observations from boxing practice

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
1

this hit me last night (pun intended) during a casual boxing session at the gym:

part of the difficulty of using a strike to ‘stop’ someone from shooting in and taking you down is that it hinges on two assumptions that really aren’t very accurate, to my mind.

  1. the first shot i throw will land properly. i’ve heard this argument before. i’ll just finger jab the guy or punch him square in the nose. well, personally, i’m not guaranteed that shot on anyone with a semblance of evasion skill. when i was boxing last night, i landed (and absorbed) a lot of shots. but not necessarily the first one in a combination.

does it have to be the first one in the combination? that brings me to my second thought.

  1. range will not change. very often in striking classes, we are paired up with people our same approximate height, weight, etc. and since we’re very often working from the same curriculum, our choices of technique are also similar. so there’s an implied and mutually understood range. in boxing last night, it was obviously the approximate length of each of our punches. in taekwondo, for instance, it’s very often the length of our kicks. but in any event, there’s an agreed-upon range. so if i missed with my first jab-cross, it’s okay because my opponent is still in or around that same range.

so what if the opponent isn’t in or around that same range? well, they’ve either closed or faded. if they’ve faded, nobody’s really at the advantage. if they’re simply out of range, nobody has anything to bring to the table until they close again.

if they close, however, i’ve got maybe one more shot (against a moving, guarded opponent) and then he’s on me. so, at best, if i’m relying on hitting to keep him off of me, and he’s determined, i’ve got perhaps two hits (one long range and one short range).

after that, we’re grappling, whether i like it or not.

so is this a ‘grappling’s better’ thread? of course not. what i know about grappling is about as much as pamela anderson knows about… anything. so i’ll just speak for myself. if i want to make use of my striking experience, i need to be realistic about how it interacts with other tactics. and in this case, i believe that means 1) knowing enough about grappling to apply some preventive measures in addition to doing what i do best and 2) making good use of what i already do (footwork to defend against the shoot before returning to striking).

just hoping to get the first shot and ending it there just doesn’t ring true for me. your mileage may vary.

stuart

2

I agree, I think that is where many strikers go wrong, believeing that if they can hit first it wont be a problem. I think there are a few phases you should be prepared for

Your first, and possibly your second shot. You should prepare to hit the ‘right’ spot with these. Like you said, it wont always happen, but prepare anyway.
Second, prepare for contact and evasion. If you canmanage to get out of your opponents grab before he takes you down, thats good, it buys you time.
Third, be prepared for the take down. Practice applying your art on the ground, whether it is to just get back up on your feet or to duke it out on the ground, it is important to be comfortable dealing with this.

3

Dont forget that while you are fighting, this person is also striking. So now timing a punch to the head is complicated as they may give a fake to make you look for something else then shoot for the takedown, Or if they think you will look to astrike they may fake a shoot to get you to put yourself into a position for them to strike you.

If it was easy to stop a shoot in NHB with a punch someone would have perfected it, but there are too many oher variables.

(Fake a punch then shoot for the legs, Fake a shoot and go for the flying armbar now that your punch is out there, Fake the shoot then turn it into an uppercut on you, …)

Or as you think they are going to strike you block that kick and a lightning fast shoot comes in.

No easy answer

4

right. two good replies. cheers guys.

and the other consideration: even a good solid hit may not stop them. granted, we were wearing gloves and headgear. but i landed a couple of good stiff jab-cross combos on this guy’s nose. afterward, he said he saw stars… AFTER weaving the third and fourth punches and rocking me with a right hook of his own. even without the gloves, i doubt he would’ve dropped on the spot, leaving me safely upright. especially not if taking me down had been his intent.

stuart

5

There is also one of my favorite ranges, standing grappling, clinching. This is an interesting range because both sides of the argument can use their skills to gain advantage, and there is constant contact. Also, you can use aikido or judo/jujutsu throws. To me, being a striker/stand up fighter should include this range.

6

Well, if they’ve closed the distance what about elbows and knees? Chin Na? Striking the vitals?

Something my instructor said last week was that sometimes it’s adavantageous to use very low stances. It reduces the size of the target the opponent can strike, but it also gives you add’l stability against takedowns.

7

If he can grab you to grapple he’s in range already. Hell, if he grabs you, you got off lucky, he should have hit you.

Now, I don’t go to hit the head or torso at this point – the reaching for the grab. I treat any limb being extended to me as if its a strike, who knows their real intention.

I strike the limb. I’ll keep my short hand as an added protection but reach out and strike the forearm or even the bicep area. Its a free shot, and its easier to control the person, sense their intention, momentum and weight. From here use gung fu, whatever is your pleausre. Follow with blows, try to gain more control, go down if that’s your thing too. Kick low. ect.

What is they shoot. I drop to a secure, extreme pushing angle to except them, like a major bow and arrow, echest to knee, down, ready. Punching hard to the head. Looking for a shoulder to turn.’

If they don;t shoot and coem with both high. Same stratagy as above. Attck one of the limbs. Not its two (punching hand and short hand) against one. You should be able to open up a momentary advanatge, like turn their shoulder if its cross handed (right had attacking their right reaching hand), using pulling power.

