Was Boxing Better In the 1970s?

Yes. Yes it was. In fact, a good case can be made that the 1970s was the best decade for boxing ever. Some may argue that boxing was more popular in the earlier part of the century, like the 40s and 50s, but that was because there were fewer other big sports to compete with. Football and basketball were far less relevant 100 years ago than they are now, so boxing was a bigger deal- rivaling baseball- but the 70s gave us what best captures the general public's imagination - the golden era of the heavyweight division. One of those heavyweights, Muhammad Ali, transcended the sport and became the most well-known athlete in the world.

The "Other" Guys

While nothing can underscore the stardom of Ali - or the cultural relevance of that golden age of heavyweights - that wasn't the only thing the 70s had going for it. They were the prime years for arguably the best lightweight of all-time, Roberto Duran, who went 54-1 in the decade (his only loss, he avenged twice). Then there was Carlos Zarate, one of the best bantamweights who fought well into the 80s and had 63 knockouts in his 66 wins. There was a new super bantamweight division formed, where Wilfredo Gomez dominated, then eventually moved up to junior featherweight where he was arguably the best at that weight class ever. He had 17 consecutive knockout wins in 17 title defenses, which is still a record in any division. No one will probably ever break it.

But it keeps going - Alexis Arguello is probably the best super featherweight of all time (and a great featherweight, lightweight, light welterweight too). The middleweight division is a little more stacked when it comes to GOATs, with Sugar Ray Robinson, Harry Greb, and Marvin Hagler in the mix, but Carlos Monzon was undeniably the middleweight king of the 70s, holding the title for 7 years and retired in 1977 having never lost in the decade. Jose Napoles was a welterweight who held the title between 1969-1975. For 40 years, he shared the record with Muhammad Ali of the most wins in unified championship bouts in boxing history. After Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore, both Top 20 PFP boxers, Bob Foster was probably the 3rd best light heavyweight of all time as well.

So there were plenty of historically great non-heavyweights in the 70s. Other names worth mentioning are Wilfredo Benitez, Antonio Cervantes, Esteban De Jesus, Ken Buchanan, Danny Lopez, and Ruben Olivares. Just like in the 60s, we were seeing a lot more boxers from other parts of the world. In most Top 10 lists of the decade, only half or less than half of the fighters are from America. And with the exception of Bob Foster on some lists, none of the best non-heavyweights were North American. This marked a big change in the shifting popularity of the sport. By the end of the 70s, there were three very promising guys from the USA coming up the ranks - Marvin Hagler, Tommy Hearns, and Sugar Ray Leonard (more on him later).

THE Golden Era

Then of course, there was the heavyweight division. Not only was it the golden era of fighters, it also had one of the best storylines in boxing. In 1967, Muhammad Ali vacated the heavyweight title when he was suspended from boxing for not entering the armed services draft with the Vietnam War in full swing. This was a very controversial move at the time, though now public opinion has changed a lot. 

This meant that there was no heavyweight champion. There was a tournament put together to crown a champ, but the best heavyweight at the time, Joe Frazier, refused to take part in it. Jimmy Young won, but back then states recognized titles and New York still had Smokin' Joe as the champion. The two fought in February of 1970 to unify the belts and Joe Frazier, true to his name, smoked Jimmy Young.

There was another young lion coming up the ranks at that time, George Foreman, who had won  the Olympic gold medal in 1968. He was a fearsome, powerful puncher like his training partner, Sonny Liston, had been in the 1960s. Speaking of Sonny Liston, he wasn't done yet. After losing to Ali twice and a fluke loss a couple of years later, Sonny was on a winning streak and was building up to another title shot. Both Foreman and Liston posed an interesting matchup for the current king, Joe Frazier. But Sonny would never get a chance as he died in mysterious circumstances later that year.

There were other interesting contenders too. Jerry Quarry, Oscar Bonavena, Joe Bugner and George Chuvalo. But there was also another guy - Muhammad Ali. After 3+ years of suspension, Ali finally got cleared to fight in Georgia and instead of a tune-up, he took on the aforementioned Jerry Quarry and won. Wasn't a stellar performance and Ali showed some ring-rust for sure but he was officially back, and in most peoples' minds, was still the heavyweight champion.

Frazier and Ali would settle this in the ring in 1971 in one of the biggest, most important, most significant fights of all time. A back and forth battle for the ages that Frazier eventually won, after knocking Ali down in the 15th round. But after that fight, Frazier seemed potentially the most damaged, taking the rest of the year off, while Ali got right back into the ring and looked good. 

A rematch was in the works but a funny thing happened on the way to ring- two funny things really. Champion Joe Frazier took on the young George Foreman and got completely DESTROYED. He was rag-dolled around the ring, getting knocked down 6 times before they finally stopped it. Big George was now the champ. Ali, on the other hand, took on a relatively unknown fighter named Ken Norton and while he wasn't crushed, Norton did break his jaw and completely frustrated Ali for a decision win.

This took a lot of air out of the Ali-Frazier rematch in 1974 but it was still a big deal, with Ali winning the decision. This set the stage for probably the most iconic, most well-known fight in boxing history - The Rumble in the Jungle- Muhammad Ali vs. George Foreman in Zaire. Most people assumed that George Foreman would just roll through Ali like he had everybody else and Ali was clearly not the same fighter he was in the 60s. The young Ali could dance circles around anybody in the heavyweight division, but this new version  wasn't quite as quick on the toes and ate a lot more punches than he ever did before.

Strangely, in easily the most baffling big game/match strategies of all time, Ali eventually decided to not even try to dance but do the exact opposite instead - lean against the ropes and let the hardest puncher in the division just wail on him. And Foreman did. For about 6 rounds. He threw everything he could at Ali while Muhammad just covered up, absorbed punches, grabbed George Foreman, and started to taunt him. As great of a slugger as George was, he had the tendency to throw long, looping punches, which were easier to see coming and brace for, with less chance of penetrating the guard. Thus eventually, big George ran out of steam and completely exhausted himself by the 8th round. That was when Ali turned it on a finished the fight, knocking George down when we could barely stand.

Besides the amazing outcome of this fight, the general public was introduced to a fundamental truth in boxing that many were not fully aware of - styles make fights. Foreman destroyed Frazier, Frazier beat Ali (and pushed him to the brink) and Ali beat Foreman. Ali also couldn't beat Ken Norton very decisively, another guy that Foreman destroyed. Even though Ali did win the next 2 fights against Ken Norton, they were highly controversial decisions. Ali himself would argue that he should have lost the last fight in their trilogy. But the point was that boxing was not as simple as “whoever is better generally wins.” Certain types of fighters give other types of fighters more trouble than others.

All 3 of the heavyweight giants - Ali, Frazier and George Foreman- were stars too. Ali did most of the talking and no one did it better than him. He was everywhere. On every talk show, appearing at every events, as I mentioned before, he was not just boxing's biggest star but one of, if not the most well-known athlete in the world. Frazier and Foreman played their roles too. With Joe Frazier, it was a bitter rivalry with Ali that made the whole story more interesting. They were once friends (Frazier even gave Ali money while he was banned from boxing) but Ali's trash talk felt like a betrayal and it started to go a little too far, creating genuine hatred between the two. George Foreman was quiet but that made him more intimidating and scary. There had never been 3 dominating heavyweights like this before that challenged each other to that level.

