Strength Training for boxing

[Ingar]

Originally Posted by RDJ

The article does not say strength training doesn't have a purpose. What it suggests is that strength not gained by hypertrophy is mostly specific to the movement, in other words that you should do it in a sports specific way unless hypertrophy is involved. Bag work for example, and I have found out that it works very well. Sure there will be some cross over gains, but why settle for cross over gains when you can have the real deal. Conclusion RDJ is a big proponent of strength training.

Nobody has said for anybody to put weight training in front of any other, it is merely a tool and nothing else. Just like everything else one does. Like I said, don't use the tool if you don't like it, keep doing your thing if it gives you the progress and results you want.
I never substitute sparring for weight training if I want to become a better boxer, nobody is saying that.
When it comes to punching power, weight training will be a useful tool if you do it correctly.

You can rehearse your motor unit story as many times as you like, and be as patronizing as you want as well, because it's not even contradicting with what I'm saying. Sure it's about "recruitment of motor units". And I think that your body will adapt to recruiting as much as possible by actually doing the movement that requires much of them in the first place. Specificity. I'm sure you know the principle, it's described in the same sports physiology books you want me to read.

What is contradicting to what you (and the article) are saying is that strength training in the sense of it's neural adaptations does not offer any carryover to different type of muscle contraction in the same type of muscle groups involved.
Myofibrilar hypertrophy is one thing, that has a carrover effect and you agree with that. The other thing is neural adaptation. Your ability to recruit more muscle fibres in a certain muscle group during a maximal contraction absolutely has a carryover effect, since stronger muscle contractions in a single muscle group does not differ from what exercise you are doing since the muscle itself cannot tell what movement you are doing.
The article you posted had a single joint movement (leg extension exercise, knee joint) and compared it with a multijoint movement (cycling, hip, knee and ankle joint). Of course you are gonna have subpar carrover results.
That's why you train only multi-joint movements when you look for increased power output for sports, such as squats, power cleans and snatches.
By training the muscle groups involved in your sport, you are being sport-spesific. Technique training is paramount in any sport, and you won't become a great sprinter by just squatting, but it will be a hell of an addition done right.

Sorry if I came of as patronizing, I didn't mean to. I'm just reacting to you being so openly negative about something that has and will always help alot of athletes. I know, this is what I do for a living, this is shit I apply, teach and read about every single day.
I know this works, I am a product of it. And so are many other people I've trained with, coached, watched, played against etc.

[Ingar]

Originally Posted by ralphc

Assuming what you have said is correct, how many people in boxing gyms have actually studied this material? How many boxers exercise the absolute disciple in training and in lifestyle that modern Olympians are famous for? Arturo Gatti admitted on TSN that he had been lifting weights which caused him to gain an extra 20 pounds, which he would have to dehydrate to make weight. As a matter of fact he got involved in a lawsuit because of this. A boxer with all his money should be able to hire the right people to get him in shape. The fact is virtually every boxer in the world today weight trains improperly by your standards.

And look at boxing's state today. Look at the Heavyweight division.
That's why there are so many out-of-shape sucky boxers around, because they don't cater to the fact that to beat your opposition it's all about getting stronger, faster and/or bigger along with more skilled.
That's why you have guys like my Norwegian mate, played football here in Norway, played in the NFL, international level shot putter, benches 280kgs.
He got in the boxing ring with no previous boxing experience and raped everybody. He's 10 and 0 with 8 KO's, 6 by KO in the first round!
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

He's currently in jail, throwing his career away for being a dumb cunt, though.

Yes, nearly every boxer today trains improperly because they either listen to guys like yourself only talking about what people don't need and that all you need is oldschool boxing training that should've been deemed outdated in the 30's, or they hire "fitness gurus" or people that have gotten a "degree" from some fitness school run by the rotten supplement and fitness industry. They know nothing about performance and athleticism. They know about how to make money, and that's it.
When you "hire a trainer", you've lost. Becoming a really great athlete is about knowing your body and what it responds to.
You learn that by expanding your own knowledge, learning from people that have actually been places and accomplished things and trying out things for yourself.
You don't get anywhere by sitting there in front of your fucking computer talking about what doesn't work.
Put up or shut up.

