Grey & Thomas's Fountain of Knowledge

[Chris Nagel]

In regarding the shoulder roll, and the stance required to do it right:

I am not sure what you mean by that term... I assume you mean the left low, right high, roll the shoulder defense made popular by Toney and Mayweather?
Look, this is not rocket science. Back in the day, EVERYBODY did it that way. Check the old college boxing manuals-they did it that way in the 1940s and 1950s.
Do not ever reach out with your right hand to parry or block punches. Angle your left foot so you are not squared up- turn your left hip. You cannot roll your shoulder if you are squared up.
The hardest parts are picking off body blows with your left arm and catching the left hook.

I've noticed that its difficult for some guys to roll not because of the actual movement it takes to do it but because they arent in a stance suited for doing it best in the first place. For me it always worked smoothly when had my hip in front almost totally sideways like burley (the only guy ive ever seen stand so sideways) and so that i wwas leaning just a bit on my back foot so that my front (left) shoulder was slightly higher than then my right. Very old school stance you'll see it alot in the 20's, 30's fighters. This makes me naturally hard to hit with rights which was always nice. Its very natural to just roll away from them since, from that stance, you are already very hard to reach with a right (literally they have to REACH) and because im so sideways the shoulder can be turned in front of the face almost instantly. Also the right uppercut counter after rolling comes off extremely smooth from this stance. Its the most natural thing to see that counter after rolling the shoulder in such a fashion.

But you see the real sceret to the shoulder roll is not in blocking punches with your shoulder. See its really preformed more like a slip than a block. where youre rolling away from the right hand and not just eating it on your shoulder. The shoulder coming in front of the face is actually just a sort of a side effect of the rolling away movement and not the primary thing.

I'm starting to see more fighters trying to use the shoulder roll. andre berto and jean pascal spring to mind. They're pretty ineffective to me though because they stand straight up in the air like a stick and try to forcibly push their shoulder up to cover the head. They end up just eating the punch because this forces them to block and dissallows the rolling away motion so critical to the shoulder roll. because they have no rolling away motion, the right uppercut which comes off of the shoulder roll becomes difficult for them to throw and thus pretty ineffective.

[Chris Nagel]

As a teacher...

I'm often told I am a trainer's nightmare, I switch stances all the time, forget to keep my chin behind my jab and when I try to box how I am told to, I feel uncomfortable and out of control. Should I box my way or just keep working the way people keep telling me to

As a teacher, I make a point to explain the hows and whys of everything I try to teach. I don't expect anybody to take my word for anything that I cannot explain the reasoning behind. At the same time, I tolerate no argument. Ask me questions- I'll give you answers. Tell me if something doesn't feel right. We'll work on it. Everybody is fallible and everyfighter is different. It is not impossible that I've made a mistake in my approach to a specific individual.
But don't argue with me. Now time for that.
Now, in your situation, consider this. He knows more than you do. That is why you went to him to teach you. If you want to learn, listen. If you want to get hurt, keep your chin up, keep crossing your feet and so on. That is the difference between a "boxer" and somebody that thinks they can fight.

hey grey i know that kid that loves to argue and wont hear you out for even a second pretty good. i used to be that kid once. i always thought i knew more than the trainers. i think the thing to do with a kid like that is to sit down and show them some tapes. this is so they can see for themselves with there own two eyes whats what. show them some tapes of joe louis knocking people out left and right and lets see them argue with that.

Me, too. The best kid I ever trained could never understand the value of going any direction but forward. Until he saw McGirt, Ricardo Lopez, among others.
I'm not always right and I am not unwilling to admit it: over time you find a better way of doing things than you had before...But in the gym I will not sit there and debate what I am trying to convey. The next step is after gym time, then it becomes "sit down and look at great fighters proving what I am teaching." (is that convoluted as hell or what?)\
I don't expect anyone to belive on faith what I am selling- their life is at stake. You always have to prove it, but there is a time and place for everything.

[Chris Nagel]

Take your destiny into your own hands:

Most trainers just don't care. Paint it however you like but if a fellow comes into a gym and paid good money to do it he wants to learn how to box not just dick around on the floor. If a trainer doesn't pick up on that then he is either too lazy or just doesn't care about you. The end result is a very disorganized gym that is more like a hangout spot than it is anything else.

