ken norton and the blackburn crouch

[Steve08]

Recently I had the pleasure of watching the Heavyweight championship match between Ken Norton and Larry Holmes. I was impressed by the speed, technical acumen, and overall athleticism of both men but what really stood out to me was Norton's subtle, pro-active defense, a lot of which appeared to be rooted in his excellent stance. He repeatedly stood with his head shifted over his rear leg, giving Holmes a difficult time of landing his excellent jab or straight right, and as such did not have to move his head much at all to slip punches. From there his right hand was active and ready to parry hooks or jabs, which to me makes this stance truly gorgeous. It seems as though it pares down the amount of reactions one needs to make, which to me is ideal, for if you have too many options then it can be easy to set yourself up. It's systematic and removes the need to think about defense.

What I am curious about is if any of you gentlemen have observed potential weaknesses in this defense either in your own competition, sparring, film study, etc? Basically, what cracks exist in this armor? One immediate caveat I can see is the longer time needed to slip over the lead leg and prepare a crushing hook, as the head is forced to travel a greater distance simply by virtue of it being held in what I refer to as a "non-centered" position.

Also, do you guys think this stance would mostly be suited for Boxing, or could it be adapted to MMA and kickfighting with some doing? I think it is possible, but a lot of people seem to think you can't be ready to defend takedowns or low kicks without being completely square with your head bolt upright. However, perhaps I'm missing something..?

Any thoughts, insight etc. would be appreciated.

Cheers

 

[clashnat]

I always wondered how this didn't help him against the punchers who knocked him out. Compare it to Ali who always had his head in the center line of attack and did very well against Foreman, Shavers and Lyle.

 

[PivotPunch]

I always wondered how this didn't help him against the punchers who knocked him out. Compare it to Ali who always had his head in the center line of attack and did very well against Foreman, Shavers and Lyle.

Ali had an incredible chin he was one of the most durable boxers ever while Norton always started to curmble when he got hit by really big punchers. If Ali had Norton's chin/tendency to give in under pressure then Foreman, Shavers and Lyle would have probably knocked him out and Ali just had great speed and reflexes

 

[Uchi Mata]

I don't think this style has any glaring weaknesses for boxing. If you too predictable in slipping the same way via the crouch every time you see a cross coming you are vulnerable to a feint followed by a lead uppercut, but there are weaknesses like that in any stance/style.

In terms of use in MMA and kickboxing, it's getting a little riskier. I do think you need to be a little more square to guard against takedowns, but the essence of the style still works. I use it a lot in sparring. You just have to shorten your head movements, because if you're ducking really low you can easily eat a knee or kick. I tend to use more of Mayweather style shoulder roll with a small duck than the full on deep crouch that typifies the Blackburn style. But if you can get good at combining that little roll and duck with a stiff jab as a cross counter, most lower level MMA guys will have no idea how to deal with it. The counterpunching game is just non-existent outside the higher levels in my experience.

Regarding low kicks, you are somewhat vulnerable but you can mitigate a lot of that vulnerability with good footwork. If you're circling away from the power hand consistently and moving in and out it's going to be hard for your opponent to dial up any big power shots. The biggest risk is a guy who's adept at the Dutch style and uses combination punching to force you to set your feet and then kicks the hell out of your lead leg. I have had trouble with this, where I'll set my feet and slip and roll to avoid the punches but then I'm not in a good position to check the kick. But that's probably more a function of me not being a very good striker rather than a weakness endemic to the style.

 

[shpboris]

I think it is possible, but a lot of people seem to think you can't be ready to defend takedowns or low kicks without being completely square with your head bolt upright.

I have seen many times this opinion that you should be square to be able to defend the takedowns. But I am not sure where it comes from - some of the best defenders ever in wrestling used VERY sideways stance.

