Centreline thought

nottingham90

Yellow Belt
@Yellow
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
Hey guys I've been grasping the "facing the centreline" concept of the past month and it has been working well in terms of making my opponents feel threatened I can see and feel a difference. (thanks sinister and the others who contributed to that thread).
My question is how hide yours successfully???

Maybe I am getting this confused and thinking I have to do more than what I'm doing but this is something I've been trying to grasp on my own in the gym but in no means can I do it alone and the guys I work with don't know stuff to this extent tbh.

So what is the best way to conceal yours?

I am a southpaw too if that changes things.
 
If you're a Southpaw, then yours is already tricky for anyone who doesn't understand the concept to get to. But it's all about preserving the depth of your stance, and moving around the person's attacks (or stuffing them)...controlling the distance between the two of you once they feel threatened. In other words, don't square up, and make them feel like they have to reach for yours.
 
If you're a Southpaw, then yours is already tricky for anyone who doesn't understand the concept to get to. But it's all about preserving the depth of your stance, and moving around the person's attacks (or stuffing them)...controlling the distance between the two of you once they feel threatened. In other words, don't square up, and make them feel like they have to reach for yours.

What's your definition of "don't square up" do you mean with the upper body? And your last response makes me think of broner and demarco.
 
Not squaring up period. Feet side by side, frontal position of the torso.
 
just to clear things up for myself if my foot happens to be on the outside I am NOT threatening his centreline or can I??? Because I am trying to think of in it reverse, if my foots always on the inside facing him correctly he cant threaten me.
 
If your foot is only on the outside, you're completely dependent upon that angle. A smart fighter can thwart this pretty easily. See Mayweather/Guerrero or Mayweather/Ortiz, and watch the way Floyd moves.

It does bring your rear hand closer to the center, and you can aim the jab at the left side of their head. If they pivot and face your center, you're in the much worse position.
 
TS, you might get something out of this thread:

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f11/pac-vs-bradley-fun-angles-2716363/

That has diagrams explaining some of the ideas Sinister is talking about.

I came up with the term "weak angle," and though nobody else uses it, I think it's a good way to describe angles. Basically, if your angle consists only of your foot being placed to the inside or outside of the opponents, with no noticable change in the direction of your body as a whole, then that's a weak angle, which means that you have an offensive opportunity, but so does your opponent.

A strong angle would be one in which you are the only one with an immediate offensive opportunity. So, going with Lu's example, if you step outside your opponent's lead foot and they pivot to face your center line directly, they now have a strong angle on you--the other guy can hit you, while you must turn before you can hit him back.
 
If you're a Southpaw, then yours is already tricky for anyone who doesn't understand the concept to get to. But it's all about preserving the depth of your stance, and moving around the person's attacks (or stuffing them)...controlling the distance between the two of you once they feel threatened. In other words, don't square up, and make them feel like they have to reach for yours.

Sinister,

I'd be interested to hear what you have to say about hiding your centreline when two orthodox fighters are facing one another (or, by the same logic, I suppose two southpaw fighters). I know that some of the above principles apply, but I also know that a southie vs orthodox has a slightly different set of rules from two fighters in the same stance.
 
TS, you might get something out of this thread:

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f11/pac-vs-bradley-fun-angles-2716363/

That has diagrams explaining some of the ideas Sinister is talking about.

I came up with the term "weak angle," and though nobody else uses it, I think it's a good way to describe angles. Basically, if your angle consists only of your foot being placed to the inside or outside of the opponents, with no noticable change in the direction of your body as a whole, then that's a weak angle, which means that you have an offensive opportunity, but so does your opponent.

A strong angle would be one in which you are the only one with an immediate offensive opportunity. So, going with Lu's example, if you step outside your opponent's lead foot and they pivot to face your center line directly, they now have a strong angle on you--the other guy can hit you, while you must turn before you can hit him back.

The way you explained angling in this post really helped me understand it and why foot placement doesn't matter really, but how you face and point the foot. i.e. the toe

Great material
 
Back
Top