How many posters on here (and be honest I can tell who does not do this) can tell or understand why and how boxers pre 1940s fought? How were they able to fight hands down? Why did they fight hands down? Why did they clinch a lot etc? Can any of you take a stab at how these boxers were able to do what they did ? Its fine to guess, its all hypothetical stuff for the most part ,but what would be lazy is saying dumb **** like boxer xyz just wasnt fast enough or that gud etc? This content is protected
for example at 1 minute 07 seconds how was Bombarder wells (the guy in the black shorts ) able to defend against the jab from Moir without the use of a high guard?
at 1 minute and 30 seconds how was Wells able to avoid that that right and subsequent shots from Gunner Moir ? answers are easier to discover when you watch these sequences at 0.25 speed and if you watch more than once?
LOL You never fail to deliver. You know we have several resident actual former boxers many members here actually train. We have a couple of very wise sages here to that are paid to train actual fighters you just may have heard of. You really just got to shop around. Then once of course you do find one of these trainers for the good of the forum could you post the convo where you try to explain to them all the things they are doing wrong?
Dude, you're not special. You don't know things others don't. If you bothered to use the search function, you'd see this topic has been done to death since 2007. Many people understand why old timers had certain components to their styles, in fact they understand more in depth than you, from what I've seen from your posts. This may sound rude, but all I've seen you do is make the same type of posts 'modernists' make, but from a classicist perspective. You don't explain your points well, if at all. Due to how many times this topic has been done, your thread is a waste of time unless you thoroughly explain yourself. For example, read through this thread and you will find high level discussion from both sides of the coin, which is how it should be done. Not some low effort, vague call out thread. https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...-of-jim-driscoll-disgustingly-archaic.635817/
Just a few for those interested. These aren't even the best ones, considering they're just the ones I've saved. I'd advise checking out @BitPlayerVesti and @Senya13 profiles. @greynotsoold @scartissue @Pat M @George Crowcroft @Tin_Ribs @escudo also have some brilliant breakdowns of old fighters in their post histories. https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/1842-boxing-manual-on-slipping.584834/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/1888-boxing-training-manual.546978/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/benny-leonard-and-modern-technique.624574/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/old-school-boxing-stance-interesting-article.288416/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/boxing-stance-traditional-classical-and-modern.624679/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/jimmy-wilde-dai-dollings-and-welsh-mountain-fighting.648053/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/your-thoughts-on-this-old-timer-bout.644061/ https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/sinister-classic-stance-defense-and-taller-opponents.3175875/ https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/boxing-from-the-l-stance.1931233/ https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/old-school-boxing-stances.2582095/ https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/charley-burley-and-the-classic-stance-amazing-video.1554533/ https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/charley-burley-analyzing-a-genius.1133833/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...ead-body-placement-ft-ggg-billy-papke.644031/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...-lessons-i-learned-1937-by-peter-kane.647264/ https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/triple-shift.635418/
That footage is awful. Cant even see what they’re doing half the time. The picture quality is good, but the FPS and speed make it unwatchable.
@greynotsoold is the most intelligent boxing mind I have had the pleasure of talking to. I have been in the same room with Common wealth champions, world contenders former ABC champions and an old LW from the 1940-50s boxing scene whom won't ID himself for me (I suspect him of being a boxer we talk about here LOL)
Largely the same reasons some modern boxers do, it has advantages especially offensively (it makes it easier to throw to the body, which had a bigger emphasis in the early period due to longer fights), and the smaller gloves meant there was a lot less advantages to keeping your hands high. You do see early filmed boxers using a higher guard though, but overall, low hands was a lot more prevelant than it is now. This content is protected Because the rules meant they could get away with a lot more. There's boxers now who would certainly clinch a lot more if they could.
there we go with the lazy reponses, the idea here is not your opinion on these fighters but your understanding of what they are doing in the ring, you are telling me you can not understand the latter with this comment.
hey dummy ,I say the same thing grey said about benny leonards low hands( once you are outta range it doesnt matter if your hands are low ) the classic stance post is no longer there but the protect the hands crap is not why they stood like that, and the dummies in the thread are proving their ignorance, hands were low cuz body punching not just to the liver but solar plexus was a thing and the head was over the rear foot so the first thing that would enter range would be your lead foot and lead hand .Look up this stance stuff on sherdog and type in sinister he ACTUALLY KNOWS WHY THEY STOOD THAT WAY Your awful opinion on the classic stance is wrong as all hell too, Right hand isnt slower in fact a simple outside slipping jab lowers the rear hand even more(if you keep it down by the midsection ) and HIDES THE RIGHT HAND (Langford footages shows this and this is another reason why the rear hand is near the midsection and not up high in the early days) the modern stance compromises distance by moving your head more forward . It also makes defense reactionary rather than positional its an inferior stance in every way , Lomas results are not the product of his stance but his ability to turn his opponent, but Loma too can be more optimal in what hes doing and he gets caught up in the pitfalls of that stance (not to mention he leans compounding the problem) the shedog posts with sinisters responses are the gold mine , A guy is very knowledgeable too and there was one more gentleman whos name escapes me who knows his stuff. But a lot of this stuff you posted with the exception of greynotsoolds comments had a lotta guys posting their opinion without knowing what they talk about.
I didnt mean find footage where a guy keeps their hands up, The better question is how were they able to keep from largely getting hit with their hands low ,and keeping it strictly to the match I posted ( I didnt pick the cream of the crop of the 1910s on purpose) and wanted answers specific to this fight! at 1 minute and 7 seconds how did bombardier wells defend that jab from gunner Moir with his hands down ? and at 1 minute and 30 seconds how did Wells avoid those shots from Moir with his hands down?
slow it down! So hoping someone with answer the questions I posted at 1 minute and 7 seconds how did bombardier wells defend that jab from gunner Moir with his hands down ? and at 1 minute and 30 seconds how did Wells avoid those shots from Moir with his hands down?