 

[Discipulus]

Jack Blackburn never actually trained a crouching fighter, to my knowledge. In fact, there's more evidence to suggest that he didn't really GET the crouch--at least not at first: consider how much trouble Joe Louis had in his first fight with Arturo Godoy, who did fight out of a crouch. Louis and Blackburn clearly underestimated the style going into that bout.

And in any case, Blackburn never had anything to do with Norton, who was a product of Eddie Futch.

 

[Steve08]

Jack Blackburn never actually trained a crouching fighter, to my knowledge. In fact, there's more evidence to suggest that he didn't really GET the crouch--at least not at first: consider how much trouble Joe Louis had in his first fight with Arturo Godoy, who did fight out of a crouch. Louis and Blackburn clearly underestimated the style going into that bout.

And in any case, Blackburn never had anything to do with Norton, who was a product of Eddie Futch.

Huh, evidently you are far more educated on matters of boxing history than me. But, I didn't mean to imply Norton learned his stance from Blackburn; in truth, I merely borrowed the phrase from one of Jack Slack's e-books, where he claimed that Blackburn taught that stance to both Louis and Sugar Ray Robinson.

This is all just semantics, though. Lettuce refer to it as a "crouching stance" for lack of a better phrase.

What do you think of the crouching stance?

I have seen many times this opinion that you should be square to be able to defend the takedowns. But I am not sure where it comes from - some of the best defenders ever in wrestling used VERY sideways stance.

That makes two of us. I think a lot of it stems from ignorance and people just repeating what they have heard others claim. For one thing if your rear hip is more backward compared to the lead hip, you limit the amount of leg attacks your opponent has, meaning he can only shoot on singles not doubles. From here you only have to worry about single leg defense which I personally always thought was pretty easy. This in and of itself comprised probably about 50% of the takedown defense of Jose Aldo and BJ Penn who I'm sure have much better TDD than your average internet mouthbreather.

Just out of curiosity though who are some of the wrestlers you had in mind when you said that?

I do think you need to be a little more square to guard against takedowns

Why, exactly? Just curious.

I have had trouble with this, where I'll set my feet and slip and roll to avoid the punches but then I'm not in a good position to check the kick. But that's probably more a function of me not being a very good striker rather than a weakness endemic to the style.

Possibly, yeah. When you evade their stuff and it's likely that a low kick is coming, try to make sure your weight is either centered or over your back leg. It's significantly easier to check kicks when your weight isn't on your lead leg because in that kind of stance you have to re-set your weight to even start raising your leg. I'm just assuming that that's the problem though, it may be something unrelated.

 

[Sinister]

FWIW, I'd call Norton's style the actual Philly Shell, as it was an adaptation of what Frazier used (also taught by Futch) who was a Philly-based fighter at the time and that's where Futch had strong influence due to Frazier's popularity. Also, passed down through Georgie Benton, who trained Bennie Briscoe, who used a similar positioning and approach to fighting as both Ali and Norton.

Frazier:



Norton:



Briscoe:



The difference between these men and Benton is that Benton wasn't as much of an aggressor. Though he did UNDERSTAND putting a guy on his back foot, he just wasn't a gigantic puncher himself. So he appeared more defensive:



Now, WAS all this stuff influenced by Blackburn? Most-likely, Blackburn and Futch knew each other well as Futch was a regular sparring partner for Louis, even though he hated it only being a middleweight himself. Joe always requested Futch because he couldn't land punches on him. But therein lies the separation, it's likely Futch picked up defensive nuances from another source in Michigan, as he learned to box in Detroit (which I think is why they sort of look like practitioners of the Crab style Floyd uses). Then took them to Philly and applied them to the aggressive fighters there. And cemented the spread of that with Benton becoming a renowned trainer. If anything I'd say what looks influenced by Blackburn is how these men threw their punches. They dropped their weight similar to how Louis did when they wanted to hurt you.

