Thread: Why is a back-hand punch illegal?

and isnt a jab sometimes bordering very closely on being a back-hand punch? For example if you throw a left hook that misses, and then try to quickly throw a left jab, that jab will be starting out quite in a back-hand position, as you will not bring the missed left hook all the way back to the starting position to throw the subsequent jab. Therefore the left hand after missing the left hook will be somewhere around your right pectoral muscle, and from that position throwing a left jab is rather close to being a back-handed punch.

For a large part of his career, Ali used a back knuckle instead of a jab. If you watch his jab, he flicks it from the back side actually using a short back knuckle instead of a traditional jab. It had a lot more power and he could actually really hurt people with it.

The rules in the amateurs at least is the punch has to land with the knuckle part of the glove. The reason people get away with it is sloppy reffing. Hamed used to do it loads too.

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

For a large part of his career, Ali used a back knuckle instead of a jab. If you watch his jab, he flicks it from the back side actually using a short back knuckle instead of a traditional jab. It had a lot more power and he could actually really hurt people with it.

A back hand is basically an arm punch there will be no body or weight behind it. There is no way a back handed jab would hurt as much as a jab from Holmes.

side of the fist would hurt the most

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

side of the fist would hurt the most

you do know they wear padded gloves in boxing?

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

side of the fist would hurt the most

For sure, hard for a ref to pick on an angled hook / uppercut from in close, its a hammer fist really. You watch close and replay you see the outer wrist bone connect at times.Good cover after a push or shove away, then walk in with it. Some of Marcianos blows landed that way due to his stature and style.Those old gloves were raw leather through the sides no where near the amount of padding that was on top.

Yeah I seen many Marciano punches landing that way. Tyson used to intentionally throw a left uppercut so the wristbone would strike right around the delicate blood vessels under the armpit--he said in an interview he would aim for that inner-arm because it would break blood vessels and/or hit a nerve and paralyze the whole arm.

As for Howlin Mad Missy----are you so demented you believe the padding will prevent the pain? Even the padding in your psych-ward room didn't prevent your pain. So how could a padded glove?

Originally Posted by ross

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

For a large part of his career, Ali used a back knuckle instead of a jab. If you watch his jab, he flicks it from the back side actually using a short back knuckle instead of a traditional jab. It had a lot more power and he could actually really hurt people with it.

A back hand is basically an arm punch there will be no body or weight behind it. There is no way a back handed jab would hurt as much as a jab from Holmes.

I'm not sure that this is correct. Consider that bringing the laft hand up and under- I think the term is a 'rising jab'- lands on the back of the knuckles. That, given the push off the rear foot, is a harder punch. That is why the old timers used it. When I was first learning about boxing, when I was 10 or so, I met a guy that had fought in the 1920s, and he showed me how to slip in back hand blows and how damaging they could be.
Of course, in those days they fought for real, with 4oz gloves, as opposed to the pillows they wear today. Given that, I can't see that there is any point in using the back of the hand.

Originally Posted by greynotsoold

Originally Posted by ross

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

For a large part of his career, Ali used a back knuckle instead of a jab. If you watch his jab, he flicks it from the back side actually using a short back knuckle instead of a traditional jab. It had a lot more power and he could actually really hurt people with it.

A back hand is basically an arm punch there will be no body or weight behind it. There is no way a back handed jab would hurt as much as a jab from Holmes.

I'm not sure that this is correct. Consider that bringing the laft hand up and under- I think the term is a 'rising jab'- lands on the back of the knuckles. That, given the push off the rear foot, is a harder punch. That is why the old timers used it. When I was first learning about boxing, when I was 10 or so, I met a guy that had fought in the 1920s, and he showed me how to slip in back hand blows and how damaging they could be.
Of course, in those days they fought for real, with 4oz gloves, as opposed to the pillows they wear today. Given that, I can't see that there is any point in using the back of the hand.

Thats basically just a slap though. Yeah through thin gloves that would sting as the knuckles crack but you still wouldt be able to put as much force in as an uppercut or straight jab.

true but i can see what he means about pushing off the back foot whilst swinging upward using all the top of the shoulder strength. shite, those shots could even clip you in the throat.

Spinning back hand would generate some considerable power, although I expect you'd have a haymaker waiting for you by the time you had done your spin.

If I back hand punch is thrown with maximin power, and is blocked by the opponants forearm. The chances of a break is high!!