What happened to the peek-a-boo style?

Yeah the high guard/turtle shell is a completely different style. I was very confused seeing people compare Winky to Tyson. If Tyson was a machine gun, Winky was a riot shield with a lower firing rate gun. Winky was more of a defensive fighter and lacked the explosive, flashy combos and dynamic angles/fast head movement of the peak a boo style. Winky fought at a more measured pace protecting his chin carefully and opened up when he saw opportunities or had his opponent hurt. The peak a boo style imposes it's will on the opponent and creates opportunities with non stop pressure looking to land bombs or combinations.

 

Exactly! It's all about styles fitting body types and personality traits. The Catskill guys seeked out very specific types of guys that were not only athletically gifted with speed and power like Patterson and Tyson, but they also had a aggressive mentality that fit that style well.

The high guard guys like Quartey, Wright and Abraham all fought at a methodical/measured pace.

 

He rather squatted and ducked below the opponent's waistline on several occasions, but that's about it, he wasn't abusing it. This isn't what the style is about, so it'll be nice to see someone reviving it.

 

It's too difficult to perfect.

 

I think it was a good approach when the hw division was full of Ali imitators but now that it's full of guys built like the klits trying to replicate them or Lennox lewis I don't think it's a smart play for a heavyweight

 

Fury is the only guy in the top 10 currently employing tactics used by Lewis and the Klitschkos. A peak a boo master would give the stiff Joshua and the sloppy zero defense Wilder problems. Usyk would have his hands full, Joyce would be target practice, and Ruiz would be 50/50.

 

Not taught. Everyone thinks they can turn into Mayweather and end up getting spanked. Tank has a good one. So does Inoue

 

Define Peek-A-Boo first.

Peek-a-boo is a boxing style which received its common name for the defensive hand position, which are normally placed in front of the face, like in the baby's game of the same name [..] The general idea is that the Peek-a-boo practitioners are counterpunchers, who contrary to accustomed ways of counterpunching perceived as constantly backing-up and jabbing from the safe distance, move forward and do it with a lot of aggressiveness by constantly charging at the opponent, provoking him into throwing punches to counter, and subsequently into making mistakes to capitalize on, by creating openings and dominant angles of attack. (Wikipedia)

The major benefit of the Peek-A-Boo style is that it gives the practicioner the ability to quickly and easily transition from Inside to Outside and from Orthodox to Southpaw. The style is built around the concept of being able to use each side in the exact same way. This allows for total access to all angles and positions at all time. (David, Christian 275:2019)

Well, a Peek-A-Boo, it's really a cruel style of boxing. You keep both hands ups, you twist your waist as you move, you come forward, you make the guy miss and counterpunch. It was pretty much discovered from Karate. They just move, get to one position, and punch with everything you got, with bad and mean and ferocious intentions. Most of his (D'Amato) fighting was psychological. He believed physical actuality of boxing was ten percent, when the mind was ninety percent. (Mike Tyson)

So to name a few fundamental principles:
a) Intense, often aggressive defense to open up counterpunching opportunities (sudden head slot changes; crouch in Patterson's case). Hands protect the chin, cocked and ready to strike, without obscuring vision.

b) Squared position enhancing lateral movement and allowing for smooth, two-fisted combinations.

c) As of 80's: ambidextrous approach with D'Amato shift, allowing for a whole new world of angles with counter-to-southpaw. Squared stance is not far from it so it's much easier than, say, shifting from bladed stance. Early on you could still see Patterson use his defense and speed to find new angles, exploiting his smaller size to gain the best leverage possible.

d) In Tyson's case: the philosophy of mean intentions. Of breaking the character of your opponent through display of extreme athleticism, superb skill, and fanatic decisivness.