yeah that cold shoulder trainers hand out is no good at all. used to happen to me and i think alot of us have experienced it and that really is a shame. the only way around this is to take control over your development as a boxer. you got to learn on your own and i know that sounds hard but believe me, such a thing is very much within your reach. forget being some dependant sap sitting on the sidelines, those bum trainers wont care about you even though you know in your heart youre willing to learn and follow your dreams. its time you start watching every tape you can find and really study the thing, you know slow motion and all. when motion picture was first introduced, its advantage for the pugilist did not go unoticed, i think fighters like smcheling and tunney would routinely study tapes. nothing teaches a fighter how to fight like tapes -- its like virtual reality sparring; you get a chance to learn from the mistakes of others and also get a glimpse at what makes them effective in the ring. coming up, i always considered those that came before me to be my real trainers and why not? archie moore taught me things just by watching him i could never have learned from some of the people i was around. anyway you want to apply what you pick up to your bag work and in your sparring, soon through trial and error you will begin to flesh yourself out as a true craftsman. then the trainers have to recognize you and a nameless slouch (at least to them) you'll be no more. my point is, you need to take your destiny into your own hands dont ever let somebody else be in complete control over it. its up to you.

Go back and re-read what Thomas wrote,then double it for me. He said it exactly as I'd have said it.
I have seen it happen so many times in gyms that it is sickening; some young guy (or girl, these days) comes into a gym full of enthusiasm; you very rarely wander into a boxing gym unless you meant to be there. These prospects come every night and jump rope and do situps and hit the bags and work hard. But they are doing everything wrong and nobody tells them anything to help them and they don't know. Eventually they get to spar and it never goes right: not that they all get pounded, but the little mistakes they make all the time keep them from being involved in the sparring. Nobody tells them what went wrong, so they try harder and next time its worse. Next thing that kid full of promise shows up only 2,3 times a week and is clowning, then you don't see them anymore.
It is really unfair because too often it isn't talent or desire or work ethic that determines champions. It very often could be a lazy or overworked or less than honest trainer who ignores some kid, can't make timwe or keeps him around for target practice for "better" boxers. Thomas is 100% correct; make the effort invest the time and don't be afraid to teach yourself

[Chris Nagel]

On Training:

You have to know your body. What pace do you fight at? Are you very tensed when you fight or is your body relaxed? You have to know what youre trying to accomplish strategically because thats what you will be asking your body to do for you. Try to get a guage of this because you want to get your body just right to accomplish what it needs to without over or under training. Over training is a pretty big problem and just as bad as not doing enough. The point is that you shouldnt just train just for the sake of training. Train smart.

A constantly moving head not only can be timed, but it also wastes your energy and clutters your mind making it harder for you to think because of those frantic movements your being busy with. This is bad because over time it slows your reaction time and ability to think on your feet; all that frantic motion. How soon then before you start eating punches you shouldn't even be eating in the first place?

[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']the things i see is most fighters will waste so much energy when fighting. i see all kinds of slipping punches that arent even there and wiggling of the arms, randomly bouncing around the ring: this kind of thing does have a price and you will start to feel it sooner or later no matter how conditioned you are. look at joe louis and notice how much energy he wastes. the answer is none. people like to say he moves around like a stiff zombie but he really is just being economical. in this way, joe could probably box 70 rounds straight since he is so smooth out there.[/font]

my point is, the style in which you guys box with these days is the cause of your stamina problems. your style uses up so much energy in order to pull off that you absolutely have to excerise like a triathlete. i tend to just stand in front of my opponent, not bouncing, not shaking, selecting my punches and specfic defensive reactions carefully. sure i look boring (thats what im told) but i can go longer than most and think with more clarity since im not occupying my mind with all kinds of crazy movements for my body.[/font]

Once again Thomas is right on the money: if you take the time to read up on and study the old-time greats and how they fought and, more important, how they thought, you'll learn that efficiency in motion was a prime consideration. You only slip punches that are thrown and then only when you intend to do something. You throw punches to land them and any judge that gives credit for punches thrown and missed is a detriment to the sport. [/font]

Watching Fights:

well i honestly think watching tapes are essential to the development of any fighter. for one they bascially plug boxing directly into your brain by way of seeing how things happen in the ring, what fighters tend to do, what fighters tend to excel at, and when (and how) they make mistakes. this sort of thing is invaluble; learning the logistics of boxing, as often and as much as you can.

if i may be allowed to give a little promoting here (my check arrived in the mail) go back and read grey's posts on the matter of boxing. nobody has the logistics of boxing down quite as well or presents them in an understandable manner. i myself try but i go off on a bunch of theory type stuff. check his forum out.