As the decade went on, more figures emerged and the story took more turns. Ali and Frazier would fight one more time in what was known as "The Thrilla in Manilla" and was one of the most brutal battles between two champions we have ever seen. Neither man was ever the same after it. Ali said it was the closest he ever came to death and if Joe Frazier's corner hadn't thrown in the towel, it is not clear if Muhammad would have been able to answer the bell. A rematch with Foreman stalled a little bit as he was involved in one of the all-time slugfests himself, with Ron Lyle. Then Foreman lost to an up-and-coming Jimmy Young. Instead of finally taking on Ali again for the championship, George Foreman chose to retire and become a minister for the next 10+ years.

Ali would then lose his belt to Leon Spinks, an Olympic gold medalist with only 7 professional fights. It was a shocking upset and it was clear that Muhammad Ali was no longer the same fighter. Nonetheless, he would avenge that loss the following year to become the only person ever to win the heavyweight championship 3 times. He would then retire, leaving the belt open again. The fate of the division was now in the hands of Ken Norton, power-punching Earnie Shavers and newcomer Larry Holmes. It was Holmes would emerge to become champ by the end of the decade (with some classic fights with the other two guys) and was really one of the most underrated heavyweights of all time. He would rule the division for the next 7 years.

One last footnote to add to the 70s heavyweight saga - The Superfight! A fictional fight movie made with Muhammad Ali and Rocky Marciano to see who was the best all-time heavyweight. Before the movie, it started as a radio broadcast after Ali was banned from boxing in 1967. A producer came up with a list of the great heavyweight champions over the year and decided to do a bracket tournament of fictional fights between all them. Who won the fight was decided by a computer, ultimately, which simulated the fights based on data from various boxing experts. This is kind of crazy to think in 1967! Anyway, it was a 3-month radio drama-like series syndicated across the country on various stations and when Muhammad Ali didn't win the fictional tournament, losing to Rocky Marciano, and he was so angry about the "slow-footed" Rocky Marciano being seen as better than him, he sued the producer for defamation of character.

Part of the settlement was to take this whole thing to another level. Film a super fight between Ali and Marciano. Rocky had been retired for about 15 years and Ali was still banned from boxing competition so what they did, was filmed themselves sparring and simulating a fight, with outcomes of both fighters winning. Rocky lost 50 pounds and wore a toupee but it still looked kind of funny. Three weeks after filming, Marciano would die in a plane crash and never saw the final cut of the movie. It was released in theaters in 1970 and once again, the computer would decide the winner and nobody knew who it was until they saw it in theaters. Once again, Rocky Marciano was picked as the winner! And Ali sued again!! But apparently in Europe, they showed him as the winner. In any case, the fantasy fight did okay at the box office but was not super well-received. In fact, the film was supposedly destroyed at one point, after an airing on Wide World of Sports in 1977 but at least one copy did survive. This served as inspiration for the 2006 film, Rocky Balboa, when Rocky comes out of a retirement because a video game simulation has him losing to the current champ. Speaking of Rocky, more on him later!

Classic Fights

Great fighters made the 70s great but all-time classic fights are what made that decade the undeniable GOAT  in my opinion. So many memorable, meaningful, interesting fights! All of these on my list below are available on YouTube to watch if you ever want to see them for yourself.

Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier I - Because of the storyline that I mentioned earlier, Ali coming back from exile to challenge a fighter like Joe Frazier, a fight everyone wanted to see for a couple years now, this was one of the biggest, most-anticipated matchups in boxing history. And it was a great battle too.

Muhammad Ali vs George Foreman - Also mentioned earlier, I think is fair to say that this is the most memorable fight in boxing history and probably always will be. It transcended the sport and even people who have never watched a boxing match in their lives know who Muhammad Ali was and are familiar with the term, "rope-a-dope."

Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier III - It's usually a sign of a very good fight if it has a name that everybody knows. It helps when the name is something catchy, like "The Thrilla in Manilla." It was the rubber match between one all-time great and the greatest of all time, and showcased just how well-matched these two warriors were. A real-life version of the first Rocky-Apollo fight.

George Foreman vs. Ron Lyle - Probably the ultimate boxing slugfest. Two, large, powerful men knocking each other down until one could no longer stand.

Carlos Zarate vs. Wilfredo Gomez - Besides being a dream matchup with Zarate coming in as the #1 pound-for-pound boxer with an insane record of 52-0 (50 wins by KO) and Gomez coming up the ranks fast at 21-0-1 (with all 21 wins coming by KO), this is also known to beginning of the great Mexico vs. Puerto Rico rivalry, which is still one of the most intense in boxing history.

Larry Holmes vs, Earnie Shavers II - And underrated classic. Their first fight was a good one too, the quintessential match-up between a slugger (Shavers) with maybe the best one-punch KO power of anyone against the boxer (Holmes) with a jab and footwork to rival Ali. Shavers had the "puncher's chance" and in Round 7, he landed a vicious overhand right that should have ended the fight, but Larry Holmes showed the recuperative power and heart of a champion, coming back to take total control, before Shavers dropped him again, before he came back again and won via referee stoppage.

Also, check out the entire fight card of that evening: 5 Hall-of-Famers and one guy in Jimmy Young who was probably just a few robberies away from potentially getting there himself:

• Heavyweight World Championship - Holmes vs Shavers
• Super Bantamweight World Championship - Wilfredo Gomez vs. Carlos Mendoza
• NABF Welterweight Championship - Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Andy Price
• Heavyweight Contender Bout - Michael Dokes vs. Jimmy Young
• Junior Middleweight Bout - Roberto Duran vs. Zefarino Gomez

Carlos Monzon vs. Nino Benvenuti - This was the beginning of Carlos Monzon's reign. Benvenuti was the champ and heavily favored, fighting in front of a home crowd in Rome, whereas Monzon had never competed outside of South America. It was a shocking upset and 1970's Fight of the Year.

Danny Lopez vs. Mike Ayala - Another slugfest and absolute battle but between 2 featherweights (125 pounds). Despite fighting with a broken nose, Ayala hung in there and traded punches in some brutal exchanges before finally getting dropped by a vicious cross. Then the referee counted him out and called the fight over. But Ayala was up before the count of 10. There wasn't much doubt about it. It's the only boxing match I know of where the fight that was completely stopped was allowed to resume. And probably the only championship fight where that happened. With the crowd behind him, Ayala came back and fought hard but the funny thing about Danny Lopez in the 70s is that the more you hit him, the better he seemed to get. He would regain control and finally win with a knockout a round later.

Olympic Heroes

In 1976, the US Olympic boxing team was pretty strong. One of the strongest we had produced pound-for-pound. Representing in the light welterweight division was a young Ray Leonard who already had the nickname of 'Sugar Ray," which was a big deal because the only other guy who had that name was Sugar Ray Robinson, the greatest pound-for-pound boxer ever. There was definitely something special about this new Sugar Ray. He was very talented, good-looking, charismatic, was confident without being disrespectful, a little bit of showboating, and looked like he was having fun out there. But beyond all that, there was the “it factor.” Sugar Ray Leonard had this in spades. With Muhammad Ali on the last legs of his career, it looked like we had found an heir-apparent.

His run to Olympic gold didn't look smooth. He had to fight a heavily-favored Soviet boxer in the semifinals, who he beat decisively. Then in the finals, he faced an even tougher - or, at least, scarier - task against the Cuban Andres Aldama, who had knocked out all 4 of his opponents thus far (something that doesn't happen a lot in Olympic boxing, especially at lighter weight classes). Not only did Sugar Ray beat him, but he dropped Aldama a couple of times to win the gold medal.

