Why has the long boxing guard disappeared?

[Deleted member 39746]

I don't think it fell out of style. I just think people cycle through that guard faster than they have in the past. It's not a guard that you always keep on. Sometimes you use it and sometimes you don't depending on what you have to deal with. The other thing that has probably affected the use of it, is that other guard variations have been developed and work quite well for the people who know how to use them.

View attachment 23781

Even in the video you can see it come up and go down.

I personally like the long guard. A lot of the advantages that it has works really good with how I like to defend and attack.
Long Guard = I'll deal with you as you come in (come get me)
Mid Guard = I'll meet you half way (Even trade)
Short Guard = I'll deal with you when you get here. (Invite them in)

Thats probbly it, the removal of clincing, and the addition of pretty big gloves and some other rule changes probbly influenced it greatly, and that had a knock on effect for how society did it. (most people learn through sports) there were a few diffrent types of guard but they were fairly long all things considered. There were a few distinctly diffrent guards that would be switched into pending what you are doing. I dont know if kicking had anything to do with this, i havent looked up the boxing vs savate fights enough.


I also know that the upside down punch used in pugilism so-so often is pretty useful and how you would effectively punch someones throat. Some things like that have been forgotten.

With gloves you need to protect the face more.

You protect your face in pugilism, its just a more active guard, so more parries and evasions as opposed to passive as to just covering a segment of your face as normal. (not saying there isnt active guards in boxing, just covers are more popular now days as the norm)

 

[Deleted member 39746]

It's very hard to generate power with a jab from that position. The jab is pretty much universally referred to as the most important punch, so eliminating that from your arsenal is a pretty big hit.

When you introduce grappling to the mix, isolating an arm like that is just asking for your opponent to take control of it.

If i have the system right (monstery) its based on self defence so no real "jab" exists. You also dont really "jab" in the modern sense in pugilism, you strike with a weaker straight punch, either vertical or upside down fist pending on how your hands are positioned. This also isnt the only guard he teaches, he has one where you strike from the belt and a half arm one. Also, in pugilism you are cosntantly milling (moving your arms/body)

There is also the case of in the peroid it was made you can be armed, and wrestling would have been taken into account and more clincing and grappling was done in boxing in the time.

The book written on his sytem is mainly from newspaper articles written by him on what he teaches if i recall, its not the only guard, the most common one that crops up is the fighting irish. (annoyingly)

Addendum: This is also a system partly for the upper class and grappling in general was not something they liked doing, and pending where was something pretty frowned on and shunned so only ruffians would do it. I dont recall if its kickers or wrestlers he said just to shoot (not too sure if thats in the book or just a joke not read through it all yet)

Addendum 2: I can strike pretty well in the guard and this is with little correction to doing well or not, All your power comes from your body and arms, if you slightly rotate your arm it adds some power (when applicable) I can even annoyingly do the upside down punch when i dont want to do it.

Short video on monsteries system, may or may not help, and is at least partly the source above in regards to the system. (been a while since i have watched it)

 

[jobo]

A push is different than penetration. Please refer to the quotes below:




Explosive body-driven power is needed to penetrate. Just like punching thru boards in tameshiwari. A quick body driven, penetrating jab is quite possible with proper skillful technique, and perhaps much training.

as ussual people are countering science points with distinctly non scientific concepts.

talking in idioms is fine as long as science isnt being discussed,

a punch can not be " explosive" as an explosion requires a) an increase in volume and b) super sonic speeds

as nether of these seems to apply, perhaps we could use a more accurate term

 

[frank raud]

It's very hard to generate power with a jab from that position. The jab is pretty much universally referred to as the most important punch, so eliminating that from your arsenal is a pretty big hit.

When you introduce grappling to the mix, isolating an arm like that is just asking for your opponent to take control of it.

And yet, when that guard was used, grappling was part of boxing.

 

[skribs]

And yet, when that guard was used, grappling was part of boxing.

What was the amount of grappling? Was it similar to the Muay Thai clinch, or was it joint locks like you'd see in Hapkido/Aikido, or ground-fighting like in wrestling/BJJ?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

as ussual people are countering science points with distinctly non scientific concepts.

talking in idioms is fine as long as science isnt being discussed,

a punch can not be " explosive" as an explosion requires a) an increase in volume and b) super sonic speeds

as nether of these seems to apply, perhaps we could use a more accurate term

You're asking for an "accurate term", but what you really want is for folks to use the terms the way you prefer them. The usage of "explosive" found in that post is pretty common, and well understood. You don't get to dictate what the rest of the world uses.

 

[jobo]

You're asking for an "accurate term", but what you really want is for folks to use the terms the way you prefer them. The usage of "explosive" found in that post is pretty common, and well understood. You don't get to dictate what the rest of the world uses.

no science so dictates,

unless you would like to give a clearly demarcation on when non explosive moving become explosive moving, otherwise it has no value as a description, outside the direct exsperiance of the person using it .

if it just means fast, then fine say fast, if it means powerful say powerful, these are all perfectly good words with units of measurment to describe intensity that are directly applicable to the topic and not just hyperbole

 

[punisher73]

What was the amount of grappling? Was it similar to the Muay Thai clinch, or was it joint locks like you'd see in Hapkido/Aikido, or ground-fighting like in wrestling/BJJ?