[ralphc]

Originally Posted by Ingar

And look at boxing's state today. Look at the Heavyweight division.
That's why there are so many out-of-shape sucky boxers around, because they don't cater to the fact that to beat your opposition it's all about getting stronger, faster and/or bigger along with more skilled.
That's why you have guys like my Norwegian mate, played football here in Norway, played in the NFL, international level shot putter, benches 280kgs.
He got in the boxing ring with no previous boxing experience and raped everybody. He's 10 and 0 with 8 KO's, 6 by KO in the first round!
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

He's currently in jail, throwing his career away for being a dumb cunt, though.

Yes, nearly every boxer today trains improperly because they either listen to guys like yourself only talking about what people don't need and that all you need is oldschool boxing training that should've been deemed outdated in the 30's, or they hire "fitness gurus" or people that have gotten a "degree" from some fitness school run by the rotten supplement and fitness industry. They know nothing about performance and athleticism. They know about how to make money, and that's it.
When you "hire a trainer", you've lost. Becoming a really great athlete is about knowing your body and what it responds to.
You learn that by expanding your own knowledge, learning from people that have actually been places and accomplished things and trying out things for yourself.
You don't get anywhere by sitting there in front of your fucking computer talking about what doesn't work.
Put up or shut up.

You sound like a rather brash young man. Are your accomplishments commensurate with your arrogance? Boxrec will tell you what Joe Calzaghe has achieved, and he did it with methods "that should've been deemed outdated in the 30's" .

[Arka]

Didn't Joe Louis develop a strong foundation of strength in his teens ,as an ice-block deliver man?

A lot of these old-timers performed heavy manual labour from an early age...

[Bill Humphrey]

I've read some good books about the old timers and yes some of them sought after vigorous labour intensive jobs to build up their body strength such as felling trees with an axe. Read Gene Tunney by John Jarred and you will learn about Gene Tunney spending a summer felling trees just to build up his upper body strength. This kind of work was labouring intensive and think about the action of swinging an axe and how it compliments the movement for hooks.

Some boxing trainers have introduced some of this kind of training back into their workouts:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Try it, take a 16 or 18lb sledge hammer and an old type and go flat out for 4 x 3 minute rounds with a minute rest and tell me what it was like.

Now imagine the old timers doing this as a job for a 10 or 12 hour shift 6 days a week.

Kind Regards BH

[Ingar]

Originally Posted by ralphc

You sound like a rather brash young man. Are your accomplishments commensurate with your arrogance? Boxrec will tell you what Joe Calzaghe has achieved, and he did it with methods "that should've been deemed outdated in the 30's" .

I'm not really brash, you just rarely contribute anything in this forum and always negate anything anybody says that are trying to contribute for people to learn new things.
Joe Calzaghe has been boxing since age nine, my mate went pro the same year he started.
His methods have worked for him, no doubt. But he could've been even better if he expanded his training repertoire, he's not exactly a beast in regards to his physique.
If Calzaghe would have tremendous power along with his suberb technique, stamina and boxing knowledge, he would be even more fearsome.

I'm not saying that the old-school method isn't good, I'm just saying that using only that approach is out-dated and will today only work maybe for a few. And even then it won't be nearly enough for them to reach their full potential.
Many have misunderstood what old-school training is about as well, it's not about not engaging in any resistance training like I get the impression from many that "follow" it, that calistenichs like just push-ups and such is "all you need". Many oldtimers engaged in resistance training all day, working hard manual labor for a living.

People in the boxing community often say that punchers are born, not made.
Punchers can indeed be made, and if more people understood that, boxing wouldn't be in such a decline.

