This is always something I have thought about. After much thought, I've always kind of been more inclined to say that punching upwards carries more power than punching downward. I know that gravity is a factor working in down punching's favor, but it seems like a strong uppercut with perfect form would inflict more damage. Another implication is that a slightly shorter fighter would hit harder with say, a jab to a slightly taller opponent in comparison to how hard the taller fighter would hit the shorter opponent with the jab. The uppercut seems particularly effective since it is angled up as opposed to down. An example of this in action would be Mike Tyson demolishing much taller men during his career. So, my question to you is, which is capable of generating more power -- an upward or downward punch? Think about it! And any links or quotes or videos of a serious, educated boxing trainer or historian, or fighter would be greatly appreciated as well. Even physics scientists are invited and greatly encouraged to take part in the discussion.
Up, because the person receiving it has gravity working against him. He can not move with the punch much, and he'll be pulled down by mother nature constantly adding force to the blow.
It is generally thought that punching up generates more power. When someone punches up, they can have their body behind it, anchored by the ground, and can throw more weight into it. Punching down, may have gravity, but the gravity is mainly on the arm. If you look at a powerful "down" punch, the puncher usually comes is a big arc, and really throws some weight over the top.
I really don`t know, but I think there is benefit to both. The upward one as mentioned. But when throwing straighter, or even a bit downward, you tend to get more rotation in your punch and that = more snap.
up down left or rjght gravitys all around us, What beats it is posture and good technique. As the Spanish Farmer said to the Hen, OLAY. :-((
Getting maximum leverage over a looping right hand has to be the hardest punch in boxing. Though every punch is hard a looping right is a killer. You can spread your legs, bend your needs, coming down on the punch solidifies your base even more, you are going with gravity etc etc Think Julian Jackson.
coming up with your full weight into an uppercut is without a doubt harder than a looping punch. you're directly using your leg strength to add to the punch. look at someone like tyson and his thighs and what happens when he uppercuts people. the chain of energy being transferred is unreal. to add to that, hitting the uppercut right and snapping the head back violently just makes getting the KO easier. it adds whiplash to the already powerful punch.
Good question, i suppose it depends on the individual fighter and where his strengths are. Some fighters throw mean overhands and others throw mean uppercuts. Personally i would say uppercuts are more powerful.
Uppercuts to shorter opponents, overhand rights to taller opponents. Though shorter fighter tend to be inside fighters so will naturally throw more uppercuts. The polls options have the opposite which confuses me, uppercuts are definitely more potent on a shorter or crouching opponent.
