Calzaghe's Old School Training

first off, calzaghe is a great fighter, but could he be better if he used some modern methods? I beleive so
secondly, boxers have different styles, those who use alot of ring movement and volume of punches are obviously going to need extra endurance training to those who rely on stalking their opponents and using powerfull combinations. but with more endurance comes less power and vice versa, so you have to find the balance that suits your style and the style you will fight against your next opponent.

 

Yes but mark you seriously think Calzaghe will be able to move his hands as quick as and constantly as he does, he doesnt need power. It is working just fine right now.

Modern methods are just a motion thrown around like the brand new Commodore, get out and get one because you'll be better off. Please. People do weights because coincidentally they may get a good win and they believe it is from the training, could they do just as well if not better without them, i believe so. Look at all good amateurs they kick arse. Look at an early Kostya Tszyu fight, or even De la Hoya, hell you could even watch a Sugar Ray Leonard fight, all so much more fluid and brilliant as amateurs.

 

Calzaghe isn't an old school trainer.

He trains some of the time by punching with elastic rubber things attached to his hands. Rubber wasn't invented until 1990

 

oz puncher, are you aware if done properly weight training makes you faster? how can that not help a boxer? how can modern training methods help every single sport except for boxing? you might enjoy reading this http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/IGH/IGH0703/IGH0703d.pdf

 

Mark that data is inconclusive. It may hav just been a coincidence. I want real proof whereas a boxer who is already training the "old school way" and data taken then weight training incorporated in and significant data recorded. Then i "MAY" be convinced.

 

Besides that was only for a single punch.

 

oz, , one punch power is pretty damn important , but it goes on to talk about many different aspects of boxing and how modern training methods have helped,did you read the whole thing? not just using scientists and scientific research but real life examples with world champion boxers and trainers who accept that there is alot of merit to using some new ideas. I help athletes with their training alot, boxers,mma athletes,tennis players and soccer players, all are well trained before they come to me and after i have changed and edited their whole program and nutritional plan all get very good results, i dont just go on what they tell me but the improvements they experience in real life competition.

here is a good detailed plan that evander holyfield used, what he lacked in technique he made up for in conditioning,
http://sportsci.org/news/news9709/hatfield.html

 

Bobby,there are very few if any elite boxers in history who got better as they weight trained.....Guys like mike spinks,jones and such found it very useful to put on functional weight to move up to heavy,yes,but they didnt get better or more powerful as a result of this....calzaghe might slow himself down if he used weights.....The best in history NEVER used weights......This thread is now repeating itself,de ja vu all over gain ...

 

If you can explain the science behind weight training slowing you down maybe I'll believe something you've said. So what if the best in history never used weights? A boxer doesn't have to use weights but can get benfits from doing so, if done correctly.

You are yet again repeating the same thing and as I've told you; lifting weights won't make you a better boxer. A decent routine can help with conditioning, strength and speed, not improve boxing skill.

 

Listen,science is proved by EMPIRICAL results buster......Just show me how weights improve ANYTHING by RESULTS,i dont want your unproven theories.....I want a world class elite boxer who improved his PHYSICALITY (not his boxing skills.) that then helped him become better in some way as a boxer....surely by you saying it improves your physical performance then this translates into some kind of improvement in your boxing? Otherwise what is the point of improving your bench by fifty pounds and then having no improvement in your boxing? I hope you and the others get the point,if weights dont eventually improve your punch power,punch speed,boxing stamina or boxing strength then they are useless except for looking good at the beach or bragging about your one rep max on the bench.....

 

Again

If you can explain the science behind weight training slowing you down maybe I'll believe something you've said.

You are yet again repeating the same thing and as I've told you; lifting weights won't make you a better boxer. A decent routine can help with conditioning, strength and speed, not improve boxing skill.

You obviously don't have a clue about weights... who said anything about bench press?

 

Listen,many who lift weights get bigger and slower boxing wise,fact,witness shane mosley,mike spinks,roy jones,mike tyson,shannon briggs,tyrell biggs,vargas and many others,and all of these still retained their boxing conditioning/training whilst doing the weights......The science is the muscles add weight and unneccessary bulk to the physique and this slows down the boxer and can lessen his stamina due to pulling around more weight or trying to move overdeveloped muscles.....Sports like track and field and american football have proven that weights benefit the guys in speed,size and power,but boxing aint NFL,and on this thread you guys have still yet to come up with ONE example of a guy benefitting big time from weights,holyfield was already great before he started weights,and the benefit he got was adding fuctional bodyweight to compete with heavies,he did however get relatively slower as he stacked on the muscle and his power didnt improve much if at all,especially at a p4p level..........Also dont discount the benefits of vitamin s,with steroids i agree you can get benefits with weights related to boxing,that why the nfl and track and field guys are so successful with weights,they combine them with vitamin S,which is a whole different ball game,if you pardon the pun......
I know about weights and steroids having experienced both......Your turn.....

 

I said science not "Um, well, the muscles add weight so it slows you down" This is completly wrong, lifting weights doesn't have to make you bigger, that's bodybuilding, showing again you don't really know what you're talking about.

This is a universal effect of weight lifting on EVERYONE no matter the sport. With a decent routine weights have their benefits for EVERYONE.

And for what, the 12th time this thread? Lifting weights will not make you a better boxer.

 

Why is it that after 30 years of weight lifting nobody in boxing ever learned how to do it properly?

 

Lifting weights lead to overload and then adaptation which either leads to bigger muscles or more efficient neuromuscular functioning,most nearly this leads to increases in muscle size however you slice it....it is very rare to increase strength with no size gain unless your are an elite powerlifter using very heavy weights and low reps....for a novice/boxer to lift with no increase in muscle size is pretty near impossible and if it were possible,what is the said benefit to the boxer? Its too simplisitc to think that because a muscle can get stronger in the range of motion of a weight lifting exercise that somehow this translates to boxing mechanics.....Boxing aint track and field,and yes,how come the world of track is so clued up on weights and yet boxing is allegedly not?
These days you could struggle to compete in nfl or track and field without weights (though some can.) but in boxing i know for sure that a guy can become an atg boxer with NO WEIGHTS WHATSOEVER.....
End of chat......