He was an undeniable star but the funny thing was, Sugar Ray supposedly was never planning to be a professional boxer. He wanted to go to college, get his degree, and get into some other business. But a couple of things happened to change his plans. He had a child with his high-school girlfriend with plans to marry her after the Olympics. She had filed a petition for child support and this hurt Ray's sponsorship opportunities to be able to pay for it. Then his father got sick and suddenly, Sugar Ray needed money and went pro in boxing shortly thereafter.

His first fights were highly-publicized and public was quick to embrace their Olympic hero again. By November of 1979, Sugar Ray Leonard became the welterweight champ by beating another great in Wilfred Benitez. Ray's career would really take off in the 1980s, along with another 2 guys who started off the decade before in Thomas Hearns and Marvin Hagler.

Speaking of the Olympics (and Cubans), perhaps the greatest amateur boxer also fought in the 1970s -
Teofilo Stevenson. He won the heavyweight gold medals for Cuba in both Olympics in the decade (1972 and 1976), as well as the two World Championships (1974 and 1978). And he won more gold in the Pan American and Central American games- pretty much every amateur contest there was over a 10-year span.

Had he competed professionally, it is believed he would have been up there with Muhammad Ali, Foreman and Frazier. Apparently, Teofilo was offered 5 million dollars at one time to fight Ali and 1 million to fight Leon Spinks, but he refused both paydays. To take money for these fights would nullify his amateur status and he would no longer be able to compete for his country.

Oh Yeah, And There Was Rocky...

On December 3rd, 1976, the movie, Rocky, was released nationally. A relatively unknown actor, Sylvester Stallone, played the titular Rocky Balboa, a fictitious small-time club boxer from the streets of Philadelphia who worked as a debt collector for a loan shark. Rocky had no interest in becoming a championship boxer or even a great boxer, he just wanted to muster up the courage to ask out a shy girl he liked who worked at his local pet store.

The heavyweight champion in the film, Apollo Creed, has no worthy or compelling challengers and is looking for a fight that will grab the public's attention. With the U.S.A.'s bicentennial coming up, he decides what better way to honor the spirit of America, the land of opportunity, than to give some nobody a chance to win the heavyweight title. And what better place to find such a person that in Philadelphia, PA, where our declaration of independence was signed?

This concept was actually inspired by a real-life fight, where Muhammad Ali, just after shocking theworld and beating George Foreman, decided to take on an older, journeyman fighter named Chuck Wepner for the undisputed heavyweight championship of the world. Wepner was no Rocky, and had competed at a much higher level, but the idea was to give a total underdog a chance at a title. Chuck had said that he just wanted to prove he belonged there in the ring with Ali, which is similar to a line Rocky says in the movie. He was able to hang in there too, for 15 rounds, before Muhammad Ali won by TKO.

Going back to the movie, Rocky really is not even particularly interested in this amazing opportunity to fight the heavyweight champ for the title, but ultimately decides to give it a go as he needs money and doesn't like working for a loan shark. What follows is the ultimate underdog story (as well as love story) where Rocky trains for this upcoming fight in a series of scenes that would forever change our culture. 

It is impossible to overstate the significance of this character and movie. It's not just that it was popular, won awards, and got a generation of people interested in the sport of boxing who otherwise may not have been, it's that Rocky became a symbol of toughness, perseverance and grit in a way that everyone can relate to in some aspect of our lives. We are generally told to believe in ourselves and that we can accomplish anything, but seeing it conveyed in cinematic format, through the character of Rocky Balboa, hit a whole different level.

There was a sequel made in 1979 as well as several more in the 80s and the franchise would continue all the way through the Creed series. To this day, people travel to Philadelphia to run up the steps to the Museum of Art just like Rocky did in the first movie. There is a statue of him nearby that is also a tourist attraction. The film has inspired countless people throughout the world and a case can be made that Rocky Balboa, despite being a fictional character, is probably the second most important and significant boxer behind Muhammad Ali.

In summation, the 1970s gave us the best era of heavyweights, plenty of the greatest boxers at other weight classes, the most classic, significant fights, the most important boxer at his height of popularity, new stars for the next decade, and a boxing movie that became forever embedded in our culture. It's hard to really make a good case against the 70s being the best time that ever was for our sport. It is true that other sports, mainly football and basketball, were becoming more popular as the American pastime and that would continue into the 80s, but boxing was still part of the public consciousness. Even non-fans knew who many of the champions were. Boxing was also more available on TV as well, even if in reruns on Wide World of Sports. 

And of course, I would be remiss in my duties as a crusty, old man if I didn't mention that back then, boxers fought more often and against just about everybody in their weight classes. You could take any heavyweight in the 1970s of any significance and Muhammad Ali fought (and defeated) all of them. He fought many guys 2 and 3 times even. Roberto Duran fought everyone in his class, though he should have given Ken Buchannan a rematch. None of these all-time greats I mentioned fought just one time a year, if we were lucky. They fought several times every year and took on all comers. There weren't a bunch of different belts in different organizations. Even if we had fighters of the caliber of many of these 70s dudes, boxing still wouldn't be as good because they just don't fight enough, or fight the highest level of competition.  I realize though, that this is not necessarily a bad thing, at least not when it comes to fighters' safety. From a fan’s point of view and in terms of the sport’s overall relevance though, there can never be a 1970s era of boxing again. I am just glad that at least we got it once!

How to Remember Combos - Part II

 

A few years ago, I wrote a blog post about how to remember combinations- particularly in our club's
boxing classes. Things move pretty quickly and it can be a lot to process in short time. Then when you get physically tired, the challenge just increases exponentially. But this is also good for you! It is good for your brain and overall mind-body connection. This is one reason people with Parkinson's disease are encouraged to try out boxing.

A lot of us psyche ourselves out though. The same brain that helps you remember things can also work against you at other times. 

After watching hundreds more people try out boxing since the last post, I figured I would write a Part II with more tips and go a little deeper into how to remember punch combinations. If you want to check out my initial post on the subject, here it is:

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2023/06/how-do-i-remember-this-combo.html

Some of the tips in this post might be somewhat addendum-ish to other tips, but in both cases, if you follow these things in earnest, I guarantee that you will get better. Not just about remembering combinations but boxing in general. I guarantee it. There is no way it can't work.

NOTE: Now I know you might look at either post and think something like, "ugh, this just sounds like more work. I just want to work out and not have to think." You can certainly do just that but it doesn't take much more brain power to to stay sharp, especially once you get into the groove, and it will not only exercise your brain but improve the work out tremendously.

#1) Don't Come to a Full Stop/Lose Your Posture

This is a big bugaboo of mine but it is for good reason. During a boxing round on the heavy bag, when people come to a full stop - hands drop down, feet come together, heels down, no bend in knees, etc. - to listen to whatever the next thing is, they lose a lot of mental momentum as well as physical. There is no reason you can't stop punching and listen with your hands up in boxing guard, while in a proper boxing stance, on the balls of your feet. Once you come to a hard stop, you will then have to start up again, which adds complication and more work for your brain. Plus you will have a better chance of getting the next combo, punch, whatever down in you try to do it in real time. Coming to a full stop adds seconds, which are more valuable than you might believe.