[RDJ]

Originally Posted by Ingar

Nobody has said for anybody to put weight training in front of any other, it is merely a tool and nothing else. Just like everything else one does. Like I said, don't use the tool if you don't like it, keep doing your thing if it gives you the progress and results you want.
I never substitute sparring for weight training if I want to become a better boxer, nobody is saying that.

Agreed, as always.

Originally Posted by Ingar

What is contradicting to what you (and the article) are saying is that strength training in the sense of it's neural adaptations does not offer any carryover to different type of muscle contraction in the same type of muscle groups involved.

To clear things up I posted the article to get some opinions on it, that's why I worded it rather carefully, saying "it suggests" instead of "it proves" or similar. It's not my article, and I don't think lifting offers no carry over. What I do still find rather convincing, is that hypertrophy carries over more than neurological adaptations.

Originally Posted by Ingar

Myofibrilar hypertrophy is one thing, that has a carrover effect and you agree with that. The other thing is neural adaptation. Your ability to recruit more muscle fibres in a certain muscle group during a maximal contraction absolutely has a carryover effect, since stronger muscle contractions in a single muscle group does not differ from what exercise you are doing since the muscle itself cannot tell what movement you are doing.

True. But not all strength gains are in the muscle itself, some are neurological, some are muscle memory related, coordination plays a part, etc. A bigger muscle creates more power obviously, but for the other gains cross over will be much less.

Originally Posted by Ingar

The article you posted had a single joint movement (leg extension exercise, knee joint) and compared it with a multijoint movement (cycling, hip, knee and ankle joint). Of course you are gonna have subpar carrover results.
That's why you train only multi-joint movements when you look for increased power output for sports, such as squats, power cleans and snatches.

Very good point, I hadn't even noticed that in the article.

Originally Posted by Ingar

By training the muscle groups involved in your sport, you are being sport-spesific. Technique training is paramount in any sport, and you won't become a great sprinter by just squatting, but it will be a hell of an addition done right.

I'm taking specificity a bit further than you are, I don't think something is sports specific just because it uses the same muscles. Boxing is a full body sport, every exercise could be considered somewhat sports specific in that case. But that's a matter of definition.

Originally Posted by Ingar

Sorry if I came of as patronizing, I didn't mean to. I'm just reacting to you being so openly negative about something that has and will always help alot of athletes. I know, this is what I do for a living, this is shit I apply, teach and read about every single day.
I know this works, I am a product of it. And so are many other people I've trained with, coached, watched, played against etc.

I can't really blame you to be honest, my tone was a bit annoying.

[RDJ]

Like I said before to me it's not whether is beneficial, it's whether it's more beneficial than more sports specific resistance training like bag work for example. To me it's comparable to running. You can just plain run, or do it in a more sports specific way, and obviously the latter will have greater cross over gains, but it'll always be suboptimal compared to the real thing.

Having said that I did manual labor since I was 15 years old, so it may not really affect me like it does others. I like a manual labor session occasionally because I don't want to get weaker again, but I notice no effect on my punching power. Boxing is more than punching though, I do notice it when my opponent tries to throw me around the ring.

[cockneyhardman]

Originally Posted by ralphc

You sound like a rather brash young man. Are your accomplishments commensurate with your arrogance? Boxrec will tell you what Joe Calzaghe has achieved, and he did it with methods "that should've been deemed outdated in the 30's" .

but you seem to ignore the fact that boxers also do it with "new school" methods - such as RJJ, and b-hop
and they did this ALL through their career, not just to fight calzaghe
RJJ also played basketball and used strength and power excercises that r necessary for that sport a lot of which happen to be used in boxing too
could you imagine joe beating roy jones in his prime?
i don't think so
roy jones would have beaten haglar,leonard and robinson in his prime

[cockneyhardman]

Originally Posted by Arka

Didn't Joe Louis develop a strong foundation of strength in his teens ,as an ice-block deliver man?

