Roots of Diaz's Standup Style

[DrawK]

The Pugilist: Nick Diaz, Daniel Mendoza, and the Sweet Science of Bruising - Head Kick Legend

 

[Sinister]

No.

 

[Jukai]

Sinister, do you mind elaborating on what you didn't like about the article? That was awfully well written. I don't think Diaz is trying to emulate 1790s boxers, but it does explain a lot of Diaz's techniques while citing wrestling and smaller gloves. A lot of it makes sense.

 

[FatalWombat]

good read

 

[Sinister]

Sinister, do you mind elaborating on what you didn't like about the article? That was awfully well written. I don't think Diaz is trying to emulate 1790s boxers, but it does explain a lot of Diaz's techniques while citing wrestling and smaller gloves. A lot of it makes sense.

Someone posted this in the Boxing forum and I read the article. The stance similarities are way exaggerated. Diaz stands straight up a lot, especially when throwing his punches, taking away his own leberage. The illustrations of Mendoza show the classic form from that period, which is a stance derived directly from fencing...which is one of the other main "Gentleman's" forms of combat. This is indicative of that Mendoza wasn't a free-swinging volume puncher with no real defense. And I feel it sells short what really makes Diaz what he is. His chin, heart, will to endure, and conditioning. Most of those things can't be taught, nor will you see in drawings.

 

[Jukai]

Someone posted this in the Boxing forum and I read the article. The stance similarities are way exaggerated. Diaz stands straight up a lot, especially when throwing his punches, taking away his own leberage. The illustrations of Mendoza show the classic form from that period, which is a stance derived directly from fencing...which is one of the other main "Gentleman's" forms of combat. This is indicative of that Mendoza wasn't a free-swinging volume puncher with no real defense. And I feel it sells short what really makes Diaz what he is. His chin, heart, will to endure, and conditioning. Most of those things can't be taught, nor will you see in drawings.

Thanks, good counter-arguments.

 

[thegreenblender]

Sinister, I get the sense that you don't have much respect for Diaz. Maybe I'm mistaking an impartial assessment for snubbing a fighter, I don't know.

What I wonder is, if Diaz isn't actually striking in the best possible way he could be, and if that doesn't merit less severe criticism. What I mean is, I think Diaz is well aware of his talents. His cardio, good chin, etc. I don't think the guy has illusions that he's Mayweather. I think he takes full advantage of his attributes, in a paradoxically smart way. There are guys who have good chins and good cardio, but they don't press the attack when they really could afford to. Some guys can just honest to god afford to be a little more reckless, and it's to their advantage to do so.

What better way to offset his lack of speed and one-punch power, than for Diaz to get his hits in while other fighters couldn't (for fear of being knocked out), and to attack with the tremendous volume that his cardio affords? I'm not saying it's pretty, but I do think it's pretty damn smart.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I honest to god think that Diaz would have less success than he does now, if he chose to box in a more conventional, pro-standup-forum way. He's too slow, his body has a natural awkwardness. It would be like a monkey trying to use a can opener. Perhaps he could with much practice, but he could just rip the damn thing open sooner, every time.

 

[Sinister]

Sinister, I get the sense that you don't have much respect for Diaz. Maybe I'm mistaking an impartial assessment for snubbing a fighter, I don't know.

What I wonder is, if Diaz isn't actually striking in the best possible way he could be, and if that doesn't merit less severe criticism. What I mean is, I think Diaz is well aware of his talents. His cardio, good chin, etc. I don't think the guy has illusions that he's Mayweather. I think he takes full advantage of his attributes, in a paradoxically smart way. There are guys who have good chins and good cardio, but they don't press the attack when they really could afford to. Some guys can just honest to god afford to be a little more reckless, and it's to their advantage to do so.

What better way to offset his lack of speed and one-punch power, than for Diaz to get his hits in while other fighters couldn't (for fear of being knocked out), and to attack with the tremendous volume that his cardio affords? I'm not saying it's pretty, but I do think it's pretty damn smart.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I honest to god think that Diaz would have less success than he does now, if he chose to box in a more conventional, pro-standup-forum way. He's too slow, his body has a natural awkwardness. It would be like a monkey trying to use a can opener. Perhaps he could with much practice, but he could just rip the damn thing open sooner, every time.

If you think I'm snubbing Diaz, I refer you to the things I compliment about him. They're things that CANNOT be taught for the most part. That means what he is right now cannot be manufactured in a Gym, and its a Hell of a compliment. But we cannot take that and attempt to call it a skill-set. Its not. But I'd put him right up there with guys in Boxing like Margarito, Librado Andrade, Jesus Soto-Karass, and numerous others who only get beaten by very very good fighters.

But if you want to see what Nick Diaz COULD be like with better technique, watch Carlos Monzon. There is no such thing as a fighter who would not benefit from learning better technique.

 

[MisterT]

If you think I'm snubbing Diaz, I refer you to the things I compliment about him. They're things that CANNOT be taught for the most part. That means what he is right now cannot be manufactured in a Gym, and its a Hell of a compliment. But we cannot take that and attempt to call it a skill-set. Its not. But I'd put him right up there with guys in Boxing like Margarito, Librado Andrade, Jesus Soto-Karass, and numerous others who only get beaten by very very good fighters.