If you come to a full stop because you are tired, this is still unnecessary. It doesn't take that much more energy to keep your boxing posture. You can rest all you want in a boxing stance. Spend the few extra joules of energy to keep your hands up and stay on your toes. I promise you that it is worth it.

#2) Avoid Pausing Too!!!

This is kind of similar and something I see a lot. Someone is unsure about the combo so they throw the first few punches and kind of pause before throwing the 3rd, 4th, etc. This is because they are unsure about what to throw next. They are trying to be sure they are doing the right thing and thinking about it. And hey, at least they are staying in their boxing stance and not dropping their posture. So what is my problem with pausing?!?

It does seem like a logical, thoughtful approach but again, after watching many thousands of people box now, I can tell you that it never helps. The person pausing never feels secure in the combination. In a perfect world, you might take the combo slowly the first time, maybe even pause in between shots but ultimately, the goal is that you can throw the combo smoothly, with speed and power. This never seems to happen though, with people who pause between strikes or especially after a defense move like a roll. That is the worst one. When someone rolls and then pauses, unsure of what to throw next. Just throw anything, man! On the side you just rolled to.

I can't be 100% sure why the pausing never seems to help but my theory is that you have introduced doubt in your mind when you pause. You have told yourself that you are not quite sure what to do next. This may be true but it can be very hard to recover from.

So what should an unsure puncher do? I already gave it away but when you get to the point where you pause, just throw any punch. Maybe it's the "right" one. Maybe it's not but that is okay. You may be able to figure it out in subsequent reps. I have done this many times myself. You have to keep your brain switched on though. And again, that is a good thing!

#3) Don't Be Afraid to Try!

Paralysis by analysis. I have seen this happen many times. I explain what we're going to do, for whatever reason someone isn't sure exactly what that means, I explain and demo it again, they are still unsure and still are slow to actually hit the bag. Trying to understand how an entire combo is going to work is sometimes very difficult. I find it easier to just try it and adjust from there. Meaning, just throw the punches as they are being called out. Don't think about the big picture, just one punch at a time. You may not get it "right" the first time but that is why we throw combos again and again and again. The sooner you start, the sooner you will be able to get it down.

#4) Don't Let the Number of Words Deter You

If you were to hear me say "lead uppercut to the body," that is a lot of syllables and sounds like a lot of things to do. But it is just one punch. And a relatively small movement at that. But I have seen many people's faces change when they hear a lot of words. It is like that self-talk I mentioned in Part I. They hear the words and think, "Oh wow, this is going to be really hard" and defeat themselves before they even try. Some punches/combos have more words than others, but don't allow yourself to be triggered just by words. 

Some boxing systems use numbers to call out punches to cut down on the number of words. For example, jab is 1, cross is 2, lead hook is 3, etc. This can be useful when constantly changing combos, particularly during padwork, but not as much during more technically-focused classes that we do. Plus most systems only number 1-6, which doesn't account for punches to the body or other punches thrown in boxing, like overhands, liver shots and the mighty, mighty bolo punch.

#5) Don't Add Stuff

This is a phenomenon I have only noticed recently. Someone isn't sure what the combo is, or maybe they even are sure, but they add additional punches (usually body hooks) for some reason. While we do always say that if you are not sure what punch to throw next, just throw anything, adding multiple punches will only make it much, much harder to follow along. Especially if we add on to the existing combo.

What is extra strange is that I will see people do this when we are throwing even a 2-punch combo. If they want to make it harder on themselves, I would recommend throwing that 2-punch combo faster and/or harder and/or with footwork and defense. There are plenty of ways to increase the challenge of your boxing workout but adding extra punches is not one of them.

#6) Try to Listen In Between Rounds

This can be tough, as sometimes we are out of breath, thirsty and go into somewhat of a shutdown mode when the round is over. We're just happy to survive. The most important thing is to catch your breath and recover but with a little practice, you can stay switched on and listen to how we describe the next round, what we're going to work on, etc. You can even start saying the combo out loud to yourself, like I describe in Part I of this post, but do it in between rounds to put it in your head. Oh, and it's a simple thing but make sure to always bring a water bottle and fill it up before class so you don't have to to the water fountain as much in between rounds.

#7) Think About the Theme Of Each Class

Every week, we have a different focus point. Something specific we spend more time working on. You can see each week's focus points on our Facebook, Instagram or YouTube channels but even if you don't pay attention to any of that stuff, we will always state it before the class and reinforce it during the class. There may even be a theme within a theme.

This can actually help you a lot when it comes to getting lost. For instance, we just had a week where our focus was to throw a punch to the body and follow it with a head shot on the same side. We did different versions of that in every round. So if we were to throw a jab-cross-liver shot, there is a good chance that the next punch would on the left side and going to the head. Being able to anticipate, makes everything easier to understand and easier to follow. If you think that it could just be anything at any time, that seems daunting and can lead to self-defeat.

#8) Think About Patterns Too

This is a big one and will help you other ways too. Along the lines of what I just mentioned and also touched on in Part I, we design these classes to flow together in a certain way. It's not just random changes every 30 seconds or so. It might feel that way but even just by telling yourself that there is a pattern related to things you've already done may help you feel like you can do it, as opposed to just thinking it is chaos.

A lot of the patterns are pretty simple, maybe simpler than you think. For instance, here is a very common pattern in my classes:

• Throw a combo (Ex: Jab-cross-left hook to the body-left uppercut)
• Punch burnout (Ex: Overhands-Liver Shots)
• Add something we did in the burnout to the original combo (Jab-cross left hook body- left uppercut + overhand-liver shot)

There are a lot of different variations of this, some certainly more complicated - involving defense and footwork - but the basic principal remains the same. There are times where we might change a combo entirely, of course, but it almost always relates to theme of the class, as mentioned above, and anything we do may come into play later.

#9) Don't Try to See the Whole Combo At Once

I touched on this already in Tip #3 but it is worth re-mentioning as it's own thing. It's kind of like that electronic game, Simon, where it flashes a pattern using 4 different colors and then you have to press the colors in that order. If you were to wait for the Simon sequence to end and then try to think about the whole thing, you would never be able to get any of the patterns beyond a few very short ones. Instead, as the colors flash, you try to remember them one at a time.

It is the same thing with punch combinations. So if someone told me to throw a jab-cross-liver shot-right-uppercut-lead hook-overhand, I would not try to imagine what that whole thing looks like. Instead, I would say to myself, "Okay, jab, then a cross, then a liver shot, then an uppercut, etc.". Just think of it as one strike at a time as opposed to a whole thing. I throw a punch and think of nothing other than that punch, then the next punch, then the next one.

I don't know if this distinction makes any sense but I can sometimes tell from looking at people that they don't do this. They try to envision what the whole thing is supposed to look like all at once. I think this makes thing much harder and as familiar as I am with our format, I would never attempt it.

#10) Watch Out For Distorted Perception

This is true with pretty much everything in life and certainly boxing. I have heard people express that they felt especially lost during a class and had no idea what they were doing. But in reality, they were lost one time, maybe twice. They threw their left hook instead of their right. But hundreds of times in the same class, they were following along perfectly. I have even heard people even say something like, "I literally had no idea what I was doing. I just punched." Again though, having watched them in the class that I made, I know this to be false. Either they didn't know they were generally following along just fine or are blowing things way out of proportion.