[quote=ThomasTabin;42466]mostly i would learn from every tape and every silent film i saw and not from any one boxer. the mystery of the sport is hidden inside every bout you see from leonard dorin to barney ross. you must look closely.[/quote]

but i am reminded now of the time when as a boy i met the profoundest chess player that there was around my way. whenever i would play him he would violently tear me to shreds with an ominous kind of calm that i had only seen at the end of old west shoot out movies. he was sharp. even in times that i had captured more of his material and was (at least i assumed so) in the seat of power - maybe a rook here, a few pawns there, perhaps even his queen - he would out of nowhere swoop down like a deadly hawk and defeat me every time without fail. for a while i used to think he was some kinda cheat -- i mean how does he suddenly beat me as easy as he does even when i would seem to be ahead -- but the man was no cheat, he was simply that sharp. i only played him a few times and never saw him after those bombardments but the questions of how he did this to me would spin around in my mind for years. i would later come to find that in truth every move that i would make was not made by me but instead by him. yes i would take my bishops or whatever and move them around myself but only ever because he would draw me out to do so. he would leave open say a rook for me to take from him (and i would like a dummy) or put a bishop in the line of my queen to make me move around my pawns in front to make her safe (and i would like a dummy) and by way of this he would deliberately manipulate my distribution of material to ultimately make a defensive lapse for that one final blow. every move i made was shepherded by his invisible hand and he would walk me into invisible traps i had no idea were even there. this lesson i would translate to boxing but also for the many other facets of life. because truly life is like boxing and boxing is truly like chess. this i think is the real prize to take from the sport, not the fame or money, but the revelation of strategy.

[Chris Nagel]

[quote=ThomasTabin;35889]at the gym was always just another day at the office. once you grow out of that romantic phase (we all do) in boxing you either 1. start to view this as an occupation like any other -- as tony zale as cool as ever once said when asked of his name and profession at a navy boot camp, "anothony zaleski; pugilist, middleweight" -- or 2. you simply come to your senses, quit boxing and join the real world. eventually we all make 1 of the 2 choices.[/quote]

boxing is a good thing. kids start it up because they have some grand romantic like notions of what they think boxing is and only then ever continue to do it once they realize and embrace how far from reality that idea is - either that or quit. most get out of it because they never had the idea of a good work ethic and discipline with them to begin with. at an age ilke 5, he is probably still in that romantic stage so you want to just be sure you learn him on the value of discipline and work ethic. that i think is the most important thing to take from boxing, more important than anything else. its a good time to get those things in him before he gets to an age where so many of us lacked it and needed it most.[/font]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']

i also think its important to dehumanize (that even a word?) boxing. how else can you get over the harsh reality inside the ring? when i fight, i fight as if i am fighting not an opponent, but boxing itself. as if i were trying to beat my best score. not making mistakes, setting up your shots, it isnt about getting the best over someone to prove how tough you are, playing the game is an end in itself.

fear is a natural thing. when you first start to box youre full of it; youre not sure what youre really even doing, the guy keeps tagging you on the beak and just how the hell are you supposed to stop that seems to be completely out of your reach. each round passes by like a whirlwind of confusion where you cant tell up from down. anyway the main point here is that all of your fear and anxiety comes directly from your confusion which ultimately comes from your inexperience. hopefully after some time in boxing you will have learned that you are the one who is in total control over what happens to you in the ring -- not your opponent. that is, you only ever get hit when you made a mistake. understanding things in this manner, you box with the idea in mind to never make mistakes which removes the elemnt of being in a street brawl for your life and replaces it with a mind set that all the greats utalize, that of putting together a puzzle. whens the last time you ever got scared putting together a puzzle?

Stance:

[/font]

][/SIZE]
I'm not sure it makes much difference assuming I take my left foot off the ground, pivot to let my foot go out a bit a little as I push sideways with my right, land with my left foot in it's new position and then follow with the right. I can see if my right was pointed in to the left more it'd be hard.

Perhaps I also naturally let it pivot out without meaning to often since my coach often reprimands me for letting that happen. Circling left is not something I guess I practice often as we only have one southpaw in our gym and I don't spar him more than once a month or so.

Do you see it being a lot easier with your right foot pointing out initially rather than pivoting as you are moving?

sharla, watch fighters like bernard hopkins or floyd mayweather (2 of the best pound for pound fighters in recent memory i should add) and notice how they effortessly can circle left. notice that they arent standig facing foward as your coach instructs. by standing so squared up you movement gets comprimised. If you get the chance to, try and ask him why a fighter like bernard hopkins (who essentially stands sideways) is such an incredible boxer and why he thinks his method of boxing is superior to bernard's. I hope i'm not stirring up trouble by saying this but its best that you gets all that information, and you wont get it by blindly following everything your trainer says. trainers tend to be pretty egotistical when it comes to thing like teching boxing (if you even hint at the possibility that they might be wrong they get all huffy and take it as an insult to their worth as a teacher)

the moves themselves are meaningless. it takes a complete and absolute knowledge to apply them properly, just knowing what the moves are themselves wont actually do anything. the moves mostly posted here are only what happens on the surface; you may know many things but if you lack the wisdom underneath those many things to link them all together, in the end, you know nothing at all. the boxing world is rich with people like this.