A lot of these old-timers performed heavy manual labour from an early age...

i've done heavy labour too
all it ever did was strengthen my biceps

[cockneyhardman]

Originally Posted by Bill Humphrey

I've read some good books about the old timers and yes some of them sought after vigorous labour intensive jobs to build up their body strength such as felling trees with an axe. Read Gene Tunney by John Jarred and you will learn about Gene Tunney spending a summer felling trees just to build up his upper body strength. This kind of work was labouring intensive and think about the action of swinging an axe and how it compliments the movement for hooks.

Some boxing trainers have introduced some of this kind of training back into their workouts:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Try it, take a 16 or 18lb sledge hammer and an old type and go flat out for 4 x 3 minute rounds with a minute rest and tell me what it was like.

Now imagine the old timers doing this as a job for a 10 or 12 hour shift 6 days a week.

Kind Regards BH

not as good as a cable machine
think about it - do you wear 18 pound gloves in the ring?
can u throw powerful, quick punches while tensing your shoulders to a great degree?

[cockneyhardman]

Originally Posted by ralphc

Assuming what you have said is correct, how many people in boxing gyms have actually studied this material? How many boxers exercise the absolute disciple in training and in lifestyle that modern Olympians are famous for? Arturo Gatti admitted on TSN that he had been lifting weights which caused him to gain an extra 20 pounds, which he would have to dehydrate to make weight. As a matter of fact he got involved in a lawsuit because of this. A boxer with all his money should be able to hire the right people to get him in shape. The fact is virtually every boxer in the world today weight trains improperly by your standards.

gatti isn't exactly a smart boxer is he?
there is a difference between lifting for muscle mass and lifting for srength and power
if you researched it and tried it yourself you would understand

[boxingtactics07]

lol a gain of twenty pounds is determined by the weight-lifting COUPLED with excess calories (not just the "heavy lifting"). The type of hypertrophy (myofibrillar/sarcoplasmic) gained is based on the individuals training regime and goals. Anyway OrlandoFighter, Your topic is a little bit misleading. You ask for strength training and then you ask for punching power. The training for the two differs. The first is your potential for the latter, which can be solved a million different ways. The more common ones being weight-lifting, strongman training, and male gymnastics. The formula for increased punching power is simple: proper technique + specificity (boxing) + frequency/practice = success. The sport comes first (3-6 days a week). In this case it's boxing. You should be doing various bag-work, mitt-work, sparring, jump-roping, and roadwork. These are the fundamental exercises for boxing. Everything else is an additional tool/option ("core" training, calisthenics, gymnastics, weight-lifting, strongman training, speed training, etc) that you can choose to suit your own needs. Add as many of them as you can; as long as they don't interfere with the boxing basics. The same idea works for other sports (IE: baseball). You would focus on fielding grounders, catching fly balls, hitting balls, etc... as your primary exercises and the additional tools are to be used to increase your ability to perform the the primary exercises.

[Arka]

Originally Posted by cockneyhardman

i've done heavy labour too
all it ever did was strengthen my biceps

Wouldn't carrying heavy blocks of ice around strengthen your legs,back and midsection?

As for sledgehammer or woodchopping type exercises,George Foreman used to do a lot of those. His trainer after the Rumble in the Jungle,Gil Clancy,criticised this form of training.He thought that it made George widen the arc of his punches.

Cable machines are I admit a great training tool for fighters....

I think when people think about fighters who trained using weights immediately the name of Holyfield comes to mind.It seemed to have worked for him.

[RDJ]

Originally Posted by Arka

Wouldn't carrying heavy blocks of ice around strengthen your legs,back and midsection?

It sure would. Manual labor is a very dynamic way to gain strength, not just bicep strength.

Originally Posted by Arka

I think when people think about fighters who trained using weights immediately the name of Holyfield comes to mind.It seemed to have worked for him.

It didn't do him much good when he faced James Toney, a man who probably never touched a weight in his lifetime except for the occasional quarterpounder

It helped him bulk up to heavyweight, that much is certain.