Why Is The Kinetic Chain Not Discussed More?

[PCP63]

I'm FAR from a boxing?MMA expert, but I've never understood why the kinetic chain isn't discussed more. Using your musculature in the correct sequence is more efficient (requiring less energy), helps you punch faster, helps you punch harder, and elicits that "whip" punching that nearly every decent boxer touts.

I feel like it's a pretty damn important part of boxing (if not THE most important), yet I've NEVER heard it discussed in a gym setting, and I've been in the gym with some pretty good coaches.

You hear every coach talking about not throwing arm punches, but I've never anyone elaborate. I've never heard talk about hip torque or the correct SEQUENCE (rather than just throwing everything at once).

Any thoughts on kinetic chain punching? I struggled for a while in gyms trying to learn how to throw snapping punches to no avail. When I learned about the kinetic chain and how proper sequencing worked? I can snap all of my punches.

 

[Thatactionbrah]

I guess if you teach it to a beginner they will start telegraphing their shots too much. They might get a little into their head about the nuances of the sequential motion to throwing a snapping punch and this will probably mess their technique up or leave them too vulnerable to take shots

The snapping punches are most often developed later on when a boxer learns more about how to use his body, but snapping punches are like any tool imo. sometimes snapping jab is good to use to set up for other things while a stiff and slightly pushing jab is better

 

[MotivatedPenn]

Actually can someone further elaborate or provide a link on this? I've never heard too much about this and I'd like to find out more.

 

[PCP63]

Actually can someone further elaborate or provide a link on this? I've never heard too much about this and I'd like to find out more.

My demonstration of it isn't too good, but I tried to explain it here:

[YT]1Ri-bkIbJ0w[/YT]

 

[Thatactionbrah]

Actually can someone further elaborate or provide a link on this? I've never heard too much about this and I'd like to find out more.

it's sequential movement of the body.

Say you're throwing a baseball.

The first motion would be at the bottom with the feet and legs. the foot steps at an angle 45 degrees. the leg lunges, assuming you're stepping with left foot, then you push off with the right leg.

the upper body twists diagonally. then the arm is slingshotted and the last thing released is the ball.

When you separate all these motions and do them from a sequence it helps you get more force into the throw. Similar to a domino effect

 

[Jarnee]

I guess the notion is kind of hidden in techniques, styles and motor skills rather than taught out right. I mean do you think those boxers who use it well were taught a physics or biology lessons before training?

 

[a guy]

Apizur made a whole thread on this already, I recommend searching for it.

 

[PCP63]

I guess the notion is kind of hidden in techniques, styles and motor skills rather than taught out right. I mean do you think those boxers who use it well were taught a physics or biology lessons before training?

Of course. But why not teach it outright, and expedite the process?

Apizur made a whole thread on this already, I recommend searching for it.

Got a link?

 

[Thatactionbrah]

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f11/kinetic-chain-2644381/

Aizpur's thread

 

[Stillw1ll]

Proper boxing technique uses the kinetic chain as effectively as it can be.

 

[Shokushu Goukan]

My demonstration of it isn't too good, but I tried to explain it here:

[YT]1Ri-bkIbJ0w[/YT]

talks about mma and boxing and why is the kenetic chain not discussed. then goes on to make a video about swinging a baseball bat instead of boxing/mma

think you answered your own thread question there

 

[PCP63]

talks about mma and boxing and why is the kenetic chain not discussed. then goes on to make a video about swinging a baseball bat instead of boxing/mma

think you answered your own thread question there

It's easier to demonstrate with a bat. Very good teaching tool. Same exact way you throw a hook.

Plus, not all of my athletes are boxers. Yet all can benefit from a more efficient kinetic chain. Hell, I taught my GF to do it in about 15 minutes.

 

[Samuel Reynoso]

Kinetic chain has no mathematical definition. It's more a classification for a system. Is a punch a kinetic chain? Yes, a punch is the sum of it's parts, so it's best to punch with the whole body. The term "kinetic chain" has nothing to do with "the how" and people will always disagree on the how.

I would rephrase your question. "Why don't people try to be more coordinated?"... Idk man, probable because it's really hard for them.

