# Old School Boxing, How accurate is this video?



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 17, 2016)

So I was watching fightTIPS boxing drills, and saw this video on the side. What he is saying makes sense, but also goes against something that I know (or think) about marquess boxing...that most of the strikes were not to the head but to the body. Can someone with more knowledge of this style of boxing look at the video and let me know how accurate it is?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 17, 2016)

Here are some thoughts.  

Palm strikes that he talks about  = Martial artist hit with the palm but not in the same motion as a jab.  Palm strikes the way he shows are not as efficient.  

Palm strikes + Raking fingers across the eyes = Kung Fu tiger claw all day.  Tiger claw does upward strikes to the chin because the head has limited vertical evasion capabilities. If you vertically bend your head back too far then you are making yourself blind in that you won't be able to see your opponent.  People can "roll with" horizontal punches, but not so much with upward strikes.

Using the Forearms to smash = Kung fu all day long. 





The upper cut = Hung Gar, Choy Ga, Choy li fut and most likely other long fist styles. Again the way that hes doing them in the video is probably not the way that they were actually being thrown.

Block a punch and give a back fist = the block is found in Martial arts and so is the backfist.
I think the reason why his techniques for bare knuckle are bad is because he read about it and didn't have any visuals on how it was done.  And if he did, then the person who read the book didn't have any visuals on how it was actually some.  Someone says do an uppercut using the palm and that's what they thought of because they are boxers, but if they would step out of the box a little then they would have come across a better way to do this.  Had he been thinking of this as fighting and not "formal boxing" then he would have likely stumbled across the right way to do the punches he was talking about.

As for the effectiveness of these.  Yes they are all effective but not the way that he was showing.  You may have noticed that he was using modern boxing movement with old boxing techniques and it's not going to work that way.

The other thing is that so many people are so afraid of breaking the hand on the skull.  There are soft areas on the face and the head that you can hit without worrying about breaking your hand on someone's head.  This fear baffles me, because if I was worried about breaking my hand on someone's head then I would just find a better way to hit the head and I would find which areas on the head can I hit to minimize me breaking my hand.  Punches should always be targeted and not something that you throw out with the only purpose of randomly hitting somewhere on the head.


----------



## marques (Oct 18, 2016)

One of the instructors I meet was teaching that stance. It seems a better option before the big gloves being part of the game. But he just called it 'Old Boxing'. Most of the other stuff I never saw...


----------



## drop bear (Oct 18, 2016)

The thing I dont get is we have bare knuckle boxing now. And to me it looks like it evolved along side normal boxing.






So the no gloves argument never made much sense to me.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Oct 18, 2016)

Paging @lklawson ...

I'm wondering about the part in the video where he says "of course grappling wasn't allowed." My understanding is that grappling (specifically throws) _was_ part of the old bare knuckle rules, which affected the tactics being used. If the guy the video doesn't know that much, it makes me skeptical about  how well the rest is researched.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 18, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Here are some thoughts.
> 
> Palm strikes that he talks about  = Martial artist hit with the palm but not in the same motion as a jab.  Palm strikes the way he shows are not as efficient.
> 
> ...


I had the same thought as you regarding the palm strikes. Seemed like a very odd and inefficient way to throw them, but I haven't had a chance to experiment yet. He is primarily a boxer, so your idea that he doesn't really know how to throw open strikes makes sense.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 18, 2016)

drop bear said:


> The thing I dont get is we have bare knuckle boxing now. And to me it looks like it evolved along side normal boxing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Perfect example of why excessive movement is never any good.  If a person is going to throw a punch then they should throw it with the purpose of connecting.  If a person must throw one punch that won't land then he should follow up with a second and third punch that will find it's target.



Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm wondering about the part in the video where he says "of course grappling wasn't allowed." My understanding is that grappling (specifically throws) _was_ part of the old bare knuckle rules, which affected the tactics being used.


The applications and techniques are slightly off because he's trying to apply them in the same context as a modern boxer.  If you watch MMA fighters you'll actually see some of them use the palm of the hand, the flat part of the fist and the knuckles as one fist.  it basically turns the open hand slap into a fist and it allows you to strike harder surfaces without breaking the hand.  You'll actually see some MMA fighters throw uppercuts this way when the opponents face is looking downward to the floor.  This same position is common with girls in street fights (the slapping fist)


----------



## marques (Oct 18, 2016)

drop bear said:


> The thing I dont get is we have bare knuckle boxing now. And to me it looks like it evolved along side normal boxing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Now you create a problem... So what is the reason? Those guys on the example are not very smart? Or boxing was not so good in the era of John Sullivan?


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 18, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> marquess boxing...



What's that when it's at home? I assume you mean Marquis of Queensbury rules, usually known as Queensbury rules.

for Irish fighting styles consult an Irishman lol!


