Joe Louis and the Blackburn Crouch

Excellent.
The rear foot pivot came a litte short, I'd like to learn more about it.
 
You know, I gotta say it's difficult to know how to feel about vids like that. Seeing certain terminology used. At least Ian Streetz dropped my name, but a lot of these guys profiting off basically standing on Dadi's shoulders don't. No mentions even of inspiration. It's great on one hand to see people thinking about this stuff and putting it out there, but it's also a little weird to see the basic premise of the Burley video regurgitated over and over without reference to the originator.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if this has been asked in here but with his head so off center wouldn't that make it easier for a cross to come in smooth? For both same and opposite stances. It just seems it goes right in path for a cross
 
I don't know if this has been asked in here but with his head so off center wouldn't that make it easier for a cross to come in smooth? For both same and opposite stances. It just seems it goes right in path for a cross

Off center to the wrong side, maybe (closer) would be worse. But who does that?

Off center means farther away, so there's that extra distance to react before the punch even gets close. "In the center" means it (the head) never moves (because it's in the center of the turning axis) despite what the rest of the body is doing, so it's extra easy to hit because it's so immobile.
 
Last edited:
^^That question is addressed IN the Charley Burley video.
 
You know, I gotta say it's difficult to know how to feel about vids like that. Seeing certain terminology used. At least Ian Streetz dropped my name, but a lot of these guys profiting off basically standing on Dadi's shoulders don't. No mentions even of inspiration. It's great on one hand to see people thinking about this stuff and putting it out there, but it's also a little weird to see the basic premise of the Burley video regurgitated over and over without reference to the originator.

I had similar thoughts with you on this matter and it's nice that I see you taking a stance on this.
Me and thousands more guys learned about this stance and these old school tactics that Wylie almost quoted without changing a word, from Dadi's video on Burley.
Ok, this is indeed the way many old school fighters fought. This style of boxing is not your partners and your own creation of course, but you guys analyzed it and conceptualized and teach your own distilled version.

He can't use the concepts and terminology you made famous and pass it in his videos as his own, especially when he takes such a big issue on plagiarizing himself, with other guys who are on the boxing analysis business.
And putting that matter aside, this video doesn't provide any new insight into Louis. It's just rehashing stuff that has been mentioned in the past several times.
Only the first page of this thread provides three times more information.
The same applies for his video about Willie Pep. If you have nothing new to add then why make a video?
 
Last edited:
The same applies for his video about Willie Pep. If you have nothing new to add then why make a video?

I think it is not 100% correct. Though the concepts in his video are not new (i.e they were already mentioned in quite a lot of videos\threads here) - the guy clearly has a good eye. And he depicts quite a lot of interesting moments that show the application of those principles. That in itself is already worth watching.
 
You know, I gotta say it's difficult to know how to feel about vids like that. Seeing certain terminology used. At least Ian Streetz dropped my name, but a lot of these guys profiting off basically standing on Dadi's shoulders don't. No mentions even of inspiration. It's great on one hand to see people thinking about this stuff and putting it out there, but it's also a little weird to see the basic premise of the Burley video regurgitated over and over without reference to the originator.

I personally have used concepts and terminology I've picked up from you and Dadi in the analysis I write, but I do my best to link the thread or video I got it from (plus nobody pays me). It was weird watching that video and seeing things described almost exactly as in the Burley video without any reference to it. I remember seeing another awhile back by a different guy who even used the exact same image of modern vs classical stances as the Burley video but made no mention of the source. It would be one thing if they demonstrated these things in a different context, but when they don't even bother to change the examples and are making money off that it doesn't seem right.
 
You know, I gotta say it's difficult to know how to feel about vids like that. Seeing certain terminology used. At least Ian Streetz dropped my name, but a lot of these guys profiting off basically standing on Dadi's shoulders don't. No mentions even of inspiration. It's great on one hand to see people thinking about this stuff and putting it out there, but it's also a little weird to see the basic premise of the Burley video regurgitated over and over without reference to the originator.