The problem with this is something I touched on in Part I. Negative self-talk. It's not helpful in any case but especially bad when the negative self talk isn't even based on reality. You are just bumming yourself out for no reason instead of celebrating the good thing you just did.

I know that people often do this as somewhat of a defense mechanism, to almost excuse themselves from having to be perfect. The problem is that it can hold you back as well. Don't be overly hard on yourself but don't give yourself an out either, by saying that you just aren't getting it today. Try not to overreact to being lost once or twice or feeling like you did the wrong thing. Avoid all-or-nothing type of thinking. Instead, be objective, honest, unemotional and accountable. I promise it will help.

#11) Don't Overthink or Second-Guess Yourself

I can't tell you how many times I have seen someone struggle with something so simple, something even that they have done before, and something even easier than things they were doing just 5 minutes ago. It happens to everyone. 9 times out of 10, this is because they are overthinking the combo and doubting themselves.

This is yet again, why non-negative self talk is so important. As soon as you tell yourself that something sounds very hard, you will start to overthink it and never feel confident in doing (or just give up entirely). Try instead to tell yourself that while this may seem hard, it's very possible that you've done it before and may not be as challenging as it may seem. Take it one step at a time and if you think you haven't got it, so what? If that is what you think the combo is, so be it. Don't continue to wonder if you are doing it right and start to second guess yourself.

#12) Don't Let Other People In Class Affect You

At least, not as it relates to understanding and throwing combos. It's another case where I have seen very experienced, good boxers struggle with something that they have done a million times. Energy can be contagious. In positive ways and not so positive ways. Sometimes when we have newer people in for their first ever boxing class, they are definitely going to be lost at times. I tell every single one of them that too. And it's okay. It's natural. We teach to all levels and trying a first class at our club is kind of like jumping into the deep end and learning how to swim. You will learn fast but the first class and some of the subsequent classes will be mentally challenging. As long as you know that and just kind of roll with the situation, you will start clicking really quick.

Whether it is a new person or even a veteran boxer that gets confused at times, you can't let that affect you. I have seen this go hand in hand with Tip #11 above. One person is confused, another person has it down but that person starts to doubt and wonder, "Wait, do I really have it down?" which throws a wrench into the whole process and then they get confused. Then it spreads even more! I can't tell you how many times I have seen this happen.

How do you not let it affect you though? You can try to tune it out but remember all of the other tips - be confident, don't second guess, say the combo out loud, don't pause, watch the negative self-talk, take it one step at a time, etc. Also, tell that voice in your head questioning if you have it right to shut up.

#13) Can't Hear the Combo? So What?!?

Sometimes it can be hard to hear a combo too. Because it's hard to hear and when you are tired, it gets harder. Just like everything else, don't let that derail you or lead to negative self-talk. Throw anything you want and keep listening because we will repeat it. If you only hear the word "cross" and something else you can't make out, throw a cross. You can also use context clues to figure it out based on some of the things mentioned above. You can look at other people too and it may help but it may also hurt. They could be lost too or you trying to translate their movements leads to more confusion, especially if they are facing you.

#14) "But I Am a Visual Learner, I Have to See Things To Understand"

Everybody learns differently but just be careful about making that a self-fulfilling prophecy and limitation. You might be able to start picking up more and more audio cues as you keep learning the sport. We are always learning, always getting better, and that applies to how we learn as well. 

But it makes total sense that it is much easier to understand new movements when you actually see them performed. If that's you or even if you find yourself struggling with combinations in general, here is a big tip - pick a bag in the middle of the class, closer to the coach's bag/home base. It always perplexes me when people who are new and even tell me that they are a visual learner, stand as far away from me as possible and sometimes even turn their backs to me during class (especially the turning their back). Instead, try to get yourself in the best position to see the coach and the coach to see you. You will likely get more attention this way too. As an instructor, I try to walk around to everybody but there is no way I won't make more eye contact with the people who stand nearest to my home base and generally in the middle of the club. I know some people like to stand on the edge so others can't see them but if those other people are following along, they will barely notice you. I don't even pay much attention to anyone near me when I take a class myself. Sometimes I tell myself to try and do this so I can help that person with what they are struggling with the next time they are in my class but I always just end up focusing on my own bag and workout.

Again, and I cannot stress this enough, I guarantee that this will all help. All you have to do is be mindful of these tips and try them out and will make your life easier and your workout better. Will it help you master every combo and never get lost or be confused ever again? Probably not but you will certainly be better off. And like everything else, things have a way of snowballing. Once you start to follow a few of these tips, it becomes easier to do more and get more engaged. Don't think of it as extra work. You are already doing work. You have showed up and set aside time for yourself to exercise. Setting aside the time is the hardest part. So you might as well make the most out of it when you are here, right?

Self-Defense Training & the "False Sense of Security"

When you train in a combat sport like boxing, kickboxing, Muay Thai, MMA, etc. - or more traditional martial arts like karate, jiu-jitsu, judo, tae kwon do, and plenty more - you are learning how to fight in a certain way. All styles have their own individual techniques and rules, but the idea is that you throw strikes to hurt an opponent and you defend strikes that would hurt you. 

Then there is self-defense in its purest form, as I have talked about before, which may involve the above-mentioned things (striking and defending) but the overarching goal is about survival by any means necessary with no “sport-like” competition aspect to it.

In all of these instances, there is a common notion that people like to express (especially online) which is that if you are training in a combat sport or self-defense technique, but the training is not good and/or your skills are not good, that you are being lulled into a false sense of security, thinking that you are better than you are. And that this is actually WORSE than if you have NO training at all.

It's a very powerful statement for someone to make. Not only are they better than you at this skill, but so much so that your own training is actually more harmful than good. And when it comes to stuff you read online in the comments section, many people are more than happy to try and express how they know more than everyone else. Everyone is an expert and needs you to know that.

The thing about the false sense of security, though, is that this claim can only apply if someone makes decisions to get into a fight and or not avoid a fight because of this training  That if, for instance, instead of avoiding putting themselves at risk or trying to diffuse a situation where someone wants to fight them, they welcome it by saying literally or figuratively, "come at me, bro!" because they feel so confident in their fighting stills. To me though, that is a terrible move to make in any situation.

No matter how well-trained or poorly-trained you are, you shouldn't be picking fights with anyone or putting yourself in unnecessary danger. Ever. Furthermore, you should do everything in your power to avoid getting into one of these situations. Most everyone would probably nod their heads in agreement with that statement, but I have seen plenty of people get into fights I think they could have avoided. Diffusing a situation where someone is acting aggressively towards you is a skill unto itself and I would much rather use that than any actual fighting skills. Remember always that even if we "win" the fight and come out unscathed, there can be legal and financial consequences, as well as other forms of retribution from the other person's side.

When it comes to self-defense, you can avoid many possible scenarios by doing things like locking your car doors as soon as you get in, paying attention when you are walking down the street (as opposed staring into a phone), trusting your gut instinct when you get a bad feeling about somebody, going into a place like a restaurant or a bar if you think you are being followed, etc. Having self-defense training should make you more aware of these things and more concerned about them, as opposed to just thinking you don't have to worry because you have some skills.

If any situation like that comes up and you can extract yourself from it, including just running away, that is the action that you should take. Doesn't matter how tough you are or how much training you have had. There should be no sense of security at all, false or otherwise.