----------



## marques (Oct 18, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> What's that when it's at home? I assume you mean Marquis of Queensbury rules, usually known as Queensbury rules.
> 
> for Irish fighting styles consult an Irishman lol!


Just to make clear I have nothing to do with that.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Oct 18, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> What's that when it's at home? I assume you mean Marquis of Queensbury rules, usually known as Queensbury rules.
> 
> for Irish fighting styles consult an Irishman lol!



yup, Autocorrect changed it from marquis to marquess, but that's what I was referring to.

And I don't know the irishmen I know would help with this. They could tell me the proper way to drink, but not to fight


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 18, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> And I don't know the irishmen I know would help with this. They could tell me the proper way to drink, but not to fight



LOL, not fighting Irish then! John Kavanagh might know, if he's not busy I'll ask him.


----------



## frank raud (Oct 18, 2016)

We do need Kirk's thoughts on this, in the mean time here are mine. My exposure to bare knuckle boxing was through Carl Cestari. As it was explained to me, the hand positioning was for protection and maintaining distance. The rear(usually right hand) was held close to the body, and protects three major knockout points, the liver, the solar plexus and the heart. The lead hand was used in a circling, piston like fashion, which both created range and uncertainty as to whether there would be a punch to the head or the body. The lead hand is dominant, looking to create openings for the rear(power) hand. As I learned it, an uppercut was not with the palm, but with the top of the   knuckles. Grappling was definitely allowed(until Marquis of Queensbury rules) As the length of a round was not determined by time, but by one man going to his knee(voluntary or involuntary) and no set amount of rounds, a fight could last for hours. The reason for the lean back and having the lead hand pistoning out is to create distance to protect the face from cuts.


drop bear said:


> The thing I dont get is we have bare knuckle boxing now. And to me it looks like it evolved along side normal boxing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is an example of people doing modern boxing with out gloves, it is not bare knuckle boxing as discussed in the OP.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 18, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Perfect example of why excessive movement is never any good. If a person is going to throw a punch then they should throw it with the purpose of connecting. If a person must throw one punch that won't land then he should follow up with a second and third punch that will find it's target.



Not really from my experience with mma gloves.  Because getting punched sucks. 

So you lean towards more head movement and shorter combinations.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 18, 2016)

marques said:


> Now you create a problem... So what is the reason? Those guys on the example are not very smart? Or boxing was not so good in the era of John Sullivan?



Stuffed if i know to be honest.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 18, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Not really from my experience with mma gloves.  Because getting punched sucks.
> 
> So you lean towards more head movement and shorter combinations.


Excessive movement is any movement that doesn't serve any purpose or contribute to you winning or striking your opponent.  If you throw a punch that was never meant to connect or close the gap then why bother throwing the punch?  Gloves have nothing to do with excessive movement.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 18, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Excessive movement is any movement that doesn't serve any purpose or contribute to you winning or striking your opponent.  If you throw a punch that was never meant to connect or close the gap then why bother throwing the punch?  Gloves have nothing to do with excessive movement.



So he doesn't punch. So you can get an idea of what he is going to do before you engage too much risk.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Oct 18, 2016)

drop bear said:


> So he doesn't punch. So you can get an idea of what he is going to do before you engage too much risk.


yeah but that was excessive.  If it took that many empty punches to figure out what the other guy is going to do then he needs a better understanding of fighting.  If you notice that the big guy in the jeans threw only what was needed.  He was a much cleaner fighter.  We could literally do a punch count and measure the effectiveness.  The guy in the shorts actually did some bobbing and weaving, yet his opponent was able to keep his hand on his head.  The 4:40 mark the guy in the shorts throws some over extended punches and I can only assume that he was gassed out from throwing out all of those empty punches.  By the 5th minute the guy in the shorts was gassed out and all he had to offer was sloppy punches.

When it was all over, the guy who did the least amount of movement actually won and the guy in the shorts wasted jabs that could have been better place instead of trying to use jabs "to get an idea of what he is going to do"  He would have been better served by baiting the big guy to throw more of those monster hay makers and exploiting them.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 20, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Paging @lklawson ...
> 
> I'm wondering about the part in the video where he says "of course grappling wasn't allowed." My understanding is that grappling (specifically throws) _was_ part of the old bare knuckle rules, which affected the tactics being used. If the guy the video doesn't know that much, it makes me skeptical about  how well the rest is researched.


You are right to be skeptical.  Grappling was allowed but it depended on the rule set, which was loosely tied to the time period.  Under the Broughton era rules and the London Prize Ring rules (LPR), standing grapples, throws, trips, and even chokes were all legal.  The Marquess of Queensberry rules put an end to that.  The MoQ rules were initially intended for amateur use, not professional, and coexisted with the LPR for a long time.  The MoQ rules were also part of a social rebranding.  In England, boxing was considered a brutal contest of ruffians and was actually illegal, despite high interest and patronage by the aristocracy.  The MoQ "civilized" it by removing grappling, adding timed rounds, limiting the number of rounds, requiring gloves ("mufflers" or "mittens"), further limiting punching techniques and targets, and other things as well.