I personally have used concepts and terminology I've picked up from you and Dadi in the analysis I write, but I do my best to link the thread or video I got it from (plus nobody pays me). It was weird watching that video and seeing things described almost exactly as in the Burley video without any reference to it. I remember seeing another awhile back by a different guy who even used the exact same image of modern vs classical stances as the Burley video but made no mention of the source. It would be one thing if they demonstrated these things in a different context, but when they don't even bother to change the examples and are making money off that it doesn't seem right.

I feel you guys. Now I really enjoyed this video. It's great because it's a visual companion to the analysts and discussion from this forum. While watching it, I figured Wylie used this forum for a lot of his research. I can understand you guy's ambivalence to videos like these. Sinister and others have put in a lot of work educating guys like me over here on this board. These guys are the unsung heroes while others seem to take out sized credit. This is not to blast Wylie because I enjoy his videos and I don't know how he does his research. But I DO appreciate you guys over here as well.
 
Last edited:
I had similar thoughts with you on this matter and it's nice that I see you taking a stance on this.
Me and thousands more guys learned about this stance and these old school tactics that Wylie almost quoted without changing a word, from Dadi's video on Burley.
Ok, this is indeed the way many old school fighters fought. This style of boxing is not your partners and your own creation of course, but you guys analyzed it and conceptualized and teach your own distilled version.

He can't use the concepts and terminology you made famous and pass it in his videos as his own, especially when he takes such a big issue on plagiarizing himself, with other guys who are on the boxing analysis business.
And putting that matter aside, this video doesn't provide any new insight into Louis. It's just rehashing stuff that has been mentioned in the past several times.
Only the first page of this thread provides three times more information.
The same applies for his video about Willie Pep. If you have nothing new to add then why make a video?

Pretty much this, although he CAN use it technically. Though Dadi and I have discussed this between us and the agreement is we have to set the bar HIGHER. We're not making the kind of youtube money these guys likely are, but that is also largely due to the fact that we're actually teaching this stuff to people in real life and don't have time to exploit/extrapolate notions of others. Like I said, I wouldn't mind at all if there were some kind of reference. Even Harry Otty referenced Dadi, and he's THE Burley Historian. This didn't really mean a whole lot to me until I started trying to earn a living and support a Family as a trainer, lemme tell ya, it ain't easy. And even ONE mention from someone who has THOUSANDS of views on their page when I know my words are coming out of their fingers would be a nice advertisement.

I think it is not 100% correct. Though the concepts in his video are not new (i.e they were already mentioned in quite a lot of videos\threads here) - the guy clearly has a good eye. And he depicts quite a lot of interesting moments that show the application of those principles. That in itself is already worth watching.

I agree, Wylie, Osta (who actually shared his McCallum video with me and talked to me about Mike a bit) and Streetz do have good eyes. And this Sport could use more good eyes telling people WHAT to look for. It just doesn't need to be done in a manner that suggests they knew something others didn't all along, that's deceptive. Even Dadi and I don't perpetuate that,we worked hard for our knowledge. I held a spit bucket for 2 years for Amateur and Pro fighters before venturing to train anyone myself.

I personally have used concepts and terminology I've picked up from you and Dadi in the analysis I write, but I do my best to link the thread or video I got it from (plus nobody pays me). It was weird watching that video and seeing things described almost exactly as in the Burley video without any reference to it. I remember seeing another awhile back by a different guy who even used the exact same image of modern vs classical stances as the Burley video but made no mention of the source. It would be one thing if they demonstrated these things in a different context, but when they don't even bother to change the examples and are making money off that it doesn't seem right.

Agreed.

I feel you guys. Now I really enjoyed this video. It's great because it's a visual companion to the analysts and discussion from this forum. While watching it, I figured Wylie used this forum for a lot of his research. I can understand you guy's ambivalence to videos like these. Sinister and others have put in a lot of work educating guys like me over here on this board. These guys are the unsung heroes while others seem to take out sized credit. This is not to blast Wylie because I enjoy his videos and I don't know how he does his research. But I don't appreciate you guys over here as well.