Training consistently in self-defense techniques as well as any fighting system can save your life, for sure. It is a skill that everyone should have. I have written several posts about it, as well as my own philosophies

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2021/07/the-tao-of-self-defense.html

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2021/06/boxing-self-defense.html

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2024/09/self-defense-class-faqs.html

Remember always, that nothing is 100%. The best form of self-defense will always be avoiding a bad situation where you could be hurt. The better you get at the technique, the more you understand this.

"Realistic" Combos

In boxing, there is literally an infinite amount of punch combinations. You could also throw any punch after any punch in any situation. Generally, the goal is hit a moving target- your opponent- that is not always standing in front of you. Your opponent is also almost always covered up in different ways, so you will try to hit them wherever is open in the least amount of time while leaving yourself open as little as possible.

That being said, there are certainly punches and combinations that are thrown far more often than others. They are simpler and efficient by nature. Since we don't have infinite time to practice infinite combinations, it makes sense that we would spend the most time practicing the more fundamental combos, as well as defending them too.

A lot of boxers and trainers refer to any combo that is not one of the more fundamental ones as "unrealistic." Or they will say that a seemingly strange, unorthodox combo "doesn't make sense." 

That description is incorrect though. When you start to break down fights between high-level boxers and figure out exactly what they are throwing, you will see a LOT of combos that many people would call unrealistic. And you will see them land successfully- particularly when finishing a fight. So, as they are thrown in a real match between skilled combatants and they are successful, it is objectively wrong to call them unrealistic. You can call them uncommon but not unrealistic.

Again, there are many, many combinations that are far more common than a jab-4 lead uppercuts-rear hook-rear uppercut but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try different things. and as I said, you should be able to throw any punch with good technique off of any other. It is important to practice this-  throwing and defending.

When boxers and trainers talk about unrealistic combos and combos that don't make sense, they are often referring to longer sequences of punches. This is because the likelihood of being able to throw more than 3-4 punches at a time without getting countered by your opponent is slim in many situations. But it can happen and does happen- just less often than simply more unorthodox combos being thrown. 

Practicing long combinations does have other value too. It helps you to flow between punches smoothly, as well as get more reps in chaining together different punches- provided of course that they are varied long combos. 

I think it can also function as somewhat of a stress test on your technique. It is one thing to throw a jab-cross on its own and try to make both strikes as perfect as possible, but throwing it along with more punches will really challenge you to maintain that solid form without everything just becoming punch mush. It keeps the brain switched on.

Varying the length of combos is also a good way to improve stamina. If you get stuck throwing 2-3 punch combos over and over again and get into a rhythm with it, your body will adapt accordingly. Then when it's time to try to finish off your opponent and throw a long flurry of strikes, your body isn't used to that gear shift and you are more likely to gas out sooner.

Along those lines but beyond the physical, it is very easy to become an "auto-pilot" boxer just throwing the same combos and combo lengths. Makes it harder to adapt when other strike opportunities present themselves. It also makes it easier for your opponent to predict what you are going to do.

This is why we like to vary things up at our club, as well as do those "Fight Like..." classes. It keeps us grounded in what strikes high-level boxers and kickboxers actually throw, as opposed to just writing off things as unrealistic. A strange thing I have noticed in the last 10 years is that even very experienced boxers, boxing trainers and boxing commentators, don't actually track what punches are thrown in a fight. Even Compubox just separates them individually as jabs or power punches (which is just anything other than a jab). So even people who seem to eat, sleep and breathe boxing - whose job it is to know as much about boxing as possible - don't seem to care to look closer. I will never understand this, myself, and would love for someone to explain to me why I'm wrong but as I write this in 2026, that day has yet to come.

In reality, no matter what any experienced person tries to tell you, there is no such thing as unrealistic combo. There are no combos that don't make sense either. Yes, there are combos that are much more commonly thrown than others, for sure, much more fundamental and good to learn but anything can work. Also, if you practice something, you can get better at it. So what might feel awkward for you to throw now can potentially get silky smooth with a lot of practice. 

Violence IS the Answer!

As you may know, the goal of boxing is to hit your opponent and not get hit. But it is not a game of tag. If you hit your opponent and it does absolutely no damage to them at all or displace them in any way, this will make it much easier for them to hit you, and if their strikes do at least some damage, you are probably going to lose that fight. And get hurt!

So, if you throw punches in boxing (or kickboxing, Muay Thai or any striking-sport) that inflict some damage, you are going to hurt your opponent. That is the goal too. There are plenty of boxing coaches and enthusiasts who don't want to plainly say this though. Not without a qualifier. They want to explain that the art and sport of striking is not necessarily to hurt someone and there is so much more to it than just violence. This is probably because a lot of people who haven't spent a lot of training in boxing don't fully understand. They think it is just 2 guys or gals beating the crap out of each other. Boxers and coaches can be sensitive to this and will be quick to tell you that there is so much more than just violence. They are correct but the simple, inescapable fact is that again, we strike our opponent to hurt them. It is an amazing, beautiful art and yes, sweet science, that takes years to learn and develop, but this art/science is about inflicting damage. In most cases, this is not because fighters hate or dislike their opponent and want to hurt them for this reason. There is no negative emotion attached or hatred/dislike between combatants. Oftentimes quite the opposite. There is almost always mutual respect on both sides but none of this changes the fact that the object is violence.

The level of violence can depend on the fighter and more importantly, whether it is amateur boxing or professional boxing. Amateur boxers generally fight 3 rounds, wearing head gear, and most of the time, the strategy is to simply out-point your opponent instead of knocking them out. “Out-point” means landing more strikes than the other guy and generally controlling the action. As I mentioned earlier though, it will be very hard to win a points-battle if your strikes do almost no damage at all nor have much force behind them. This is because the other fighter will be able to walk right through them and do damage to you, meaning you pretty much have to punch and run away for 3 rounds. Some amateur boxers can do this, for sure, but it is not the best strategy and puts you at risk against higher caliber opponents

What about if you are just training for fitness though? You have no desire to compete and certainly don't want to hurt anybody? That is where I am at right now. But I can tell you that regardless of fitness goals, f you are throwing non-violent punches on a heavy bag (or mitts), you are heavily, heavily limiting the fitness benefit you get from training. You will also give yourself a low ceiling in terms of progress, so the fitness benefit potential for the future is much less too. Throwing violent punches makes you stronger, burns more calories, increases your cardio, works more muscle groups, better trains your skills like balance, agility, coordination and reaction time, has stress-relieving and confidence-boosting benefits - I could go on and on.

When you are punching (or anything) the heavy bag, you should always ask yourself this question: if you were being hit by your own strikes, would it hurt at all? Of course no one really wants to be hit, even lightly, but would any of your own strikes actually do damage to yourself or any other human non-baby? If the answer is "no", then you really should punch harder. 

Harder doesn't just mean tensing up and trying to muscle your punches. I have written several blog posts that talk about the mechanics of throwing powerful punches and it has little to do with how strong you think you might be. Here are a few:

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2025/11/punching-power-is-something-you-are.html

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2022/12/do-i-have-to-be-big-strong-to-throw-big.html

https://theboxingmanifesto.blogspot.com/2025/07/slow-down-to-get-it-right-yes-but.html

Beyond the technical aspects, there is a mental side too. In fact, the mental side is what people often are missing. Someone who has done extensive boxing training for years may still not get it. Their punches, footwork and defensive form can be pretty good but their strikes feel like just movements to me. The same movements they would use in any form of exercise. But that's not what boxing is. Even if you do it for exercise. Your punches, kicks, elbows, knees, whatever are designed to hurt an opponent and that is how we should practice them on the heavy bag for maximum benefit. Throw everything with bad intentions and you will get so much better. We need to come to terms with this, embrace it, and avoid all excuses for not doing it.