If there wasn't standing grappling allowed in boxing, then what the heck are these?:

From Shaw's manual:






From: Boxing. A Manual Devoted to the Art of Self-Defense by James Edward Sullivan, 1893





















Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 20, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> So I was watching fightTIPS boxing drills, and saw this video on the side. What he is saying makes sense, but also goes against something that I know (or think) about marquess boxing...that most of the strikes were not to the head but to the body


Well, if you believe the old manuals, the head is one of the primary targets as is the solar plexus, which they called "The Mark."  Body blows were also important, of course.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 20, 2016)

frank raud said:


> We do need Kirk's thoughts on this, in the mean time here are mine. My exposure to bare knuckle boxing was through Carl Cestari. As it was explained to me, the hand positioning was for protection and maintaining distance. The rear(usually right hand) was held close to the body, and protects three major knockout points, the liver, the solar plexus and the heart.


Absolutely right.  The covering hand position you describe is from the LPR era.  John L. Sullivan stuff.  The rear hand was held so it covered "the mark" (solar plexus).  Some writers said that with a left lead, position your right fist in front of your left nipple. 



> The lead hand was used in a circling, piston like fashion, which both created range and uncertainty as to whether there would be a punch to the head or the body.


Called "milling."   The action performed a similar function to the Dog Brothers "snakey stick" (I think that's what they call it).  



> The lead hand is dominant, looking to create openings for the rear(power) hand.


 The extended guard acted as a foil to parry long range punches with, a barrier to inhibit closing distance, and a feeler to read movements.  Many authors talk about this but Driscoll talks about it extensively in his book "The Straight Left and how to Cultivate it."



> As I learned it, an uppercut was not with the palm, but with the top of the   knuckles. Grappling was definitely allowed(until Marquis of Queensbury rules) As the length of a round was not determined by time, but by one man going to his knee(voluntary or involuntary) and no set amount of rounds, a fight could last for hours. The reason for the lean back and having the lead hand pistoning out is to create distance to protect the face from cuts.
> 
> This is an example of people doing modern boxing with out gloves, it is not bare knuckle boxing as discussed in the OP.


Right on all counts.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Oct 20, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> What's that when it's at home? I assume you mean Marquis of Queensbury rules, usually known as Queensbury rules.
> 
> for Irish fighting styles consult an Irishman lol!


Actually, "Marquess" is a valid spelling within this context.

Marquess of Queensberry Rules - Wikipedia

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 20, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Actually, "Marquess" is a valid spelling within this context.
> 
> Marquess of Queensberry Rules - Wikipedia
> 
> ...



Mmm wiki is American isn't it?  Marquis of Queensbury - ARRSEpedia

or to be more correct from the British Boxing Board of Control HISTORY OF BOXING | British Boxing Board of Control


I do like the rules though 'no shoes with springs allowed' lol. Spring Heeled Jack strikes again.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 20, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> Mmm wiki is American isn't it?  Marquis of Queensbury - ARRSEpedia


Isn't everything that's good and right in the world?  



> I do like the rules though 'no shoes with springs allowed' lol. Spring Heeled Jack strikes again.


I always think the same thing.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 20, 2016)

I should probably say people shouldn't go on the ARRSE NAAFI site, not really for the faint hearted lol. The forum site might be a bit much for many.


----------



## lklawson (Oct 20, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> I should probably say people shouldn't go on the ARRSE NAAFI site, not really for the faint hearted lol. The forum site might be a bit much for many.


Why?  Do they use British spelling instead of proper American?  <ducking>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk (yes, I'm feeling my cheerios today  )


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 20, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Why?  Do they use British spelling instead of proper American?  <ducking>
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk (yes, I'm feeling my cheerios today  )



Have you ever met British Squaddies lol, lets say 'they are imaginative' when they speak?


----------



## drop bear (Oct 20, 2016)

lklawson said:


> You are right to be skeptical.  Grappling was allowed but it depended on the rule set, which was loosely tied to the time period.  Under the Broughton era rules and the London Prize Ring rules (LPR), standing grapples, throws, trips, and even chokes were all legal.  The Marquess of Queensberry rules put an end to that.  The MoQ rules were initially intended for amateur use, not professional, and coexisted with the LPR for a long time.  The MoQ rules were also part of a social rebranding.  In England, boxing was considered a brutal contest of ruffians and was actually illegal, despite high interest and patronage by the aristocracy.  The MoQ "civilized" it by removing grappling, adding timed rounds, limiting the number of rounds, requiring gloves ("mufflers" or "mittens"), further limiting punching techniques and targets, and other things as well.
> 
> If there wasn't standing grappling allowed in boxing, then what the heck are these?:
> 
> ...



This is how evidence works as well by the way.


----------