 

[Sinister]

The most simple answer, after 5+ years of teaching people in an epicenter of combat sports activity, is most instructors in combat sports don't know a kinetic chain from a bicycle chain. They have their idea of what a student should be doing, but these sports aren't taught like they used to in many places. And it doesn't occur to modern coaches that perhaps conditioning a student to be able to make a movement you want is a better approach than merely yelling at them until they can do something that somewhat resembles that movement and being happy with that. Once upon a time trainers' philosophy was to be able to solve any problem their athlete could have, so they often tried to learn as much about body mechanics, nutrition, bleeding (for cuts), psychology, as any of the Professionals in those fields. Nowadays, instead, fighters just have a nutritionist, a favorite cut man, a conditioning coach, and a sport psychologist when necessary.

In boxing the main two places body mechanics are still highly stressed are Cuba, and the former Soviet Union Countries. Which is why they stand out, when they win, they look practically unbeatable.

 

[PivotPunch]

The most simple answer, after 5+ years of teaching people in an epicenter of combat sports activity, is most instructors in combat sports don't know a kinetic chain from a bicycle chain. They have their idea of what a student should be doing, but these sports aren't taught like they used to in many places. And it doesn't occur to modern coaches that perhaps conditioning a student to be able to make a movement you want is a better approach than merely yelling at them until they can do something that somewhat resembles that movement and being happy with that. Once upon a time trainers' philosophy was to be able to solve any problem their athlete could have, so they often tried to learn as much about body mechanics, nutrition, bleeding (for cuts), psychology, as any of the Professionals in those fields. Nowadays, instead, fighters just have a nutritionist, a favorite cut man, a conditioning coach, and a sport psychologist when necessary.

In boxing the main two places body mechanics are still highly stressed are Cuba, and the former Soviet Union Countries. Which is why they stand out, when they win, they look practically unbeatable.

But does it really matter to look at it that analytically? Not as in it's wrong what Russia does it's great but as in do you ahve to make it that scienitifically?

Any really hard puncher at elite level uses the kinetic chain properly even if he "doesn't know a kinetic chain from a bicycle chain" .

Obviously it can help but again how scientifically does it have to be and is it any more helpful to a fight to speak of kinetic chains and whatever instead of "turn your hip before your shoulder" or something like that?
Wihout disrespect especially in the early days of boxing many boxers and their trainers probably couldn't even spell "kinetic chain" yet guys like Joe Louis sure as hell knew how to apply it

 

[aries]

I'm FAR from a boxing?MMA expert, but I've never understood why the kinetic chain isn't discussed more. Using your musculature in the correct sequence is more efficient (requiring less energy), helps you punch faster, helps you punch harder, and elicits that "whip" punching that nearly every decent boxer touts.

I feel like it's a pretty damn important part of boxing (if not THE most important), yet I've NEVER heard it discussed in a gym setting, and I've been in the gym with some pretty good coaches.

You hear every coach talking about not throwing arm punches, but I've never anyone elaborate. I've never heard talk about hip torque or the correct SEQUENCE (rather than just throwing everything at once).

Any thoughts on kinetic chain punching? I struggled for a while in gyms trying to learn how to throw snapping punches to no avail. When I learned about the kinetic chain and how proper sequencing worked? I can snap all of my punches.

It is discussed, it's just called 'technique'

 

[Sinister]

But does it really matter to look at it that analytically? Not as in it's wrong what Russia does it's great but as in do you ahve to make it that scienitifically?

Any really hard puncher at elite level uses the kinetic chain properly even if he "doesn't know a kinetic chain from a bicycle chain" .

Obviously it can help but again how scientifically does it have to be and is it any more helpful to a fight to speak of kinetic chains and whatever instead of "turn your hip before your shoulder" or something like that?
Wihout disrespect especially in the early days of boxing many boxers and their trainers probably couldn't even spell "kinetic chain" yet guys like Joe Louis sure as hell knew how to apply it

Once again, it's not that the Eastern Bloc Countries are doing it, it's that they WIN. So is it that important? Yes, of course it is. Fighting is about much more than being a hard puncher, the rationale that "any hard puncher is going to do it right anyway" seems to lack the "how" he's going to do it right if he's not taught? By happy accident? Coincidence? What good does that do our Sport and our rate of success? Shane Mosley magically figured out how to hit very hard, yet how many Mosleys actually come along and does anyone want to be that guy waiting on the miracle athlete to show up? Or should we be able to teach fighters how to maximize delivery of force in a sound manner? The focus of these places on the development of teaching body mechanics are at the foundation of why the most feared fighters in boxing right this second are from those places, and they're manufactured. So I don't see how the relevance is a question.

