Cuban Boxing Fundamentals

[tekkenfan]

Greed, laziness, and sub-par practices make for a struggle of industry. Boxing is like old shopping malls, impressive to look at but failed to update the experience to make it palatable for generations riddled with convenience and laziness, which foster much more the desire to pretend to know how to fight as opposed to actually fighting. And competing with MMA as opposed to capitalizing on the increased need for fighting with the hands.

The market changes, but boxing is populated by people whose mantra is resistance to change.

curious what your thoughts are on ufcs formula vs boxing do you think boxing would do better under a ufc like org where most top guys are signed and do you think if mma was like boxing where top fighters could fight anyone not just guys signed by ufc

 

[Sinister]

curious what your thoughts are on ufcs formula vs boxing do you think boxing would do better under a ufc like org where most top guys are signed and do you think if mma was like boxing where top fighters could fight anyone not just guys signed by ufc

I think everyone thinks it would be awesome, then it wouldn't actually be. Big boxing is not what's wrong with boxing popularity.

 

[Dexter]

The universal favorite of all time, Mr. Frolov, introduces a new coach with a different approach to training. He is a former master of sports international level and a judge of the international category. Will we discuss it?

 

[StopDucking]

The universal favorite of all time, Mr. Frolov, introduces a new coach with a different approach to training. He is a former master of sports international level and a judge of the international category. Will we discuss it?

The way he's teaching to lean forward on the jab makes no sense to me.

 

[Dexter]

@StopDucking

The way he's teaching to lean forward on the jab makes no sense to me.

There is such an approach in training:

From a long distance, they strike either with a step with the front foot (with a vertical body) or by transferring the body weight FOR the front foot and with the body tilted towards the opponent (practically falling towards the opponent) or with a step (or pulling towards the opponent) of the back foot . Each of these options is performed depending on the situation. If there is a high probability of enemy counter-strikes and the moment is chosen to enter the strike distance, then strikes are applied without loss of balance towards the opponent (without tilting the body towards the opponent and without carrying the body weight over the front leg).
If the fighter chose the moment to enter the strike distance when the probability of an oncoming strike by the enemy is low, then you can enter the strike distance with a loss of balance, that is, with the upper body tilted towards the enemy, with the transfer of body weight over the front leg or kicks in the fall towards the enemy.

Personally, I believe that such a hypertrophic transfer of body weight to the front leg, often used by some trainers when teaching beginners to better understand the idea of putting the whole body behind the punch, not just the arm, is wrong and harmful for the fighter in the future. 3 main problems of such approach:

1. Bad balance - the center of the body moves from one leg to the other, instead of remaining in the middle.
2. Lack of speed - the body has to move back and forth with each hit, forcing you to beat either hard, OR fast, but to do this and that at the same time is impossible.
3. Power loss - your strikes are less powerful because you are simply trying to transmit power while standing on one leg. (c)

 

[Reyesnuthugr]

The way he's teaching to lean forward on the jab makes no sense to me.

When the trainer demonstrates, he's stepping with the jab, but instead of stepping forward he's shifting his weight to the front foot and twisting like you would for a power punch, typical heel-toe (and then shift back after the jab is done). The way the trainer does it looks exaggerated and off to me but still looks like it could maybe work.

The guy he's teaching is instead stepping UP on his tiptoes (because that's all he sees) while trying to punch and that's all he's doing, which is not what the trainer wants (because it is goofy and wrong). You want to sit down with punches not go up on your toes, that reduces your power and control and makes it easy to get knocked on your ass if you get hit while doing it.