Speaking of excuses, here are the ones I have heard people say out loud as well as some I have heard them think in their brain, using my psychic, telepathic powers:

"I don't need to punch hard because I am too old/too tired/not planning to get in the ring with someone/not a fighter/just doing this for exercise/etc."

"I am not strong enough to punch hard"

"I just want to work on the technique."

"I am trying to pace myself"

"I am not a violent person"

"Not every punch needs to be powerful"

Note that many of these are not necessarily wrong. But they are not mutually exclusive either. You may not be able to punch like Mike Tyson, but you can definitely punch harder, no matter who you are. And regardless of whether you want to hit another human being, punching harder will have exercise benefits I touched on earlier. Working on the technique is great but power and technique are connected. They are not two separate things, and improving power does not inherently make your technique any worse. Trying to pace yourself can be very limiting. You would likely get more benefit from working towards failure (exhaustion) and every time you do, you will push that bar further back. I have seen several people achieve pretty incredible feats doing this. And not being a violent person is a good thing! Again though, it has nothing to do with how hard you hit the heavy bag. Some of the hardest strikers in combat sports are some of the biggest sweethearts in real life. Hitting the bag violently and hitting a person in anger are two totally different things. Sometimes hitting the bag hard can even make you less likely to want to strike a person in anger. Gets the stress out!

I am going to take that last excuse - "Not every punch needs to be powerful" - separately because it is another thing that boxing coaches, boxers and boxing enthusiasts love to say- that sometimes we use "throwaway" punches to set up our opponents. This is certainly correct but how many super light, seemingly intentionally light punches do you see thrown in a professional boxing match? I have watched hundreds, maybe thousands, and can tell you there are not that many. Not every punch is 100% either. It's not all or nothing. There are faster punches, there are harder punches, there are set-up punches, but very few are thrown at a level of intensity that would not do any damage to their opponent. If you are just trying to set someone up, there needs to be a payoff- a violent punch- you are setting them up for. So if you are training at a sub-maximal level, there should be a reason for it. But a lot of people use it as an excuse not to push themselves.

Remember also that violent doesn't mean sloppy or out of control. Technique is part of the violence. Controlled, technical violence is what we are looking for. Think Mike Tyson in the 80s or our very own member, Kayla S., in the modern day.

So next time you are doing bag work, don't give yourself any excuse not to be violent. Doesn't matter who you are, why you are training in boxing or anything. When you stand in front of a heavy bag, you are like 007. Licensed to kill!

Emotional Coaching vs. Technical Coaching

Whether you are boxing or training in any sport, you need a good coach. A coach is someone who cares about you and your development, someone who teaches you the sport and how to get better at it, someone who pushes you to work harder, have a better understanding of what you are doing, etc. Sometimes coaches try to do all of those things, but they just don’t click with the student, so personal chemistry can be important too.  

There are many factors that go into what makes a good coach and there are plenty of different types of coaches and types of coaching, but I think you can break it down into two separate halves- emotional coaching and technical coaching. 

Emotional coaching is focused on pushing students to work harder, to stay focused, not to give up, to keep pushing, dropping the “you can do this, c'mon c'mon, give all you got,” etc. The coaching can even be personal, directed to you and you only, but it is not specific to any technical or strategic aspect, but just related to your emotional state on some level.

Technical coaching is explaining how to do something, what the goal of it is, what you may be doing right or wrong, and how you can make it better, then structuring your training around that aspect. When it comes to boxing, there are some things that would be technical coaching - like "keep your hands up"- but I would almost put them more into the emotional coaching category because they are so basic and repetitive that for many boxers, they no longer really provide technical insight, just more like saying "work harder" at this point. Being more specific however - like "you are dropping your rear hand when you throw a lead hook" - is a better example of what I consider to be technical coaching.

Everybody needs both types of coaching. Usually someone will work harder if you tell them to and be held more accountable when they have a coach monitoring them. Working hard is certainly good. And with some, the emotional coaching can really make them feel better and even like their coach more. Especially if it is more personally directed. Even more especially, if it feels honest. Knowing that your coach believes in you and likes you is incredibly motivating for almost all of us. 

With a sport like boxing (and probably all other sports), technical coaching is how people learn and improve their skills. I have talked a lot about this in the blog before and won't go too far down the rabbit hole again but every great boxer, every great athlete, throughout the history of time has had someone teach them what to do. Even in sports that seem pretty straightforward, like sprinting, there are coaches. There is always technique. Just like looking at something under a microscope, the closer you look, the more you will see.

So what should the balance be between technical coaching vs. emotional coaching? It depends a bit on the person, the sport and the overall goal, but I strongly believe that in any case, when it comes to boxing and combat sports, the vast majority of coaching should be technical. Not only is it ultimately more important to someone's overall development but there is far more technical coaching to be done, meaning that technique is a much deeper subject than the emotional, motivational side of training.

A problem that I have observed at different boxing gyms and with other trainers, is that it is the other way around. The majority of the coaching is emotional and not technical. This doesn't just include fitness boxing concepts, but also old-school gyms that train competitive fighters. Sometimes you will even hear a coach talking to his fighter in the corner in between rounds in a competitive fight and the coaching is mostly emotional. Now, I understand that in this particular instance, it might be hard to reach a fighter with a lot of technical coaching but still, I would prefer that a coach tell me if he notices that I am doing something poorly and what he or she notices the other fighter doing. Doesn't have to a full dissertation, just a tidbit like, "stop chasing him around the ring, cut him off when he circles out" or whatever.

It is also my belief that the reason for less technical coaching in boxing comes from a lack of ability to break down technique to a sub-atomic level and express that to students. I have spoken about this many times, in different ways, on this blog. Kind of like technique itself, the more I learn, the more I see how this is true. It's a lot easier to tell someone to push themselves, to work harder, than it is than it is to tell them how exactly to transfer their weight from foot to foot efficiently. Plenty of coaches may not have the knowledge of anatomy, physics and biomechanics to get too deep into process and that is why you hear plenty of them saying things like, "punching power is something you are born with." This all gets magnified exponentially when trying to teach students who lack athletic abilities and boxing training experience.

It can also be harder to provide technical coaching in a group class environment, where things move faster and you can't exactly stop the class for one person not getting something, but technical cues should still always be provided. Individual feedback should be delivered too. It doesn't have to sound like individual feedback though. It can be given to the group as a whole while the coach stands right next to someone who is struggling with that particular element.

The last thing that makes technical coaching harder is that not everybody responds well to it. Or responds at all. Some think you telling them something negative, like they are doing something wrong, some may think they ARE actually doing what you say but are not, some might not be paying attention and some may not care. Giving emotional feedback usually isn't going to potentially make someone mad or fall on deaf ears, so it is much safer, and I am sure that is a big reason coaches tend to prefer it (or at least, do it significantly more). But as I have always said, coaching is caring. Trying to help someone get better at something is generally a good thing. NOT trying to help them get better is doing them a disservice. This doesn't mean that coaching feedback can be delivered in a hurtful, offensive, obnoxious manner, but it's okay because hey, you are trying to help them. Of course you want to be nice about how you tell students how to do something better and understand that every one of them is different and may respond to different things.

