Bagwork critique

[Sinister]

It went into responses in live fighting, though. Bag work is bag work. Even sparring doesn't tell the tale of how a fighter will behave in a fight. This isn't even two full rounds of bag work.

 

[apizur**]

While apizur kicks his back foot all the way to the ropes and covers his head with both gloves.

It went into responses in live fighting, though. Bag work is bag work. Even sparring doesn't tell the tale of how a fighter will behave in a fight. This isn't even two full rounds of bag work.

...

He's a big boy, Sin.

 

[Discipulus]

...is that some kind of fat joke?

I'll reply to the responses in this thread when I get some free time tomorrow, folks. Thanks for all the constructive criticism.

 

[a guy]

...

He's a big boy, Sin.

Hahaha love the gif. The full video is nuts.

 

[sourdiesel209]

for gods sake put those hands up!!!

 

[Sinister]

...

He's a big boy, Sin.

His size has nothing to do with getting better at critiquing. Besides, if you read between the lines, my overall criticism is that this is a non-indicative video of a round and a half of bag work. I've given YOU much more useful information about your videos than I can give to Connor about this one, because you've posted video of application.

 

[NAKMUAY18]

It went into responses in live fighting, though. Bag work is bag work. Even sparring doesn't tell the tale of how a fighter will behave in a fight. This isn't even two full rounds of bag work.

By all means disagree with what's being said, but that's other people's opinions. You have a shit ton more experience than me, but I don't agree with some of the things you teach . I don't think your wrong though, I just don't like to do things that way. Disc put a bag work video up for everyone's opinion, if he only wanted yours then he would have sent it directly to you.

I don't think Api was making a fat joke (could be wrong), I think he just means that Disc doesn't need to be defended.

 

[Discipulus]

By all means disagree with what's being said, but that's other people's opinions. You have a shit ton more experience than me, but I don't agree with some of the things you teach . I don't think your wrong though, I just don't like to do things that way. Disc put a bag work video up for everyone's opinion, if he only wanted yours then he would have sent it directly to you.

I don't think Api was making a fat joke (could be wrong), I think he just means that Disc doesn't need to be defended.

For the record, I was kidding about the fat joke thing.

I'll get to everyone's critiques a bit later, but as far as the high guard thing goes (the serious suggestions, not the jokey "hands up!" ones), the fact of the matter is that I don't really want to fight with a high guard. I know for a fact that it's not necessary, and until I manage to get out to Vegas, I'm trying my best to teach myself how to get by without it.

The only times that I do throw up a high guard are when I'm hurt or under severe duress, which happens more than I'd like because, whenever I've gotten to spar lately, I've been tossed in against much more seasoned fighters than myself, and given virtually no practical advice other than "hands up" which, regardless of how viable you think a high guard is, about as useful to an inexperienced boxer as "swing the club" would be to an inexperienced golfer.

So, I'm determined to learn to box without having to rely on a high guard. I want to pick off jabs with my right hand, and slip, roll, or ignore everything else. I know I'm not at it yet, but that's my goal. For those who don't think it's possible, here's one of the best pressure fighters of all time, against one of the best junior welterweights of all time, and he doesn't ever feel like he has to shell up.



Honestly, I think the high guard is completely counterintuitive to a pressure fighting style. You throw up a high guard when you feel pressured, but I'm supposed to be making the other guy feel pressured. He's supposed to be the one who's so worried about getting hit that he has to throw his hands up, and I'm supposed to be the guy who doesn't stop punching even when he does that.

That was a longer rant than I initially intended, but the long and short of it is that I don't want to fight with a high guard, and I don't think it suits my style, so I'm going to practice not using it.

By the way, I'm going to be doing some light sparring and partner drills with a friend soon, so I'll post those when I get the chance. I know anything with a partner tells you a lot more about my skill level than any amount of bagwork could, so we'll see soon how well I can apply this stuff in a controlled setting.

 

[Sinister]

By all means disagree with what's being said, but that's other people's opinions. You have a shit ton more experience than me, but I don't agree with some of the things you teach . I don't think your wrong though, I just don't like to do things that way. Disc put a bag work video up for everyone's opinion, if he only wanted yours then he would have sent it directly to you.

I don't think Api was making a fat joke (could be wrong), I think he just means that Disc doesn't need to be defended.