IMO the most glaring weakness of this style is two-fold, but centered around one thing, which is that these men tended to drop their weight onto their front foot. But it's clear it had a function, they'd bait a punch, and crack you when you opened up. But if you knew how to stay back and fire from just out-of range, they could be out-boxed. That's how Briscoe lost almost all the fights he lost, and fighters who didn't give up control of distance to Benton (weren't baited by him) gave him the most problems. Also, for the hyper-aggressive ones like Briscoe and Frazier, they could be put off-balance with a shove or nudge in the right direction, they'd have to work to reset before starting anything else. Foreman did that to Frazier for most of the first minute of their bout. Just shoved him off-balance every time he went in, a-la a teacher of Foreman...Sandy Saddler.

They were all pretty adept at slipping, sliding, and rolling with punches, but some of them were a bit too rhythmic. They could be timed, albeit it took some of greatest fighters in the History of the Sport to time them.

 

[a guy]

I have seen many times this opinion that you should be square to be able to defend the takedowns. But I am not sure where it comes from - some of the best defenders ever in wrestling used VERY sideways stance.

Very good point, it's a myth.

I mean it's no coincidence that none of the 3 current strikers in MMA with the best TDD (Aldo, Machida and JDS) stand square. Or all that wide/low, even though people insist on that as well.

 

[shpboris]

Just out of curiosity though who are some of the wrestlers you had in mind when you said that?

Both of Saitiev brothers. The older one is 3-time Olympic champion, 6 time World champion etc ... Leipold from Germany - almost all of his scoring came from counters to TD attempts. If I remember correctly - John Smith from US, but he had also very low stance.

The area of TDD is an art in itself IMO and it is much deeper, than just standing square, moving your feet back and putting your weight on the opponent while pressing his head down.

 

[a guy]

I don't think this style has any glaring weaknesses for boxing. If you too predictable in slipping the same way via the crouch every time you see a cross coming you are vulnerable to a feint followed by a lead uppercut, but there are weaknesses like that in any stance/style.

In terms of use in MMA and kickboxing, it's getting a little riskier. I do think you need to be a little more square to guard against takedowns, but the essence of the style still works. I use it a lot in sparring. You just have to shorten your head movements, because if you're ducking really low you can easily eat a knee or kick. I tend to use more of Mayweather style shoulder roll with a small duck than the full on deep crouch that typifies the Blackburn style. But if you can get good at combining that little roll and duck with a stiff jab as a cross counter, most lower level MMA guys will have no idea how to deal with it. The counterpunching game is just non-existent outside the higher levels in my experience.

Regarding low kicks, you are somewhat vulnerable but you can mitigate a lot of that vulnerability with good footwork. If you're circling away from the power hand consistently and moving in and out it's going to be hard for your opponent to dial up any big power shots. The biggest risk is a guy who's adept at the Dutch style and uses combination punching to force you to set your feet and then kicks the hell out of your lead leg. I have had trouble with this, where I'll set my feet and slip and roll to avoid the punches but then I'm not in a good position to check the kick. But that's probably more a function of me not being a very good striker rather than a weakness endemic to the style.

It's really hard to land a lead uppercut on someone standing like that. You have to square your feet up and move forward to be in position, and even then it's a little awkward. Left uppercut works much better when their head is over the front foot. The punches that tend to be most dangerous for guys who are low on their back foot are the right uppercut, and a tight, downward arcing right hand.

And about the leg kicks, if you're slipping (or punching) then don't worry about checking. Catch instead.

 

[a guy]

Both of Saitiev brothers. The older one is 3-time Olympic champion, 6 time World champion etc ... Leipold from Germany - almost all of his scoring came from counters to TD attempts. If I remember correctly - John Smith from US, but he had also very low stance.

The area of TDD is an art in itself IMO and it is much deeper, than just standing square, moving your feet back and putting your weight on the opponent while pressing his head down.

Another good post, and even in wrestling most TDD isn't deep sprawling. It's primarily circling, using the hands and fighting for position.

 

[shpboris]

Another good post, and even in wrestling most TDD isn't deep sprawling. It's primarily circling, using the hands and fighting for position.