its like a freind of mine would say about it, "smart dumb motherfuckers"

[quote=ThomasTabin;12248]you could hit with all the force in the world but it would all just be a big waste unless you can actually land the thing. say you have a good punch, maybe even downright great punch, if you find yourself unable to get it into it's target or if your opponent saw it coming -- in effect allowing him to brace himself for the impact, if not simply rolling away from it -- your punches are all bark no bite. sure you might look scary on a heavy bag, but a bag is not hardly the same thing as a thinking and adapting opponent. its all about getting the punch home and with that power follows naturally as a result.[/quote]

Defense:

lots of people are scared to break a nose and to that i say, benny leonard had 212 bouts and a nose that stuck out like a sun dial but one look at the man and you see not one bend or twist on that sucker. in 212 bouts not one man could hammer that monument of a nose on his face. the moral of the story is: defense, defense, defense

Quality over Quantity:

i had this thing for a while called...uh, shin splints i think was the term. it lasted a few months, had to go see a doctor and everything. the problem was all the roadowrk i had been doing, something to the tune of 6 miles or so on that hard concrete and not to mention the old beat up chuck taylors that certaintly seen prouder days i was running in. my main problem was that i would "work through the pain" which seemed real rocky balboa of me at the time but this kind of mentality eventually messed my ankles up so bad i could not even walk without pain. i learned a very good lesson about training as a result -- quality over quanity. anyway the big problem is that when you run you want to make sure youre nice and warmed up first; you need to stretch for a while. next big thing is you want to start off slow to get your legs used to the strain of running. after that just make sure you at least have some good shoes that help to absorb some shock (example: anything but chucks) and you should be set. for the problem you have now: just make sure to ice the area real good and if its very bad take some anti inflamtory pills. all this was straight from the doctors mouth that i went to see.

[Chris Nagel]

Look for punches:

Do you think fighters can be trained to take a better punch Physically and Emotionally, Id like to hear your veiws.Plus to what degree.

i thnk that fighters should be taught to be on the look for punches and to have that as the primary concern while bxing. it sounds obvious but some guys dont do it and if youre not boxing with that 'defense first' mindset it makes you often get caught by suprise with punches that otherwise shouldnt never be landing. this mentality allows you to roll with punches because you see them coming and that in itself (seeing the punch coming) gives you a better chin as youre able to prepare yourself for the blow.

its my theory that all the guys who supposedly had good chin also had very good eyes in the sense that they saw punches coming.

You're right, I think that it applies to applies to a lot of guys, Roberto Duran comes to mind. He was especially hard to hit with a clean punch as he was always slipping, twisting and turning with the punches.

[Chris Nagel]

I know that this following quote comes from a thread that is already on this board, but it's so good that I had to include it here:

I think whats so interesting about Burley is his upper body movement in combination with his footwork. He moves around the ring, but not so fast that he isn't always set. This means that, through this, he can use the ring while still maintaining an ability to move his upper body. Something you won't see Ray Robinson or Ali doing because they're moving too fast to be set enough to preform these movements.

Well that makes him infuriatingly hard to hit. Smith misses essentially all of his punches and not only just that, he misses them big. Sometimes by a few feet.

This is something that is only accomplishble with a stance like Burley's. There are fighters like Ricardo Lopez or Barrera who use the ring and are incredible defensively but are unable to preform the upperbody movement that Burley can. Thus they can't make an opponent miss as badly as Burley can.


and because of that, they can't make an opponent reach as hard as Burley can.


Thats because the harder you are to reach the more an opponent will commit into his punches. You can see the way Burley is "pulling" Smith into him. That is something a squared up fighter can never do.

The general idea behind Burley's strategy and stance seems to me that - and correct me if you see something else - to pull your opponent into you and thus force him to reach with his punches, making him vulnerable.



There is an episode of The Way We Were with Joe Walcott and Joe Louis. They show on the screen the Knock down Walcott gave Louis in their second fight and Walcott says that he was leaning away knowing that he would pull Louis' jab enough to able to throw his right hand over it.

Schmeling did the same thing to him.

Not surprsing that all of these fighters share the same type of stance and, with that, the ability to "pull" fighters into them.

Recently I was going over some interesting things that I pulled off of the internet which kind of reminded me of Thomas's thoughts:

Walcott, Bivins said, had a frustrating technique he employed to get you to step forward as he connected with his right. Joe somehow moved his body in a manner that gave the appearance to his opponent that he was starting to back up, when all he was really doing was shifting his weight...Bivins stated that when you would begin to take that initial step forward upon seeing this, Walcott would crack you with the right. It was unexpected, and walking into the punch made it hurt even worse.