Moving around in southpaw

It's overused IMO. Not many people can do it sufficiently either unless they're fighting someone just a whole lot worse than they are. Shifting into the stance to escape an attack or to create one is much more beneficial for the most part than just switching stance completely. Pirog's KO of Jacobs is a lovely example of that.

But if you really want it as something to use, then I hate to be boring but you gotta train boring. Practice moving moving to your right as you jab out of the southpaw stance, practice your defense even more. Most boxers just want to be able to throw some nice combinations as a southpaw but it's a dangerous game. Your attacking arsenal changes as a southpaw but so do your vulnerabilities.

 

You need to hang them up.

 

I come bearing some bad news for everyone: all of you motherfuckers have this wrong.

The arguments for "anybody can do it potentially; you just have to practice until you get it perfect!" and the diametrically opposed viewpoint "most people shouldn't bother as hardly anybody can do it at that high a level" are both well-meaning and well thought out up to a point but ultimately myopic. They both fail to account for the one universal truth: everybody's (that is, every body's) different. Our brains are not all wired the same. We all really are snowflakes, at least in cognitive terms.

• Many people will try and fail to ever get even halfway passing fair at stance-switching, no matter how much effort they pour into the undertaking. These people, after experimentation in the opposite stance (when and only when they have mastered the basics in their "native" stance) with early returns suggesting they wear it awkwardly (like a wrong footed shoe), ought to be discouraged by coaches from persisting and just focus on their native forevermore. Bashing your head into a brick wall attempting to bleed that stone will only detract from time you could be sharpening your skills in your native stance - and heavens forbid you ever panic and try switch-hitting during a real fight when you've not gotten comfortable with it, goodness, you'll get yourself mangled.
  
  
• Conversely, anyone that reaches a certain plateau of mediocrity in the opposite stance - able to compete at more than half of their efficacy in their native - has done well for themselves, compared with those unfortunates in the above paragraph. These people - assuming they can maneuver around the ring without tripping over themselves, and muster the holistic neural coordination (looking, stepping, punching, defensive posturing, all seamlessly integrated and without any freezing up betwixt), and regardless of whether they do this with any especial panache or flair, oughtn't be told "well, you'll never be a world class switch hitter, so best never use this". No. Another wrinkle to your game, unless the liability outweighs the benefit, is never a bad tool in the kit for a rainy day.

I'll liken it to another controversial flashpoint of boxing advice, which often spawns impassioned and contradicting (and ultimately, again, only half-correct) admonitions: using the Philly shell.

No, you'll never resemble Toney or Mayweather doing it. No, even world championship level guys who try it (a lot) manage to never 'look good' doing it, any many never even have much success with it or improve their overall defensive capabilities with it, making it for them in effect a waste of time & energy on fight night (along with the unseen cost of countless man-hours squandered in the gym).

...but so what? The goal isn't to 'look the part'. Aesthetics don't matter. Stop wanting to see a carbon-copy of Pretty Boy or Lights Out when viewing tape of yourself. All you need concern yourself with, as you get the hang of the shoulder roll and sprinkle its use gradually into your sparring is this: do your partners find you more difficult to hit, even marginally, when you do? If the answer's yes, then full steam ahead. "Ugly effective" and "prettily effective" are of equal worth, because they have the pertinent word in common.

So here's what I suggest. Anybody interested should first and foremost do all their normal boxing drills they've learned in their native stance, in the opposite during a spare moment in training. Keep at it a few times, giving it the old college try. Any of roughly three broadly categorized things will happen:

1. you will find it almost repulsively uncomfortable and/or difficult. If you are so discombobulated & disoriented by switching that after going at it a while you can't even take a few steps without feeling "off" - kiss the idea goodbye. Your brain probably just flat out doesn't like it and never will, and that's fine. Get as good as you can at doing it facing the way you were first taught.
2. you might find it challenging, but notice improvement by increments as you keep at it. you'll in all likelihood never be amazing, but with a lot of hard work you can have it become a valuable additional dimension to your in ring identity. You'll never be in the same league as Bud Crawford doing it, just as nobody will be PBF or JT doing the Philly shell - but again, so what? As long as you can at least sort of hack it without getting your physiology too confused to function, the harm doesn't outweigh the good and carry on.
3. you might actually be in for a major surprise. you might find that your so-called "opposite" stance is easier, or more comfortable or 'natural' feeling than what you believed to be your native. This is because, as I said before, we are unique little snowflakes, no two completely alike. One person may have consistent handedness across the board: writing, playing baseball (all positions), and boxing, et cetera. Another may hold a pencil with his left, but throw righty and bat in either stance (and be the ambidextrously gifted rarity in boxing). Yet a third may be able to sign his name with either, but can very strictly only hurl a fastball with his left, and boxes more fluidly southpaw, and yet can toe up on either side of home plate. My point is, handedness, contrary to popular belief, doesn't automatically correlate across contexts and disciplines. My theory is that a lot of people (not like a ton, but some... more than most realize, I think) and indeed even their unwitting coaches, gravitate toward boxing a certain way based on assumptions that it'll match what they use in manuscription. Once you've worked out what you are, then you can suss what you can do and proceed from there.

 

Nah Cory, you're the one who's done goofed here. Only difference is that we didn't write a ****ing 25,000 word essay explaining it.

Good post fella

 

Unless you have completely mastered the fundamentals of boxing I would highly recommend forgetting the idea of learning how to box southpaw and switch between stances. I've seen guys who thought they could pull this off too early only to get hurt seriously

 

Yep, but like I said above, for those who already have reached a more intermediate tier, a little trial and error within reason to see if switching is 'for them' can't hurt.

 

True. Be prepared to absorb some shots though

 

I mean, yes but that's when incorporating literally any new element in sparring.

(although this is a bit more complex a matter than learning a basic pivot, admittedly)

 

I'm a fake southpaw I'm actually right handed but I've always felt more comfortable southpaw it just takes practice bro

 

I'm right handed but have always fought southpaw. It just felt very natural to me and with a snappy enough left hook allowed me to get off nicer offensive combos.