You wouldn't have stayed in the "clinch" long in old school boxing. It allowed for low kicks and foot stomps. Also, the "hip throw" would have been common along with trips, sweeps etc. They wouldn't clinch up like they do in modern boxing without taking a lot of punishment.

 

[jobo]

l

You wouldn't have stayed in the "clinch" long in old school boxing. It allowed for low kicks and foot stomps. Also, the "hip throw" would have been common along with trips, sweeps etc. They wouldn't clinch up like they do in modern boxing without taking a lot of punishment.

how old is ' old school boxing "

 

[punisher73]

Someone mentioned not hitting as hard to the head in "old school" bareknuckle boxing. The body was the preferred target. Remember that they didn't really have "professional fighters" for the vast majority of fighters where all you did was train and fight once or twice a year. If you broke your hand, then you weren't working at your regular job and therefore you weren't eating either.

 

[punisher73]

l

how old is ' old school boxing "

Well, since we are talking about the old bareknuckle boxing, that is what I am referring to.

 

[jobo]

Well, since we are talking about the old bareknuckle boxing, that is what I am referring to.

well that seems to go back to some time before christ with a variety of rule sets over a couple of thousand years in many different countries, hence my question of exactly which ERA your refering to

 

[punisher73]

well that seems to go back to some time before christ with a variety of rule sets over a couple of thousand years in many different countries, hence my question of exactly which ERA your refering to

LITERALLY, the first line of this thread "First off to clarify, i mean the "old school" pugilism style of boxing guard." (even had a picture to illustrate it).

Can't help you out if you just jump onto threads and want to argue and make dumb statements to make yourself look better.

 

[jobo]

LITERALLY, the first line of this thread "First off to clarify, i mean the "old school" pugilism style of boxing guard." (even had a picture to illustrate it).

Can't help you out if you just jump onto threads and want to argue and make dumb statements to make yourself look better.

well yes, old school pugilist goes back several thousand years, , the term pugilist, comes from the ancient greek word for fist

it seems you mean sometime in the 1800s, but that's just a guess on my part,in which case when in the 1800s is decisive on which rules apply, is it really to much trouble to specify a decade, to which your statements on which throws are allowed, applies,

there were a variety of rules in place before queens bury and gloves came into being , which may effect the accuracy of your statement with out further clarification, on specifically when, but also where

 

[Deleted member 48484]

First off to clarify, i mean the "old school" pugilism style of boxing guard.

In the vein of this style. (there are variations but most seem to have died out as far as i can see)


To answer the question you probbly have to go back to why it has disappeared from sports boxing, of which i dont recall why it fell out of fashion. I have heard knives being the reason for it falling out fo favour, but its not like europeans never carried knives, they fought like that alongside carrying weapons. So that sort of didnt stand up to some mental scrunity when i thought about it.


Any imput for why it fell out of fashion? Best i can come up with is the modern boxing style is more entertaining to watch and works better in the gloves they use so with it falling out of favour there it means it fell out of favour with the general population as boxing became more of a sport than for fighting study.

Because back then you had fist fights without gloves and always aimed for the body/torso and not for the face. Now you aim for the face and use gloves hence the guard went up.

 

[frank raud]

well that seems to go back to some time before christ with a variety of rule sets over a couple of thousand years in many different countries, hence my question of exactly which ERA your refering to

The Marquess of Queensberry rules were published in 1867, formally accepted in 1889, so the era in discussion is the latter part of the 19th century.

 

[frank raud]

What was the amount of grappling? Was it similar to the Muay Thai clinch, or was it joint locks like you'd see in Hapkido/Aikido, or ground-fighting like in wrestling/BJJ?

Throwing was allowed, you wouldn't see joint locks. It was stand up grappling, no ground work. @Kirk Lawson could fill in more details. I was taught an introduction to bare knuckle boxing, Kirk has explored it more in depth. Even wrote a book about it.

 

[Martial D]

Penetrating power without enough velocity is just going to be a push.

If your punch is coming from the arm you won't hurt anyone. A good punch will fulcrum on the hip.

 

[Damien]

Another factor in the guard moving up and close to the face is that boxing gloves are basically giant cushions. Using a guard up by your face without gloves, is not only less effective for stopping hits due to the decreased size, but the hits that you do stop just result in you punching yourself in the face. Not ideal!

I'd say boxing gloves allow for the high guard, rather than forcing the long guard out. There's still plenty of variation in guard techniques, even in modern boxing (philly shell, extended lead hand, arms dropped low etc.), it's just that the high guard is the simplest and so the most frequently used.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Throwing was allowed, you wouldn't see joint locks. It was stand up grappling, no ground work. @Kirk Lawson could fill in more details. I was taught an introduction to bare knuckle boxing, Kirk has explored it more in depth. Even wrote a book about it.

Just quoting mention, i dont know if that tag was done correctly or not. (and i tried to tag them and couldnt)

LITERALLY, the first line of this thread "First off to clarify, i mean the "old school" pugilism style of boxing guard." (even had a picture to illustrate it).

Can't help you out if you just jump onto threads and want to argue and make dumb statements to make yourself look better.

I only used the above guard picture as a refrence as i dont know how the fighting irish is done, so for refrence i would be speaking about guards in the vein of that picture. (there are some diffrent ones, but the fighting irish can be discussed here i just dont know how to use it or what makes it so, i know the pictured sort better) If you google it, you get th fighting irish and that sort mainly.