Or raise the left hand for protection and shoot the right that hit his aproaching left against to his throat.

Too hard to explain. Technical takes too long.

8

shaolin boxer and olethros,

absolutely. that part shouldn’t be overlooked. it’s an inevitable (albeit perhaps brief) transition from striking to takedown, yeah?

as i said, this isn’t a ‘yay grappling’ thread. it’s more of a ‘i’ve spent years getting decent at striking, so how do i now capitalize on that’ thread.

you know. one of those. :slight_smile:

stuart

9

evolutionfist,

hmm… i don’t know about that. the next time i get dumped on my arse and ‘reforged’ into a crude imitation of a christmas wreath, i don’t expect i’ll have much success regarding myself as ‘lucky.’

he should have struck if striking was his strength. if taking me down and systematically wrenching my joints out of whack is his strength, then i’d consider myself lucky if he’d gone ahead and tried to strike me.

as for the limb destructions when he tries to grab you, i don’t think that’s a bad tactic. but once again, you’re betting the farm on that one hit. and if he’s shooting in for a takedown, the worst frikking charlie horse in recorded history isn’t going to stop him from at least body checking you. low stances may do the trick, i suppose. but as i understand it, they tend to give a wrestler that nice front leg to work with. (again, i’m no expert.)

stuart

10

We all need to find what works for us. The way I punch, if I do not hit my exact intended target, I have at least jammed what was incoming by keeping a shield based aroung forearms looking like this: X, || or |.

From this connection sensitivity is imprtant. I do not plan on the strike ending anything. It is merely the opening, and the battle must still be won. This is merely a way of getting my specialty in place. I want to get connected to you. I want both your hands. So I can read you and lead you and fill the gaps with blows.

But I don’t want to be nice about making that connection.

If he’s a better grappler then you are a striker, whatever, well, then, you’re going to loose.

My master said something to me a while ago after a brief Chi Sau encounter that has really hit home lately and I’ve noticed it in chess and sparring:

“When I’m better then you; it doesn’t matter what I do – I can do anything.”

Soemthing else I’ve bee thinking about, one needs to know the rules – elbows down, never turn ones back, basic stuff, ect – before one can break them. At least you understand the dangers involved with the move.

Sort of like trading a quenn for a knight, but you see check mate in 3 moves.

11

evolutionfist,

that makes sense. i like the idea of hitting the arm en route to doing something else. it’s not going to stop the forward momentum of someone shooting. so it’s entirely possible that you’ll quickly be doing chi sau from the floor. but i imagine that the sensitivity garnered in that drill would help you in the transitions. and from little i understand of grappling, there’s an awful lot to be said for the transitions.

stuart

12

apoweyn

You make a good point about bad assumption made by strikers when dealing with grapplers. I’ve made those assumptions and was dually rewarded many times in the past.

I would like to also add that strikers little realize that their prefered martial talent is an exceptionally hard task to pull off. Think about it. At high speeds, you throw your legs and arms at small targets located on another high speed individual, who is trying to avoid, block, or jam you. This all happening while your opponent is putting up distractions by attempting to do the same thing to you.

It analogous to sharp shooting. And any good shooter will tell you that as soon as the target starts moving accuracy drops by at least 67%.

I think one of the reasons that grappling claims so much success against striking is this reason: once the grappler has ‘closed the gap’ they feel you. They’re task, perhaps, is a little more managable at this point, once in reach. (That statement will probably get me into trouble. I don’t mean to diminish the skill of grapplers by saying this. Its just thinking out loud.) And the strikers becomes more difficult. (I’m using ‘striker’ and ‘grappler’ in its most general sense to illustrate my point, not to catagorize styles or fighters.)

Your other point I agree with also. In my experience, when training with wrestlers, BJJ, etc., they continually train to close distances, performing drills that simulate the relationship held between a striker and grapplers. Until recently, I have not seen that trait amoung strikers training together. Maintaining a constant distance with boxers is more comfortable and often encouraged.

Although, thanks to this ridiculous debating between the idealized grappler vs the idealized striker, boxers are starting to formulate their position regarding facing off with a grappler of some ilk, much like MA grapplers have (I assume) been doing for years.

Of course, I say all these things with finite knowledge of either supposed side.

So, what do you all believe is a more managable way to deal with an opponent who wishes to ‘close the gap’? I’ve read of limb destruction and foot work on this thread. Do you have drills to practice these solutions? Please share.

13

If you are “boxing” then grappling shouldn’t even be a question that comes into play.

if you’re striking style is american boxing and you are doing a mma match that includes striking and grappling then you should have the tools for the job when it comes to ranges.

Often times a lead jab is a feign and not intended to land.