Compare it to the High-Guard:

a) It actively employs tight defense composed of hands held tightly at the temples. Great defense at the cost of your offense, as your punches are coming from a predictable angle, your vision is obscured, and you are prone to control game (frames, hand traps.) Subtle movements at the waist/upper-body movement required to achieve some degree of slickness. Peek-A-Boo most of the time keeps the vision clear and less prone to such maneuvers.

b) Give-and-take concept is the main engine behind your counterpunching opportunities. Conditioning your opponent to making contact with your high-guard and creating and illusion of hittability, you can take it all away suddenly with a defensive maneuver followed by a counter. That is a stark contrast to Peek-A-Boo which typically does not want to be hittable at any point.

c) High-Guard has to be assertive, taking space and pressuring your opponent, but it doesn't have to be outright aggressive, wheras Peek-A-Boo at its heart demands you to create an opening an ruthlessly exploit it.

It's relatively easy to see that Peek-A-Boo demands athletic gifts and extreme dedication to truly flourish, as you will be trying to draw the fire and exploit openings with bold angles and rapid combinations. Naturally it suits a smaller fighter, who can punch faster and more effectively up close and is typically the more nimble boxer. High Guard is easier to pick up and less demanding to implement, even if its mastery is as difficult as any other style.

EDIT: Also, no trainers. That is probably the main reason.

 

how many peek a boo masters have their been in boxing history?

the only heavyweights trying to mix it up close like that these days (unless against overmatched competition) are smaller guys like Babic, T-rex arms Ruiz and Usyk. And none of them are doing peek-a-boo.

i like the style, for the record. explosive, fun stuff to watch. but i don't think effective styles just go away for no reason. even if we don't see fighters try it in the ring, I'm sure they're trying it in training and sparring. the great peek a boo masters, Patterson and Tyson, both hit walls when met with people physically stronger than them.

and seems like the style is best suited for a young spry fighter but young heavyweights aren't taking risks against the top guys like Tyson and Patterson did to claim their respective records as youngest champions. heavyweights these days make their move for the title at 28-32. If Tyson had waited to 27 to challenge for the title like Fury, and all other things in his life remained the same, does he win the title at all?

 

Who knows what would happen if Tyson waited till 27. We both agree it's a young man's style and very physically demanding. You can't half ass the peak a boo or just go through the motions, you need to be in shape and have the strength and speed to apply pressure and throw ferocious combinations every round.

This is why it's difficult to use in this day and age. Trainers usually try to make their guys more well rounded and fights are usually done at a slower pace. Inside fighting and pressuring is discouraged by both the ref and trainers who sometimes seek to win a decision first, go for the knockout if it presents itself. The peak a boo isn't about outboxing your opponent, it's about dismantling them and taking them out.

 

no argument here but thats kinda what my point was originally. the style just isn't fitting into the contemporary division. there's a reason trainers are not training their guys to go in there and just try and smash their opponent. heavyweights are so big on average and just hit so hard. and it's not like their skulls or brains are any bigger or more durable, neck size aside. nobody wants to end up like AJ or Morrison or John Tate.

it's unfortunate from a viewer standpoint, and what i meant when i said the modern division imitated Wlad and Lennox, because those are 2 guys who got caught a few times in their career by lesser fighters and shifted styles as a result.

 

The Romanian fighter Mihai Nistor was the last really effective proponent of the style, but he turned pro too late and hasn't looked remotely as good as his World Series of Boxing days.

This content is protected

 

IMO, Tyson would probably have been better without the D'Amato style if he worked on a more conventional style as much as he did the D'Amato style. When a fighter's feet get parallel it's easy to push the fighter back and the fighter probably loses some power from his dominant hand. With Tyson, if his right foot had been behind him instead of beside his left foot, he could have probably jabbed with even more power, his right would probably be harder, and his left hook might be closer and harder to see. He'd also be much harder to push backward as his balance points would be the left front and right rear. He could still have the excellent head movement, if there is an argument for the D'Amato style I'm willing to listen, but to me it's just a style that leaves a fighter squared up and more vulnerable than he would be in a more conventional style of boxing. I think that because it is not being used is more proof that it is ineffective.

 

Right now the closest guy to that style that I can remember is Isaac Cruz.

 

A "peek a boo master? " This message board has found a new low. Is that from a boxing video game or a video maker?