Like I said earlier, more of this information out there is unequivocally a good thing. Ultimately, for boxing, it'll do more good than harm if some people get slighted in the process. Thankfully with the existence of the internet, at least mine and Dadi's names won't die, and guys like us, Billy Briscoe, Lyte Burley, Wilson Pitts, and many other guys carrying old school torches can reach out much much easier than before. There's even a young(ish) trainer at my Gym who studied under Clemente Medina who I talked into training people who is doing really really well. There's new life being breathed into these principals. And that's great.

That being said, we do have to remain competitive. Even teaching this stuff in-person is no easy hustle. In a microwave world people want everything last week. They want to be good already, or told they're good because they read some stuff and watched some videos. Doing this shit under stress is a different animal. The boxing gym is no place for idealism. That's the only disservice some of this information can do. You don't wanna try to learn it all by watching youtube vids. If it means THAT much to you, you need to seek out an instructor. I mean, imagine if Luke Skywalker learned his force and light saber skills from watching clips of Yoda. Ain't happening. He wasn't all that good and was taught first-hand by TWO Jedi Masters. There's a big difference between knowing stuff about this craft, and performing this craft.

That's why as things progress, that's what you're going to see out of Dadi and I. Like the thread I just answered a question in about the classic stance and taller fighters. I gave a video reference. What you're going to see when you look at our media isn't going to be merely us saying: "hey watch this video and read our description of it." You're actually going to see fighters being built. That's how my youtube channel is formatted right now. Though there's no spoon-feeding of what you're seeing, yet.
 
Your can't ask for credit for something you didn't invite.

You guys for sure brought it to modern eyes but that's where the credit giving should stop.

Dr. Yuri Verkhoshansky invited plyometrics, yet his estate doesn't ask for royaltis everytime you see plyometrics on some lame late night infomercial.

I will say that spreading your message(s) through some kinda distance learning is a great idea. Rather that's an actual course or just some videos on you tube it's great marketing.

Sherdog>video marketing>personal coaching

Money can be made on the videos through ads or a closed membershipsite ( mgination ) then obviously you have the high end in person coaching.

Ether way I'll be watching can't wait.
 
Last edited:
The bringing it to modern eyes part is mainly what I was referring to, and for the DIRECT use of terminology. There shouldn't be any discrepancy where that's concerned, unless guys in the U.K. can sufficiently explain precisely how they learned the exact terms we use, which are already a bit of a hodge-podge put together from various idioms of actual trainers.

However, bringing it to modern eyes, yes. And realistically I don't expect anything to happen, never have. Guys are gonna do this shit regardless, even if they know for a fact anyone doesn't like it. I just like to make it known those eyes didn't see it first anywhere different than you did, or anyone else reading this.
 
IMO, it would be good for creators of such videos to mention where they got their inspiration from.
There are quite a few reasons to that.

1.
It is simply to give the credit to the original source.

2.
Most of the chances, the creator of the video is
not in any kind competition with the coach due to geo locations and other stuff.

3.
Coaching and doing videos are two different things. Even if in video you can explain the final system - it is still not enough. There is also a system on how to get a guy to that final level - doing that part without a coach (just with video) is problematic.
 
You know, I gotta say it's difficult to know how to feel about vids like that. Seeing certain terminology used. At least Ian Streetz dropped my name, but a lot of these guys profiting off basically standing on Dadi's shoulders don't. No mentions even of inspiration. It's great on one hand to see people thinking about this stuff and putting it out there, but it's also a little weird to see the basic premise of the Burley video regurgitated over and over without reference to the originator.

I can understand to some degree how you might feel about it. It does kind of suck though - especially if he's making money on something that you & others have given away for free. It's worse if someone is making money on it without doing props to where he got it from - so they also benefit.

I think there are multiple positives though - the spreading of knowledge is a noble thing. If it does help someone or educate them - you can be credited to that. I think that in itself is a beautiful thing many take for granted. Not only that but it's a service to boxing - by educating others & preserving what you've learnt for others use. Many people take & benefit from martial arts but don't give anything of equivalent value back to it - imho it's shameful to take something that benefits you & not give something in return to it - you have my props that you are giving back - not many people do that. It's a noble thing.

