Holly Holm lost because she doesn't have a jab

Hi-Tech

Slavic Fighter
Banned
Joined
Jul 18, 2016
Messages
4,939
Reaction score
0
Holly is a southpaw who is used to fighting orthodox fighters, she seems to be dependent on her lead left hand and that southpaw angle where you have the foot on the outside and then pivot out to the right which is a good weapon to have when you're fighting orthodox fighters but can easily be neutralized when fighting another southpaw.

When you're fighting someone with the same stance as you are (orthodox vs orthodox, southpaw vs southpaw) the jab becomes much more important, that's why so many boxing coaches obsess about it. It's pretty much a necessary punch unless you have some flashy style like Roy Jones Jr., among other things because it helps you find range which is what Holm was unable to do during the entire fight.

Holly was unable to get the jab going and didn't feint the jab properly (her feints are horrible) in fact she didn't even try, she was trying to land some of the most telegraphed lead left hands I ever saw which was embarrassing to watch. She got countered by Valentina's right hand all the time. She's a really one dimensional boxer with exactly one good punch.

I love Holly for what she did to Ronda but people who claimed that she has "P4P" best technical boxing in MMA always seemed ridiculous to me. A 155 lbs male fighter with Holly's technique gets jabbed to death by Nate Diaz in a pure boxing match.
 
The jab is your range finder punch..Holm doesn't have it. She loses to people she should beat. With her height, she should have jabbed Valestina to death and moved
 
This is Greg and BJ's fault, right?
 
Winklejohn is highly overrated. Most of his charges are either average or PED users.
 
From a broader sense, she lost because Shevchenko let her lead the whole fight. Holly is very similar to Anderson in that regard.

Holly should have looked to use feints to bait Shevchenko out of her shell and countered that. Counter the counter, so to say.
 
The jab is your range finder punch..Holm doesn't have it. She loses to people she should beat. With her height, she should have jabbed Valestina to death and moved
If she loses to someone then she wasn't suppose to beat them
 
I feel like she lost because she has very poor MMA skills. This was her chance to take somebody down and submit them. She should have learned something down at Jackson Wink in all this time?!?!?!
 
Only if Holly had some experience in boxing she would learn how to jab.
 
Holly is a southpaw who is used to fighting orthodox fighters, she seems to be dependent on her lead left hand and that southpaw angle where you have the foot on the outside and then pivot out to the right which is a good weapon to have when you're fighting orthodox fighters but can easily be neutralized when fighting another southpaw.

When you're fighting someone with the same stance as you are (orthodox vs orthodox, southpaw vs southpaw) the jab becomes much more important, that's why so many boxing coaches obsess about it. It's pretty much a necessary punch unless you have some flashy style like Roy Jones Jr., among other things because it helps you find range which is what Holm was unable to do during the entire fight.

Holly was unable to get the jab going and didn't feint the jab properly (her feints are horrible) in fact she didn't even try, she was trying to land some of the most telegraphed lead left hands I ever saw which was embarrassing to watch. She got countered by Valentina's right hand all the time. She's a really one dimensional boxer with exactly one good punch.

I love Holly for what she did to Ronda but people who claimed that she has "P4P" best technical boxing in MMA always seemed ridiculous to me. A 155 lbs male fighter with Holly's technique gets jabbed to death by Nate Diaz in a pure boxing match.
Nate would get killed by anybody even near the level of Holms caliber in a pure boxing match, you clearly don't understand the astronomical difference between strictly boxing and somebody like Val who keeps you in kick boxing range, in a boxing match Holm wouldn't have to worry about kicks, takedowns or spinning attacks. Nate would get worked over by an amateur journeyman.
 
Holm has a jab, she just has no idea how to lead the dance and measure distance with it. People really REALLY need to learn how a counter-striker works.
 
Nate would get killed by anybody even near the level of Holms caliber in a pure boxing match, you clearly don't understand the astronomical difference between strictly boxing and somebody like Val who keeps you in kick boxing range, in a boxing match Holm wouldn't have to worry about kicks, takedowns or spinning attacks. Nate would get worked over by an amateur journeyman.
You can't compare women's boxing to men's since the depth is extremely shallow. Nate is a far better boxer than Holly.
 
I do not have the technical knowledge to comment much, and need to rewatch with a critical eye...but I was indeed wondering throughout the fight "where is her jab?"

Holly also appeared physically stronger in being able to control Valentina against the cage, yet i don't recall any sustained effort to put a muay thai fighter on her back...why not?

It was also strange to see such little change in gameplan during the fight.
 
She lost because she fought a better fighter, there is no mystery.
 
Last edited:
A jab would help, against someone like Tate it would score a fuck ton of free hits and help Holm keep the range open. Against Shevchenko it's going to be a lot more difficult since she has good range control and isn't a sitting duck, plus she has ways to counter the jab and make her opponent pay for throwing them. She also has a pretty good jab herself so getting into a jabbing contest with her isn't likely to end well.

 
You can't compare women's boxing to men's since the depth is extremely shallow. Nate is a far better boxer than Holly.
NO, he isn't. It doesn't matter if the depth is shallow, Nate wouldn't even make it to European level. He literally only throws 1-2s, he has no footwork or lateral movement and he gets hit A LOT. Why is Nate all of a sudden the second coming of B-Hopkins? He's had his shit pushed in more often than not at LW and has never fought anybody of Vals caliber in the striking department. Nate is overrated. Until Nate actually steps foot in a boxing ring there's absolutely nothing to suggest he can even compete with a journeyman.
 
Back
Top