Jab/ jab/ Hook is common, with the hook (or a cross) being the hammer. If the hammer hits then follow it with another hammer such as a cross, hook, jab or even an uppercut if your in clinch range.

work your tight ranges to include tight shots such as inside uppercuts and tight hooks, work your long ranges to include combos of jabs and crosses.

for grappling, there are a variety of methods, with virtually all of them working in close to extremely close range. You have to know at what point are strikes now weak and grappling takes over. punches delivered out of range are ineffective. punches delivered outside of the position of strength are ineffective.

train your short combos and train your counters. training your boxing seperate from your grappling, but when you apply them together work on having a free flow from one to the other (no mind transistion).

peace

14

mantis9,

very well said. and thanks for moving this thread along to the next logical step.

i’ll get back with my own ideas soon. juggling a few tasks right this moment.

cheers.

stuart

15

Mantis9 - Right on. Strikers should be training more for that sort o fthing, it is highly neglected. Too many people get into the ‘art’ of it. They miss out on the martial part a little. If that is what you are into so be it. I say if you are training to fight, train for all the options possible.

16

kung lek,

obviously, if we were talking about boxing proper, the takedown wouldn’t be an issue. but we aren’t. we’re talking about a thought that occurred to me in boxing. and i box as a way to train martial arts. not for the sake of boxing.

stuart

17

Hey Stuart, :slight_smile:

I have to admit that I deal with the grappler-adversary issue by ignoring it as a critical issue.

I see it as no more, no less, valid as the ultimate challenge, than facing a gun or knife and probably less common. Grappling may be the art de jur, and so more common in the street than 15 years ago, but it is no more dangerous than a drunk homie or red neck with a hand gun and an attitude.

Maybe it is just blind faith, but I try to keep my goal simply to learn and keep training… in a general sense within my art, with the belief that the art will care for the rest. If I am lucky, my worst street encounter will be no more than an untrained bully. If I am not… karma, neh? :wink:

Approaching the end of year three in karate, I am finding some facets of training that might address a grappler (when needed, of course :slight_smile: ).

One is learning to “target” specifically. I am beginning to see people in their pieces (throat, nose, small ribs, groin, etc) rather than just as a “mass”. As this becomes more defined thru my training, it will surely make my strikes more effective.

Another facet is movement. I am becoming more able to manage distance… or at least to understand it (which will make managing it better, ultimately).

Also, I am learning to put the power into my strikes more reflexively. Strike, using full hips or body rotation 500 times, and maybe I will begin to interject it into my strikes “naturally”.

So… at the end… if one does all this faithfully for years, you gain the ability perhaps to control your distance better than your adversary and land a telling blow to a critical point. That’s how the story goes anyway.

Stuart too :smiley:

18

fair enough ap ,

I was pointing to the idea of moving from one skill set to another without skipping a beat vis a vis training of both skill sets but not necessarily together until application.

in essence you become the bridge for the ranges and the bridge is made stronger by the sum of it’s parts.

peace

19

Good thread. I more or less agree with Ap.

Some thoughts, especially from a Grappler’s Pont of View.

SLC–without meaning to sound like a jerk, have you ever boxed? I ask this because the things you are describing are VERY hard to do. It’s hard enough to hit somebody in the head. Trying to hit them on a specific spot in the head is even harder. Secondly, “critical points,” don’t end fights as frequently as we’d like. I’m all for eye strikes and gouging in self defense. The problem is that I don’t need to see to grapple. If I’ve made contact with you, that’s enough. Everything else is feel. So, if you’ve aimed for my eye or throat, or what have you, and you’ve managed to partially blind me or make my throat hurt, but haven’t crushed it, AND you haven’t stopped my forward momentum, then it’s human pretzel time :wink:

Olethros–what you are describing has a place, but it is not the answer. Low stances do equal a “stronger root.” However you are, by necessity, handing me your front leg. Secondly, low stances facilitate a snap down or front headlock. A great place for sinking heavily into your stance is when the person is attempting some kind of hip throw. This enables you to avoid the throw as well as counter quickly. Otherwise, you are better off keeping a mobile,balanced stance, just as you normally would.

Now–to address the clinch. It is true that the clinch is sort of a “no man’s land,” in that many styles practice some sort of standing grappling. The big difference is in application. As a wrestler, when I attack, I want to shut the space down and remove your base. That’s a takedown, pure and simple. However, typically, the goal of a striker in the clinch is to create enough room to throw a balanced, effective strike. The problem is that even the most well balanced strike is less balanced, and has less control over the center, than somebody trying to execute a takedown. I’m not saying it can’t be done, I’m saying that it’s difficult. As a wrestler, I just want you down, period. Everything I do is geared towards that. As a striker, in the clinch, you’re trying to stay on your feet AND throw shots. It’s harder because you are doing two things at once. This is why I ALWAYS recommend that the striker achieve positional dominance FIRST and then worry about the strikes. If you achieve positional dominance, you can strike or bail out as need be and start over. If you try to strike from a disadvantaged position (meaning the person has control of your ‘danger zone,’ [a wrestling concept]) then you are more likely than not, going to wind up on your back.

Ap has addressed it correctly–how do I stop their momentum and maintain my balance. This is the key issue. Without these two things, unless you have pulled off some pretty amazing stuff, you’re going to have a hard time.

20

Interesting discussion. Has nothing to do with most styles of kungfu, but interesting.