See that's the thing, everyone that's making criticisms in here are taking them way too seriously, that's part of what I'm getting at. I think that IS because its kind of an indirect objection to me. I don't really care if anyone doesn't like what I do, I have fighters who fight and win, or can at least intelligently defend themselves. That's more than enough validation.

But if someone is going to make what I think are inappropriate inferences from a video with not enough evidence to make those inferences, then I'm going to say something about that because its unfair. It doesn't need to be Discipulus, I've said similar things in other threads. If I put up a video of a guy (doesn't even need to be me) doing less than 2 full rounds of bag work, it should be strongly considered that they may have just been getting started, or working on some specific things. I've rarely ever seen a bag work video that's indicative of everything a guy knows how to do or doesn't know how to do. Sometimes there's criticism of people around here that ask things of them that they simply havent been taught yet.

And I was playing along with the fat joke thing, my statement was tongue-in-cheek.

 

[shpboris]

For the sake of discussion, the examples of Frazier and Pryor who were not using high guard look not so convincing.

Frazier IMO had exceptional reflexes - may be he wasn't the fastest guy out there, but still exceptional reflexes. Pryor was also very fast + very good reflexes. So my feeling is that unless you are very gifted in those areas (speed + reaction time), having an option to fall back on may be valuable.

BTW, both of them could take enormous punch sometimes - which is not an option for an average fighter.

Another possibility for not using high guard IMO is if you have strong punch + reach advantage. Then probably you have the phisycal tools to keep th opponent at distance - so no need to use high guard.

 

[Nuclearlandmine]

How do you know that Frazier and Pryor have cat-like reflexes and not just well schooled? And also, Frazier was partially blind on his left eye for the duration of his career. So unless he have hyper reflex just out of one eye....I don't think so.

And also, Bernard Hopkins is another example of well-schooled fighters who relied on craftiness and technique, and he doesn't rely on high guard. At his advance age, you can't say that he relied on his "explosiveness"

 

[shpboris]

How do you know that Frazier and Pryor have cat-like reflexes and not just well schooled? And also, Frazier was partially blind on his left eye for the duration of his career. So unless he have hyper reflex just out of one eye....I don't think so.

And also, Bernard Hopkins is another example of well-schooled fighters who relied on craftiness and technique, and he doesn't rely on high guard. At his advance age, you can't say that he relied on his "explosiveness"

IMO, it is a combination of both - having reflexes + being well schooled.

If by just being well schooled everybody could fight like Frazier, you would see more people like him. Kind of, it is like saying if I study enough I will become professor in math ...

 

[shpboris]

BTW, about specifics why I think that all those listed guys DID have good reflexes:

Sometimes you just have those really unexpected moments where they defend exceptionally well and another guy would just get hit flush.

I mean, not that they slip, say, after their own right hand or that their slipping technique is incorporated into their footwork and punching. Those moments you can attribute to being well schooled.

But not some totally unexpected crap that happens during the fight and they are still able to defend somehow - this is reflexes, IMO.

 

[Sinister]

Well, there are a lot of math professors, and it stands to reason that many of them became math professors by studying.

There were more fighters like Frazier, when Benton and Futch were around to build them. Not many had a left hook like he did, and of course he had an astounding sense of timing and good reflexes. But I'd hope any World Champion fighter would regardless of whether it was natural or developed. Some ability to comprehend and utilize timing (via reflex) is an absolutely necessary trait for a fighter, kind of like how being tall has become necessary for basketball players.

 

[Nuclearlandmine]

Edit.

 

[Sinister]

For the sake of discussion, the examples of Frazier and Pryor who were not using high guard look not so convincing.

Frazier IMO had exceptional reflexes - may be he wasn't the fastest guy out there, but still exceptional reflexes. Pryor was also very fast + very good reflexes. So my feeling is that unless you are very gifted in those areas (speed + reaction time), having an option to fall back on may be valuable.

BTW, both of them could take enormous punch sometimes - which is not an option for an average fighter.

Another possibility for not using high guard IMO is if you have strong punch + reach advantage. Then probably you have the phisycal tools to keep th opponent at distance - so no need to use high guard.