That's what Ronda was doing when she was 'fighting' Nunes and it really made things so much worse for her, getting slapped around like a puppet and unable to recover balance while taking damage. Bad stuff. Ronda no doubt heard that general boxing maxim to "stay on your toes" so she kept going up tippie toes after she would get smashed in an exchange. You're supposed to keep over the balls of your feet for balance, not rise up on your toes but Ronda didn't know that because the only instruction she had was those tired, worn out phrases without any specifics or clarification (because her trainers don't know any besides the cliches they've heard on TV, movies etc.-- they'll tell her "head mooment!" but never showed her how)

 

[ShadowoftheSun]

@StopDucking



There is such an approach in training:

From a long distance, they strike either with a step with the front foot (with a vertical body) or by transferring the body weight FOR the front foot and with the body tilted towards the opponent (practically falling towards the opponent) or with a step (or pulling towards the opponent) of the back foot . Each of these options is performed depending on the situation. If there is a high probability of enemy counter-strikes and the moment is chosen to enter the strike distance, then strikes are applied without loss of balance towards the opponent (without tilting the body towards the opponent and without carrying the body weight over the front leg).
If the fighter chose the moment to enter the strike distance when the probability of an oncoming strike by the enemy is low, then you can enter the strike distance with a loss of balance, that is, with the upper body tilted towards the enemy, with the transfer of body weight over the front leg or kicks in the fall towards the enemy.

Personally, I believe that such a hypertrophic transfer of body weight to the front leg, often used by some trainers when teaching beginners to better understand the idea of putting the whole body behind the punch, not just the arm, is wrong and harmful for the fighter in the future. 3 main problems of such approach:

1. Bad balance - the center of the body moves from one leg to the other, instead of remaining in the middle.
2. Lack of speed - the body has to move back and forth with each hit, forcing you to beat either hard, OR fast, but to do this and that at the same time is impossible.
3. Power loss - your strikes are less powerful because you are simply trying to transmit power while standing on one leg. (c)

This is interesting, because I know that Sinister is fond of saying that for the jab, the bodyweight does move to the front foot, but only for just long enough to move back.
Given that you're not fond of this approach, what approach do you personally prefer?

 

[StopDucking]

This is interesting, because I know that Sinister is fond of saying that for the jab, the bodyweight does move to the front foot, but only for just long enough to move back.
Given that you're not fond of this approach, what approach do you personally prefer?

You're misunderstanding Sinister's teaching.

Sinister's style is about keeping most of your bodyweight on the back foot. Therefore, some of that weight will move onto the front foot when you jab (if the weight was already there in the beginning, there would be no transfer). Sinister doesn't teach moving the weight onto the front foot, he advocates limiting (as opposed to maximizing) the weight transfer that will happen no matter what.

This (head over the back foot, rear heel down):

Is the opposite of this (head over the front foot, rear heel up):

 

[Dexter]

The guy he's teaching is instead stepping UP on his tiptoes (because that's all he sees) while trying to punch and that's all he's doing, which is not what the trainer wants (because it is goofy and wrong).

The guy's a newbie, so "monkey see - monkey do" .

This is interesting, because I know that Sinister is fond of saying that for the jab, the bodyweight does move to the front foot, but only for just long enough to move back.
Given that you're not fond of this approach, what approach do you personally prefer?

If you look at Western coaches, my old-school soviet mentors were most similar in their approach to Kenny Weldon. I personally prefer to keep the balance in the middle, in this I like the approach of the guy from expertboxing.com. I do not always agree with him, but I always read his articles with interest.

 

[Sinister]

My style is for control of distance. But many prefer the top priority to be to LAND the jab. And they'd not be wrong.

I just dont give a shit if the jab lands if it allows a punch to land itself. I prefer the reason to be maintenance of optimal distance.

 

[Beijing Power]

The universal favorite of all time, Mr. Frolov, introduces a new coach with a different approach to training. He is a former master of sports international level and a judge of the international category. Will we discuss it?

This channel is quite good. But u must understand the nature of the teaching philosophy. It's from the soviet school and as such is very attached to it's to it's teaching methodology. This can be seen in the video about the hook to the liver out of a pendulum step, imo.

I'm no expert in boxing, but I have learned quite a bit from this channel, and have used bits and pieces from what I learned during sparring with decent success.

Here are a few videos I saved:

 

[RabbitPunch36]

You're misunderstanding Sinister's teaching.

Sinister's style is about keeping most of your bodyweight on the back foot. Therefore, some of that weight will move onto the front foot when you jab (if the weight was already there in the beginning, there would be no transfer). Sinister doesn't teach moving the weight onto the front foot, he advocates limiting (as opposed to maximizing) the weight transfer that will happen no matter what.