Don't want to hijack the striking thread with this but anyway ))

If you watch guys like Leipold and Saitiev they will often let you to grab one leg and counter from there. Leipold preferred throws from standing position. Saitiev would just sit on his a..ss and do all kinds of sweeps from there. They were so good at TDD that in some matches it would come to absurd situation, where their opponents would refuse to try TD because they were afraid that this is just a trap.

 

[Sinister]

^That sentiment is why I say that if anyone in MMA is afraid to get taken-down, it's because they don't train their grappling enough, not because there's something wrong with their boxing/kickboxing.

 

[shpboris]

^That sentiment is why I say that if anyone in MMA is afraid to get taken-down, it's because they don't train their grappling enough, not because there's something wrong with their boxing/kickboxing.

Is there a different opinion on that ? I mean, you don't learn TDD in boxing gym )))

 

[Sinister]

The old "you can't do so and so because you'll get taken down"...well, if I suck at wrestling I'll get taken down no matter what. If I'm good at wrestling I don't care if someone tries to take me down, I'll do what I want.

It's interesting because with my Grand-dad being a Naval Corpsman, he learned more combat than the average Naval personnel. So I got acquainted with catch-wrestling at an early age because of him, but when I was older I gravitated more towards standing arts, but never lost my appreciation for catch. Well, when I was in HS me and a few buddies were dickin' around outside the school and a wrestler joined us. My buddies who had never grappled all ended up slammed, so yes, that theory can prove true. Takedown after takedown. Then he and I go, he shoots, I drop into a guillotine and wrap a leg up with my legs. He got up all butt-hurt and said that was an "illegal headlock." If we were on the mats, sure, but we were outside. I told him: "Out here, you shoot on me, you get choked." In other words, I didn't give a shit about being taken down in the first place.

 

[shpboris]

The old "you can't do so and so because you'll get taken down"...well, if I suck at wrestling I'll get taken down no matter what. If I'm good at wrestling I don't care if someone tries to take me down, I'll do what I want.

It's interesting because with my Grand-dad being a Naval Corpsman, he learned more combat than the average Naval personnel. So I got acquainted with catch-wrestling at an early age because of him, but when I was older I gravitated more towards standing arts, but never lost my appreciation for catch. Well, when I was in HS me and a few buddies were dickin' around outside the school and a wrestler joined us. My buddies who had never grappled all ended up slammed, so yes, that theory can prove true. Takedown after takedown. Then he and I go, he shoots, I drop into a guillotine and wrap a leg up with my legs. He got up all butt-hurt and said that was an "illegal headlock." If we were on the mats, sure, but we were outside. I told him: "Out here, you shoot on me, you get choked." In other words, I didn't give a shit about being taken down in the first place.

To play the devil's advocate, there were some guys in MMA like Mirko. His technical wrestling was close to 0, but due to his striking, people would shoot from too far outside. Also when in clinch he was very strong phisically.

So all-in-all, he did great without having good wrestling.

 

[Sinister]

Yeah but that's fairly rare. A guy who takes understanding of distance and applies it generally. I feel more comfortable saying to someone afraid of takedowns: "Well, we'll learn some wrestling so you don't worry about it so much"...as opposed to saying: "Well, be like CroCop."

 

[PivotPunch]

Very good point, it's a myth.

I mean it's no coincidence that none of the 3 current strikers in MMA with the best TDD (Aldo, Machida and JDS) stand square. Or all that wide/low, even though people insist on that as well.

Oh wait you said "none" for whatever reason I read "all"

 

[clashnat]

^ Your buddies who got slammed. Were they trained in any combat sport? Like boxing?
We have this swarmer in in our gym who goes viciously to the body. If he fought a wrestler, it would really be about who gets off first.

Crocop wrestled a lot as a kid by the way. Not in a real amateur wrestling environment, but that doesn't mean that there was no method to his training. So in a way he trained for MMA his whole life, even before he started with MMA.