Your last point uses a terrible example, actually. Why do you think Joe Louis or Jack Blackburn couldn't spell kinetic chain? That's a weird thing to insinuate. However, it would possibly help you to know who you're talking about, because Joe Louis wasn't always a hugely concussive puncher. His Amateur record was modest, with a modest KO percentage. He was so mediocre in that regard (with more of a bouncing upright style) that Blackburn initially really didn't care to train him, especially because he was black and Blackburn felt that Jack Johnson had ruined all hope for black fighters. It wasn't until he saw Joe floor a sparring partner that he changed his mind, seeing potential. He then taught Joe HOW to put his bodyweight into his punches, and lowered his positioning. This is because Blackburn knew quite a bit about delivery of force, and positions the body needs to be in to do so optimally for boxing. Once Louis LEARNED this, he hurt nearly everyone he ever got in the ring with.

If what you're suggesting is simplification of language, that's one thing. But you seem to take it a step further in assuming these guys had no real understanding of what they were teaching because they didn't use fancy-sounding words. That's false. They understood body mechanics just fine, and if anything the language has been over-simplified to the point where many trainers NOW can't explain to you why you need to move a certain way, or remain in a specific position. If anything, the understanding of it has degraded.

 

[PivotPunch]

Once again, it's not that the Eastern Bloc Countries are doing it, it's that they WIN. So is it that important? Yes, of course it is. Fighting is about much more than being a hard puncher, the rationale that "any hard puncher is going to do it right anyway" seems to lack the "how" he's going to do it right if he's not taught? By happy accident? Coincidence? What good does that do our Sport and our rate of success? Shane Mosley magically figured out how to hit very hard, yet how many Mosleys actually come along and does anyone want to be that guy waiting on the miracle athlete to show up? Or should we be able to teach fighters how to maximize delivery of force in a sound manner? The focus of these places on the development of teaching body mechanics are at the foundation of why the most feared fighters in boxing right this second are from those places, and they're manufactured. So I don't see how the relevance is a question.

Your last point uses a terrible example, actually. Why do you think Joe Louis or Jack Blackburn couldn't spell kinetic chain? That's a weird thing to insinuate. However, it would possibly help you to know who you're talking about, because Joe Louis wasn't always a hugely concussive puncher. His Amateur record was modest, with a modest KO percentage. He was so mediocre in that regard (with more of a bouncing upright style) that Blackburn initially really didn't care to train him, especially because he was black and Blackburn felt that Jack Johnson had ruined all hope for black fighters. It wasn't until he saw Joe floor a sparring partner that he changed his mind, seeing potential. He then taught Joe HOW to put his bodyweight into his punches, and lowered his positioning. This is because Blackburn knew quite a bit about delivery of force, and positions the body needs to be in to do so optimally for boxing. Once Louis LEARNED this, he hurt nearly everyone he ever got in the ring with.

If what you're suggesting is simplification of language, that's one thing. But you seem to take it a step further in assuming these guys had no real understanding of what they were teaching because they didn't use fancy-sounding words. That's false. They understood body mechanics just fine, and if anything the language has been over-simplified to the point where many trainers NOW can't explain to you why you need to move a certain way, or remain in a specific position. If anything, the understanding of it has degraded.

What i meant is that they weren't formally educated back then they were educated boxing wise.

I heard Joe Louis already hit hard when he met Blackburn and that Blackburn mostly fixed his balance and stuff like that but apparently that's wrong

 

[karlcom]

I teach kinetic chain punching,and i think its only a mater of time before it takes of,on Bradley scotts his last visit,this is the increases he had His cross had 26% more power
His kinetic left hook has 23% more power
His kinetic jab had 28% more power
Mexican right kinetic hook had 23% more power
Mexican right kinetic hook had 12%
Kinetic Right hook had 13% more power

all measured scientifically on the strikemate
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLa3lfJInckC3td6gLr57PGs8mKMjGDXuo

 

[Sinister]

What i meant is that they weren't formally educated back then they were educated boxing wise.

I heard Joe Louis already hit hard when he met Blackburn and that Blackburn mostly fixed his balance and stuff like that but apparently that's wrong

I'm not sure there's a huge difference. Many of the older trainers (outside of racial barriers) worked for well-known athletic clubs and other physical education programs. You didn't get jobs like that if you were ignorant to most things non-boxing.

Also, no that's not wrong if you actually read what I said. Joe knocked a sparring partner down in front of Blackburn, he did that by hitting hard. He just didn't have a style designed to garner the results he got as a Pro.