This (head over the back foot, rear heel down):

Is the opposite of this (head over the front foot, rear heel up):

I don't quite understand so you shouldn't shift your weight from front to back foot to jab (same way as a hook). I thought shifting back is the way to do it because it moves the head further back and off the centerline.

 

[Dexter]

But u must understand the nature of the teaching philosophy. It's from the soviet school and as such is very attached to it's to it's teaching methodology.

Not sure I understand you, bro. Please clarify your point.

 

[Dexter]

Jab for dummies

 

[StopDucking]

I don't quite understand so you shouldn't shift your weight from front to back foot to jab (same way as a hook). I thought shifting back is the way to do it because it moves the head further back and off the centerline.

You only shift your weight from front to back if you've previously moved your weight from back to front, like when you go cross-jab. If you jab from your starting position with your weight already on the back foot and your head as far away from the opponent as possible, the weight can only move forward or not at all.

 

[Beijing Power]

Not sure I understand you, bro. Please clarify your point.

This is taken for many years of teaching, curriculum development, and eventual management within the Chinese education system which was based on the Soviet era model of education. If this is different from your experiences, please let me know.

Generally speaking, education under this style of methodology, is a very top down approach with academic standards instituted by government entities assign the task of designing them. While this is also the case for many western countries as well, implementation of such standards is seen as a guide and many paths can be taken to lead the students to achieve the defined learning goals. However, from experience, teaching under such a top down system, this kind of methodology often leads to a lack of creativity in teaching application and can also lack the ability to reach those students whom the methodology is poorly suited for.

My point was, as long as we understand the framework from which the teacher is operating, us as well educated students, have the ability to pick and choose which pieces from this framework to implement into our practice. With trial and error, we can find what best works for us.

Now, long-term learning tends to be a cyclical process and as such, some things we try to implement might not work at one's current stage of development, but will have a differing result in the future when have progressed further as a whole. But I digress. . .

 

[Dexter]

Soviet boxing school Lesson 2: counter-punchers.

 

[Lucas Coradini]

@Dexter

This video has surfaced a couples times round here. I love the technique demonstrated and always try use it. What you think about it? Is it standard for russian boxing? How advanced it is in the programming to learn footwork to set up counters like that?

 

[kenji goh]

This technique is pretty standard I guess because I have seen it in various russian videos too, as well in the one that @Dexter posted right above "Soviet boxing school Lesson 2: counter-punchers", around 8 minutes in .

@AndyMaBobs also posted a video of Dascalo Jacobs showing exactly the same moves.
https://forums.sherdog.com/posts/142341707/

So many different styles in Russian boxing. The people who use this technique use more their hips to move than Frolov's or Isaev's style from what I saw who are all about the pendulum step.

I have also found a russian channel of a boxing gym that it's very similar to @Sinister's channel.
They are all about partner drills and their style of boxing is more similar to Sinister's than Frolov's for example. It's also built around hip movement and they focus a lot in drills similar to the tile drill too.
In the first video they demonstrate their stance and movement principles and in the second one you can watch them in motion in partner drills.



EDIT: It's funny that the cuban boxing thread turned to Ex- Soviet boxing instead.

 

[zapataxiv]

This is taken for many years of teaching, curriculum development, and eventual management within the Chinese education system which was based on the Soviet era model of education. If this is different from your experiences, please let me know.

Generally speaking, education under this style of methodology, is a very top down approach with academic standards instituted by government entities assign the task of designing them. While this is also the case for many western countries as well, implementation of such standards is seen as a guide and many paths can be taken to lead the students to achieve the defined learning goals. However, from experience, teaching under such a top down system, this kind of methodology often leads to a lack of creativity in teaching application and can also lack the ability to reach those students whom the methodology is poorly suited for.

My point was, as long as we understand the framework from which the teacher is operating, us as well educated students, have the ability to pick and choose which pieces from this framework to implement into our practice. With trial and error, we can find what best works for us.

Now, long-term learning tends to be a cyclical process and as such, some things we try to implement might not work at one's current stage of development, but will have a differing result in the future when have progressed further as a whole. But I digress. . .

Are you talking about the Chinese education system in general or how education regarding boxing is instructed in the government sponsored sports universities?