I'm not a member of wgf so I thought I'd let you know here.
I was reading over your debate on wgf.
I thought alex's point and your points were both good.
Many questions arose from the debate.
I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
cool, alexV and I actually agreed for the most part, he just misread me a bit and I went off on some tangents.
Obviously boxers are the best punchers and have the best punching technique. But would they be even better if they did extremes for punching?
my problem is with "extremes for punching", i'm not at all a fan of iso extremes and do not see how they would benefit punching in the least.
Because they are pro boxers there is already a pre-selection for punching talent. Maybe the boxers that make it are the lucky ones born with perfect technique. Perhaps for other boxers iso-extremes would have helped them?
well ya most good boxer's do have a genetic disposition to boxing:
- fierce
- great motor control, coordination, kinesthetic awareness
- work ethic
- slightly better than average conditioning
but none of those factors really indicate being born with perfect punching technique.. instead, these individuals are able to learn proper punching technique alot easier than those who are less developed in the motor programming/coordination categories.
Any athlete can learn how to throw proper punches if that becomes their primary focus. Stuff like excessive weight training & improper coaching can these people throwing sloppy punches, tight punches, etc..
You *have to* be able to see something on video/in person and mimic it to be a successful boxer, if you can't do that, you lack the coordination necessary, though it can be worked on.
Southpaw, on this forum, is a pro boxer... no one thought he would ever do anything in boxing when he started training in the gym, but his determination, work ethic, toughness, and attention to detail left him with very good boxing skills, a good amateur record, and i think he's 3-0 right now in the pros.. point is, he was no "super natural" walking into a gym the first time, he worked and improved. His entire focus was on boxing, sparring, heavy bag, proper technique, etc, only recently did he start getting into the strength & conditioning side of things.
or, maybe all of the practice punching led to perfect technique as the body adapted to the demands?
that's my theory.. look at little kid's throwing punches, like early amateur kids.. i mean, you can see the kids who are very talented, but rarely do you find perfect punches at that age.. it is definitely a learned quality and something that has to be practiced CORRECTLY over and over and over..
although, even at the upper elite levels of boxing, some guys throw very untechnical punches and still are amazing fighters.. pacquiao is pretty untechnical, so was the guy everyone thought would become him (edwin valero), and so was roy jones jr.. regardless of lacking perfect technique in big fights, all of them still have great boxing ability, ie the ability to slip and counter, move in and out, setup traps, etc..
I read something from a coach where he was talking about glute development and the best way to do that was by doing sprints...the body would adapt to using the glutes properly. Is this possibly similar (i.e. all of the practice leading to the body's search for efficiency and thus perfect technique arising)?
I'm pretty sure korfist (WGF) has said things like that.. he's not big on form running.. he's big on getting the right muscles strong & firing in the right order, all that stuff, and then sprinting.. so ya I'm also among that ideology, i'd rather get the glutes/hams/calfs very strong and sprint, over time, adjustments will be made and progress will occur..
it's similar to how my body (jumps) change when doing plyos + lifting vs just lifting.. with plyos I plant more like a real basketball player, side plants etc.. without them, i plant more like a squat trained athlete.. none of this is conscious.. I get up higher when I'm planting in a side-plant :F
peace man