No one is saying not to fall back on that option, though. Even Discipulus has repeatedly said he does because he's not where he wants to be. But the ability to defend a punch without needing to occupy your hands is simply not reliant on being exceptional with physicality. And with regards to taking an enormous punch...well, its boxing. You're GOING to get hit, you're going to get hit hard, rocked, knocked down, possibly stopped. That's happened to everyone with the exception of some guys were never stopped. Using hands for defense doesn't stop that. Plenty of guys have had to take a big punch with their hands glued to their faces, but they still got hit because their opponent was smart.

Taking a big shot isn't an option for an average fighter? Well, if the fighter IS average than they're going to get hit, right? It's unavoidable. I would hope that no one has it in their goals to be average.

 

[shpboris]

Some ability to comprehend and utilize timing (via reflex) is an absolutely necessary trait for a fighter, kind of like how being tall has become necessary for basketball players.

That is my feeling as well.

But you have a lot of guys in Germany\Europe who fight successfully based on a style which is IMO less restrictive in terms of having good reflexes. In certain situations they can't react perfectly like Frazier or Montell Griffin or JT, but at least they don't get hit flush while pretending that they can.

I think that if you are not exceptionally gifted fighter, you will be more successful if you try and utilize every type of defense - arms, head movement and footwork.

What do you think ?

 

[shpboris]

Sorry, missed your last post ...

 

[NAKMUAY18]

See that's the thing, everyone that's making criticisms in here are taking them way too seriously, that's part of what I'm getting at. I think that IS because its kind of an indirect objection to me. I don't really care if anyone doesn't like what I do, I have fighters who fight and win, or can at least intelligently defend themselves. That's more than enough validation.

But if someone is going to make what I think are inappropriate inferences from a video with not enough evidence to make those inferences, then I'm going to say something about that because its unfair. It doesn't need to be Discipulus, I've said similar things in other threads. If I put up a video of a guy (doesn't even need to be me) doing less than 2 full rounds of bag work, it should be strongly considered that they may have just been getting started, or working on some specific things. I've rarely ever seen a bag work video that's indicative of everything a guy knows how to do or doesn't know how to do. Sometimes there's criticism of people around here that ask things of them that they simply havent been taught yet.

And I was playing along with the fat joke thing, my statement was tongue-in-cheek.

The fact you have fighters that win with you style is awesome and the perfect justification. The fact guys win with hands up to defend is justification for them. Their is no right answer, just opinions. Disco wanted peoples critique on this video and that's what he got.

I think Disco's answer was perfect, I want to learn to box with my hands down. That's it, end of. Win or lose that's what he wants to do, he's not saying everybody should but he wants to.

And I guess I had a sarcasm failure with the the fat jokes. He's obviously not fat anymore, he's cuddly.

 

[Discipulus]

For the sake of discussion, the examples of Frazier and Pryor who were not using high guard look not so convincing.

Frazier IMO had exceptional reflexes - may be he wasn't the fastest guy out there, but still exceptional reflexes. Pryor was also very fast + very good reflexes. So my feeling is that unless you are very gifted in those areas (speed + reaction time), having an option to fall back on may be valuable.

BTW, both of them could take enormous punch sometimes - which is not an option for an average fighter.

Another possibility for not using high guard IMO is if you have strong punch + reach advantage. Then probably you have the phisycal tools to keep th opponent at distance - so no need to use high guard.

Pryor was fast and did have great timing, but neither of those allowed him to beat Arguello. Arguello was a master, and he beat the shit out of plenty of fast guys in his time. Pryor, though, had absolutely relentless pressure, both mentally and physically. You'll notice that, from the very beginning of that fight, Arguello learns that he's not allowed to miss, because if he does Pryor will immediatley punish him. And if he's not allowed to miss, he needs to be very careful about picking his shots, which almost instantaneously assures that Pryor will have the far greater volume of punches. Pryor is one of the best ever when it comes to using defense, even better than Frazier, and his mentality of "every movement sets up a punch" is what made him so dangerous.

Of course his speed and timing contributed to his overall game in a big way, but you simply can't be a great fighter without a certain level of athleticism.

I'll say again, I find the idea that I should work out of a high guard more often strange, both for my style and my build. If my opponent sees me holding my hands up, he can clearly see that I'm not punching, which means that he can try to punch me. Particularly as a big, slow guy, I really don't want to give the impression of a stationary, defensive target. Part of being a pressure fighter is always looking like you're ready to throw back and come forward, and a high guard just doesn't give that impression.