I've learnt a hell of a lot about old school boxing tech/fundamentals from you and Wilson Pitts. I can credit both of you to my passion for old school boxing tech/fundamentals - it's directly impacted the way I think about my own Karate. To the point that I've started to see connection between old school karate & boxing - hell it's even changed the way I approach my Karate in training. Hell if you were based in the UK - I'd be a regular to your gym without a doubt.
 
I personally have used concepts and terminology I've picked up from you and Dadi in the analysis I write, but I do my best to link the thread or video I got it from (plus nobody pays me). It was weird watching that video and seeing things described almost exactly as in the Burley video without any reference to it. I remember seeing another awhile back by a different guy who even used the exact same image of modern vs classical stances as the Burley video but made no mention of the source. It would be one thing if they demonstrated these things in a different context, but when they don't even bother to change the examples and are making money off that it doesn't seem right.

It would be pretty ironic if Lee Wylie did use the Burley video as inspiration without referencing it - especially when he made a big "hoo haa" when Kenny Florian plagiarized his material.
 
He's used direct phrasings from the Burley video that are ones Dadi came up with. Like I said, I don't doubt he could have found an instructor himself who taught similar principals, or that he eventually got a hold of and read a lot of boxing books to find out about guys like Blackburn, but that shouldn't lead you to directly use phrasings someone else did on how to explain something. When you do that, you're copying. When you copy without crediting, that's plagiarizing.
 
That's the only disservice some of this information can do. You don't wanna try to learn it all by watching youtube vids. If it means THAT much to you, you need to seek out an instructor. I mean, imagine if Luke Skywalker learned his force and light saber skills from watching clips of Yoda. Ain't happening. He wasn't all that good and was taught first-hand by TWO Jedi Masters. There's a big difference between knowing stuff about this craft, and performing this craft.

If Luke would have watched prequel clips of Yoda flipping around like a maniac with a lightsaber and tried to base his idea on what a Jedi is off that.... He woulda got chopped up by Vader.
 
He's used direct phrasings from the Burley video that are ones Dadi came up with. Like I said, I don't doubt he could have found an instructor himself who taught similar principals, or that he eventually got a hold of and read a lot of boxing books to find out about guys like Blackburn, but that shouldn't lead you to directly use phrasings someone else did on how to explain something. When you do that, you're copying. When you copy without crediting, that's plagiarizing.
This quote described best what Wylie did.

I think it is not 100% correct. Though the concepts in his video are not new (i.e they were already mentioned in quite a lot of videos\threads here) - the guy clearly has a good eye. And he depicts quite a lot of interesting moments that show the application of those principles. That in itself is already worth watching.

Don't get me wrong. As I said in a comment I posted on his video about Louis ( he deleted it for some reason :rolleyes: ) some of his material is great and I am a fan.
Also, that sentence of yours, that I put in bold it's what made the Pep video at some moments worthwhile. That we can visualise those principles thanks to his videos.
But there is a limit of how many times you can repeat the same things. At some point the videos are becoming nothing more than fan tributes and not technique studies.
His last 2 videos are indicating that he might have taken the easy way, now that he has established his name and hordes of youtubers can't have enough of his "genius".
 
Last edited:
This quote described best what Wylie did.



Don't get me wrong. As I said in a comment I posted on his video about Louis ( he deleted it for some reason :rolleyes: ) some of his material is great and I am a fan.
Also, that sentence of yours, that I put in bold it's what made the Pep video at some moments worthwhile. That we can visualise those principles thanks to his videos.
But there is a limit of how many times you can repeat the same things. At some point the videos are becoming nothing more but fan tributes and not technique studies.
His last 2 videos are indicating that he might have taken the easy way, now that he has established his name and hordes of youtubers can't take enough of his "genius".


Is that because of lack of technical awareness or lazyness?
 
Back
Top