But if you want to see what Nick Diaz COULD be like with better technique, watch Carlos Monzon. There is no such thing as a fighter who would not benefit from learning better technique.

This.

Imagine Diaz coldly hammering his opponents with a Monzon-esque jab and a debilitating right hand. Sure, Monzon had a granite jaw but he hardly relied on it as much as Diaz does with his.

Excellent Footwork + Textbook Boxing + Reach + Chin = Middleweight GOAT.

 

[RockyBullwinkle]

Someone posted this in the Boxing forum and I read the article. The stance similarities are way exaggerated. Diaz stands straight up a lot, especially when throwing his punches, taking away his own leberage. The illustrations of Mendoza show the classic form from that period, which is a stance derived directly from fencing...which is one of the other main "Gentleman's" forms of combat. This is indicative of that Mendoza wasn't a free-swinging volume puncher with no real defense. And I feel it sells short what really makes Diaz what he is. His chin, heart, will to endure, and conditioning. Most of those things can't be taught, nor will you see in drawings.

I didn't get the impression that it was making the claim that Mendoza was a volume puncher or that Diaz doesnt win with his chin, heart, and conditioning, I think people are reading way too much into it when really all it seems to be is a fun comparison between some - key word some - of Diaz's odd techniques and the uncanny resemblance they share with old bareknuckle boxing and not postulating that he is an actual London Prizefighter. I saw that the author even stated in the comments on BE that Mendoza didn't fight like Diaz, he was an outside fighter much more evasive, but that they shared a few techniques which he highlighted.

 

[Sinister]

People are reading what's there. Look at this thread title. And the author called Diaz a throwback, not really. The techniques he does use are a lot more modern and further removed from the premises the older styles used. Nothing wrong with that, either.

 

[RockyBullwinkle]

But the word throwback never appears in the article. What the author does state is that:
1. Diaz keeps his hands out in front of him, which was a tactic recommended by Mendoza and uncommon in modern boxing.
2. That he uses square gating and shift punching with video showing him doing just that.
3. That Diaz tries to use the top of his head to defend against punches, which Diaz confirmed during his rambling post fight press conference.
4. That Diaz's stance bears a resemblance to what Mendoza described in his manual and in illustrations.

These four items seemed to be where he was making the comparison (plus the fact that Mendoza had a short temper like Diaz) and looking at the links and other WMA sites the last couple of days I think he's correct. I think there is a whole lot of other stuff Diaz does to be successful but I also think that a lot of the stuff he gets criticized for works for him for reasons the article illustrates.

 

[Sinister]

I've already made statements on the stance and gate. There's significant differences there. Diaz stands square, but it's not functional for leverage because of his elevation. It's a complete difference between that and the what's perceived from Mendoza's fighting. The reason there's not specific differentiating is because when the early manual was written, stances were uniform. There wasn't the need to differentiate between then and now. When you look at how the stances function in Combat, they're not even remotely the same.

Mendoza:

Diaz:

Nick being completely different from the waist down is VERY VERY important when discerning the two fighters. That he sticks his hands way out and ducks his forehead into punches is arbitrary by-comparison. If those are the key similarities (aside from personality traits), then there's not much similar at all.

However, if you look at the fighters I named who are modern and that he IS similar to, you'll see a much more reasonable and complimentary comparison.

 

[RockyBullwinkle]

Were stances really uniform? The images of Mendoza's fights against Humphreys seem to show two different stances. Mendoza always has his left far forward and Humphey looks square with head back

In fact Mendoza's book has an illustration showing the difference between their stances or "first positions":

Not trying to be a dick here, just think your mistaken.

 

[RockyBullwinkle]

And at the end of this gif Diaz really seems to be in Mendoza's "first position".

 

[Sinister]

Yes stances were more uniform. As I've said prior in the thread, they came from fencing. The first illustration isn't a demonstration of two stances, its an attempt to show an opponent advancing towards Mendoza. You don't begin boxing with your feet intertwined. In the second illustration there's very little difference. Humphrey is not standing square to Mendoza. The difference is weight distribution, neither of them look like Diaz. Their feet are postured in the L-stance, both heads slightly off-center though Humphrey is leaned back more where Mendoza preferes a more forward posture. That makes sense if he was an elusive counterpuncher, as it would draw the opponent forward. And both of their lead shoulders are elevated above the rear. And no, Diaz's knees are far more straight, his head is not slightly off-center with his lead shoulder in front of his chin (which is defensive posture 101). Diaz is straight up and down, head in the middle, shoulders even.

I'm not mistaken. What I have is more experience discerning information of fighters no one currently has ever seen. And have given key examples of very good fighters you can actually see move whose styles are similar to Diaz, especially given that many of them are from Cali, where that particular kind of fighting isn't discouraged. There are a lot of good fighters in Boxing Diaz can be compared to. Daniel Mendoza simply isn't one of them.