting to deal with.

And here is the immediate defense reaction I noted before. I make no claims about modern bareknuckled boxing vs old, I just say one of the reasons I prefer such a punch personally and used history as an example of why I prefer it.

Any fighting technique is based on trade offs. If done properly the type of punch I am noting can be powerful, with the right body structure, as the Wing Chun punching video I have posted a few times previously shows. That said it is not the most powerful punch out there (especially when compared to "round" punches).

So on one side we have the potential for a slightly stronger punch with a higher relative risk of injury, on the other a slightly less powerful punch but with a lower relative risk of injury.

All of the above also doesn't take into account that modern professional boxing practices are obviously going to have an impact on modern bareknuckled boxing, similar to how for a fair amount of time "old school" bareknuckled boxing practices continued to influence gloved boxing.

 

[drop bear]

And here is the immediate defense reaction I noted before. I make no claims about modern bareknuckled boxing vs old, I just say one of the reasons I prefer such a punch personally and used history as an example of why I prefer it.

Any fighting technique is based on trade offs. If done properly the type of punch I am noting can be powerful, with the right body structure, as the Wing Chun punching video I have posted a few times previously shows. That said it is not the most powerful punch out there (especially when compared to "round" punches).

So on one side we have the potential for a slightly stronger punch with a higher relative risk of injury, on the other a slightly less powerful punch but with a lower relative risk of injury.

All of the above also doesn't take into account that modern professional boxing practices are obviously going to have an impact on modern bareknuckled boxing, similar to how for a fair amount of time "old school" bareknuckled boxing practices continued to influence gloved boxing.

And you dont think it is kind of like prefering voodo to modern medicine due to its longer use in history?

Apart from some boxers did this fifty years ago. Is there any indication it protects your hands any more that rolling a punch over?

I mean people did some knarley stuff back then. Doesn't mean it was anatomically correct due to biomechanics. That link is just made up. At this point anyway.

I mean I just saw a pretty reputable street fighters bag work. And you would have to assume he wins mostly on toughness.

By the way I get overhands. because it goes pretty much over the top of a guys head. Just makes intuitive sense that it would be high risk bare knuckle. But this sort of discussion from people who may have read some book on the subject. Dont understand bimechanics and nobody here is any sort of reasonable bare knuckle boxer. Kind of puts the arguments in a bit of doubt.

 

[Juany118]

And you dont think it is kind of like prefering voodo to modern medicine due to its longer use in history?

Apart from some boxers did this fifty years ago. Is there any indication it protects your hands any more that rolling a punch over?

I mean people did some knarley stuff back then. Doesn't mean it was anatomically correct due to biomechanics. That link is just made up. At this point anyway.

I mean I just saw a pretty reputable street fighters bag work. And you would have to assume he wins mostly on toughness.

By the way I get overhands. because it goes pretty much over the top of a guys head. Just makes intuitive sense that it would be high risk bare knuckle. But this sort of discussion from people who may have read some book on the subject. Dont understand bimechanics and nobody here is any sort of reasonable bare knuckle boxer. Kind of puts the arguments in a bit of doubt.

It is a biological fact that the punch I note naturally aligns the first with the are more naturally at the point of impact. All the old school boxing does is show the application of this fact. Here is why, I am going to assume you know the following but are just being stubborn.

When you throw a straight/horizontal punch with a horizontal fist you align the first two knuckles in your hand with the bones in your forearm for maximum structure so you don't hurt yourself, otherwise you risk the most common "boxer's fracture" occurs to the ring and/or pinky finger. In doing this you protect the fingers but as you canted the wrist without a fair amount of training you now risk injuring your wrist.

Now with the "old school" linear/straight punch, due to how the radius and ulna align, this positioning of the fist happens naturally, there is no need to think about canting the wrist so you have the optimal alignment (for injury prevention) of not only the fist to the target but the fist to the forearm. No voodoo, simple biology which translates into biomechanics.

As for "experts", there is someone who has responded to this thread who is an expert on Western Martial Arts, to include bareknuckled boxing.

 

[drop bear]

It is a biological fact that the punch I note naturally aligns the first with the are more naturally at the point of impact.

Source please or you are making stuff up.

 

[drop bear]

When you throw a straight/horizontal punch with a horizontal fist you align the first two knuckles in your hand with the bones in your forearm for maximum structure so you don't hurt yourself, otherwise you risk the most common "boxer's fracture" occurs to the ring and/or pinky finger. In doing this you protect the fingers but as you canted the wrist without a fair amount of training you now risk injuring your wrist.

Now with the "old school" linear/straight punch, due to how the radius and ulna align, this positioning of the fist happens naturally, there is no need to think about canting the wrist so you have the optimal alignment (for injury prevention) of not only the fist to the target but the fist to the forearm. No voodoo, simple biology which translates into biomechanics.

I can throw a vertical fist and impact with my last knuckle. I can throw a vertical fist and have my wrist bent.

Apart from "Fact" I haven't read anything so far that makes one safer than the other.

 

[drop bear]

Just because I couldn't figure out how to repost just the pictures. Juanny what part of the hand are they hitting with?

"When you throw a straight/horizontal punch with a horizontal fist you align the first two knuckles in your hand with the bones in your forearm"

And you wonder why there is arguments.

What part of my hand should I use to face palm properly?

 

[Juany118]

I can throw a vertical fist and impact with my last knuckle. I can throw a vertical fist and have my wrist bent.

Apart from "Fact" I haven't read anything so far that makes one safer than the other.

If you don't force it and allow the fist to form naturally, a 100% straight/level punch, with a vertical fist, you will strike with the index and middle fingers first.

If you change the angle of the punch, the one you posted is basically going for the head, then you naturally end up hitting with the last three naturally. Again though the fist is naturally in alignment with the wrist so there is a natural transmission of force down the entire arm to the shoulder.

I like how you avoided my last point though as you claimed no experts are around but an expert on Western Martial Arts has posted their opinion here already.