The Art of Crossing Your Feet: Lessons from Billy Conn

We all know what happened in the first Louis vs Conn fight. Conn brought out his inner Ali before Ali was even born, and along with a mix of brilliantly sharp and precise in-fighting, the former Middleweight went ahead and gave Louis all he could handle. Or at least, that's what the story says. The story is only half true.

Ali and Conn may look similar on the surface. Both were on their toes, both were often squared in order to utilise latteral movement, and both of them broke some rules, especially in regards to the crossing of the feet. Here's what you haven't been told, though. Despite the similiarities, in terms of functionality and execution, Conn utilised this movement in a manner far more akin to how Willie Pep used his footwork, than in a manner akin to how Muhammad Ali did. Pep was the best when it came to suddenly changing and shifting direction when moving, and it's not all that close either. Along with his small size, Pep primarily liked to switch to southpaw when moving in order to open up the potential trajectory of his movement. Just look at 2:20-2:23 and 6:06-6:12 and dare to lie to my face by telling me you're not impressed.

This content is protected

So how does the obviously much larger Conn, who is clearly much more aquared up than bladed, get a similar result as the guy with arguably the best footwork ever, who also happens to be a much smaller Featherweight, especially when doing something as sinful to the rulebook of Boxing as crossing his feet ?

This content is protected

Look at 1:50. Conn crosses his feet, but look at that small movement he does. His left foot ends up being where it should have been after the crossing of the feet regardless, but the rear foot has gone to the right of where it was when the legs were initially crossed. If you know the importance of half steps, you know how crazy that is. Conn just half stepped while utilising lateral movment. When was the last time someone did this ? Seriously. And the result ? Louis misses a jab that would have otherwise landed if Conn continued his trajectory before that little shuffle.

At 6:18 he beautifuly disquises his intent. Crosses his feet to disquise the fact that his right foot would otherwise be in position to attack had his stance not been so weird and narrow, and then he simply has to step forward and to the left to create full leverage for the right hand. He does something similar soon after at 6:25 with a left hook. He even tries something like that for a third time (rule of 3, anyone ?) later at 6:35 but decides to half step and feint with his lead hand instead, and Louis fails to land miserably. Though props to Louis for reading it at 7:50 and countering with a left hook.

So the next time some arrogant and incompetent excuse of a Tijuana brawler tries to tell you that breaking the textbook rules and crossing your feet is for dummies, remind him that the rulebook says more about his favourite fighters' limitations than that of the greats.

 

Thanks man. And yeah, having guys like Corbett III, Zivic, Yarosz and Apostoli as your teachers, you're bound to get ahead of the curve compared to most people who learn their trade from extended amateur careers against children/teenagers and people who haven't experienced the pro game. It's the ideal way. I'd rather take today's amateur career approach rather than the fight twice a year approach modern pros take though, it's way too infrequent.

If you've got anything you want to share about Conn, I'd absolutely love to see it.

 

You definitely misread it then, because I didn't say Pep crossed his feet. I said Pep was superb at changing directions on a moment's notice at any time, by switching to southpaw momentarily, and that instead of doing that to change direction, Conn got a similar result through his crossing of the feet.

I don't necessarily agree with the last point. The rulebook is there so you don't get iced while you're still a novice and don't know the difference between Marciano and Graziano. Obviously, you can go the whole way while utilising it, but it can also just as easily limit a fighter. Great fighters didn't break the rules just because they've got athletic gifts and are too lazy to learn how to Box ''the proper way". They simply found a way that makes them fight better through that rule break, because it can potentially expand their available tools, or because they can form a strategy around it. Most of them were smart and knowledgeable enough to know when and when not to break the rules. Even someone like Duran, who is seen as almost purely textbook, can be seen crossing his feet vs Cuevas frequently, and that was at a point where he couldn't exactly be called that athletically gifted anymore. He obviously did it for a reason. Guys like Ali and Jones didn't break the rules because they were great, they became great because they learned how to break them, if you catch my drift.

It's still important to know the basics so they can carry you along the way when your physical gifts leave you and you can't rely on those rule breaks as easily anymore, but why waste your prime years being a lesser fighter if you're better when breaking them ? Look at Jones. There's no way he just went ''Well I'm basically Superman so I can just do whatever I want'' when he started finalising his style. He did an interview with Andre Ward recently where he actually explains his lack of jab. It wasn't because he could get away with it simply because he was an athletic freak that could throw power punches instead of jabs, it was a part of his strategy, and this strategy was one of the many reasons that he became great. It's from around 10:45-11:25.

This content is protected

 

I actually haven't, I'm very on the dark when it comes to 90's Featherweights, period. And yeah I agree, if it consistently works for you, who the **** am I to tell you you're doing it wrong ? If Pep had the stamina to bounce around for 15 rounds, why even care about the fact that it's wasted movement when it helps his creation of angles and offensive/defensive opportunities ?

As for Louis' comments, I'm not sure. Conn also definitely wasted movement, but it was clearly still all purposeful when it came down to intent. Ali had times where he did actually seem to be dancing on his toes just for the sake of dancing on his toes, though he himself was purposeful for the most part. It was also trendy to **** on Ali during the 60's, so I guess that might have been part of it as well.

 

I like the philosophy behind it, but I don't think it's that black and white. When you perform a defensive maneuver that isn't merely moving your feet to get out of range (aka slipping, ducking, weaving etc), most times you'll find that your opponents are hard wired to expect a counter shot and react accordingly. You could miss a lot of opportunities to play with patterns, to break expectations and mess with your opponent's head if you religiously subscribe to this rule. Obviously, the best shots you're gonna land are counters through such movements, but variety is always key, so I think it's wiser to mix it up. Look at Jones here for example from 26:19-26:23

This content is protected

You can see him play with the rule of 3 here. 3 seperate times he jabs head and body, so Thornton thinks the 4th time is also gonna the same, until feints him and gets him with the left hook instead. I did something kinda similar in sparring once. Unlike Thornton, who got too preoccupied with Jones' work to throw, and unlike Jones' decision to jab head and body, I merely entered his range and stepped back when he threw the jab, and this happened 3 times as well (rule of 3), so he started thinking I didn't want to engage with him, so the 4th time he enters with a really big and strong step and I catch him flash with a left hook to the face that definitely took away some of his morale.

It's just too much of a shame to miss opportunities like these.

 

Something like that

Definitely didn't put that much malice into it though