Of course it takes more time and effort, generally, to provide technical vs. emotional coaching. Coaches who don't care enough to spend that time and effort certainly don't fall into that category of a good coach I mentioned earlier. But you can also think of technical coaching like this: if I (or Steph) give you any kind of feedback on your technique - how to do something, how to do it better, what to not do, etc. - we are, in a way, also giving some emotional coaching at the same time. We are saying (without saying) that yes, you can do this! We wouldn't tell you to do something we didn't think you could do. That would probably be frustrating to both sides. Sometimes I know not everybody in a single class may not be able to make changes right on the spot, but I also believe in planting seeds. Maybe you hear something once in the heat of battle and it doesn't register at all. Maybe you hear it again, but don't take any action. Then you hear it again and think about it a little. Then again and you try it out but it feels awkward. Again and it's slightly less awkward. And then one day, it fully clicks and that seed grows into a blossoming bud of technique! And we will also cheer for you at every stage! 

Boogeyman & Steph's Boxing Lingo

Boxing is very much it's own language. Every punch, every defensive maneuver, pretty much every movement has a specific name and we generally don't use these names for anything else of a similar context in our daily lives. Learning boxing is learning a sport AND a new language. 

Beyond the basic terminology, there is somewhat of a shorthand we use in classes at our club. This is to make things more efficient but also reinforce some of the basic principles. It's funny because writing this all out, it seems very complicated but most everyone who comes to our club more than a couple of times, tends to get it down without even really thinking about it. So maybe it's a mistake to put it all in writing? Oh well, I guess I have already started...

Default Settings

These are the things that one should assume are always true unless we say otherwise. 

Every punch defaults to the head - if we call out a jab, cross, hook, uppercut, whatever, this means the punch is intended to go to the head of our opponent- who we also assume is as tall as we are by default. If we intend for you to throw the punch to the midsection, we would add the word "body" or "low." Jab to the body, lead hook to the body, cross low, etc. 

So, that also means that unless we say "body" or "low," all of your punches should land at roughly the same area. Different angles for all different punches, but for instance, if the combo was a jab-cross-lead hook-rear uppercut, none of those strikes would ultimately land any lower or higher than each other. Oftentimes we will see people throw their jabs and crosses pretty close to the face of their default opponent but hooks and uppercuts are noticeably lower. This should never be the default.

Slips and Rolls - Which Way? - According to our basic laws of weight-shifting, you would always slip or roll to the side you just threw a punch from. For instance, if your last punch was a left hook, you would slip or roll to the left side first. You would also counter with a punch from that side too. So, if you slipped to the left, your next punch would be on that left side. "Jab-cross-lead hook-slip-lead hook" is how we might say it. If the last punch before a slip or roll was on the right side, you would default to slipping or rolling to the right, and then throwing another counterpunch from the right side too. Besides just learning how to dodge punches, this also reinforces the concept that just about everything we do is shift our lower body weight from one side to the other.

For more information on our basic laws of weight-shifting, check out this wonderful video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAkKqbNX3Fs

Pulls - Which Way? - The pull defensive move is a little simpler because you would almost always want to pull over your back foot and shift your weight there. This is for balance and to load a powerful counterpunch on that side. You certainly can pull over your lead side but you will be off-balance. To dodge a punch, you've got to do what you've got to do to avoid getting hit but again, the default pull is to your rear side. Here is another (wonderful) video about pulls - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHyIfQ_dZw0

Overhand - This is always going to be the rear (dominant) hand. So if you are right-handed, it is the right hand, left-handed, the left hand. Overhand punches with the lead hand can happen, but are pretty rare and in the cases that we throw them in class, they are called out very specifically. We also often short the word "overhand" to "over." So we might say, "double-jab-over" when calling out the combination.

Liver Shot - For an orthodox boxer  (right-handed stance), the liver shot is a diagonal body punch with the left hand, which targets the liver specifically. For southpaw (left-handed) stance, it is kind of a lie. The lefty would throw the same punch but with their lead/right hand. This does not target the liver but the spleen instead. Yet we still refer to it as a "liver shot." We could call it something more universal, like "lead shovel body hook" but I like saying "liver!" and since a punch that hits the spleen has a similar effect to a punch that hits the liver, I feel like it is okay and clear enough. Just like on overhands, we usually shorten this by saying "liver." So an overhand-liver shot burnout would just be called "over-liver".

Burnout vs. Combos -  Speaking of burnouts, a burnout is non-stop, rapid-fire punching with no pauses between strikes at any point. It can be slow, it can be fast, but it must continuously flow, whereas combos involve a series of punches that flow together, with an implied break in between. We do burnouts for several reasons. Some people think they are for cardio but that is not necessarily the reason. At least for me, I find them most valuable at teaching a flow between punches, as well as an opportunity to focus on one type of punch as opposed to remembering a specific combo, using footwork and head movement, etc.

Burnout Callouts - Oftentimes in burnouts, we like to call things out, whether they be other punches, a change in intensity, a defensive move, or footwork. The idea is that you will do that one thing and then go back to the previous burnout. So if you are throwing a jab-cross burnout and we call out "hook!," you would throw a single hook (or however many we say) and then go back to jab-crosses as soon as you finish throwing that single hook.

Mostly Default Settings

These are almost default settings but not quite. Sometimes they can vary but we will almost always explain that clearly.

Left-Right Alternating Punches - Oftentimes, we will call out a combo without specifying which hooks, uppercuts and body shots are from the lead side or the rear side. The default here is that it the punches alternate hands so "Jab-cross-hook-hook" is going to always be jab-cross lead hook-rear hook. If it were 2 lead hooks, or meant to be a rear hook after the cross, we would clearly specify this in how we call it out. 

BUT, of course, good boxing combinations are not always left-right-left-right-etc. We often throw multiple punches on the same side, particularly the lead hand. We always try to be very clear about this when calling out combos, reiterating that. in this case, we are throwing two (or more) punches on the same hand. We often use the word "reload" in these cases, too, to indicate that not only are you throwing another punch on the same hand, but you need to bring back your body weight to that side before throwing the next punch.

"Body" on its own is a hook to the body - Rather than say "body hook" or "body shot", we often just say "body" and the default is that it is a hook to the body. If it were a liver shot or cross to the body or whatever, we would say so. And just like above, "body-body" means alternating hooks to the body - So if you were going to throw multiple, alternating (left-right or right-left) body hooks, we will often say "body-body" to imply this. So for instance, "jab-cross-body-body" = jab-cross-lead body hook-rear body hook.

And "Head" is generally a hook to the head - This is almost always used when throwing multiple punches to the body to set up a punch to the head. So like, "body-body-head" would mean 2 hooks to the body and one hook to the head (and since there was no indication on lead or rear side, you would assume that it is just left-right-left, or potentially right-left-right).

"Hook" is usually the lead hook - This is another thing to save time but also illustrate that the vast majority of hooks you would throw in classic boxing combinations are lead side hooks. So if we were to call out a "hook-cross" or a "jab-cross-hook", we would be referring to the lead hook. Throwing a jab-cross-rear hook would be a strange thing - not necessarily a bad thing, just something not done as often - and if we were to do it in a class, we would call a lot of attention to this being different and accentuate the rear hook a lot.

"Uppercut" is oftentimes the rear uppercut - This one is definitely not as common as the "Hook" above. For me, this is more often than not when I call out a "jab-cross-hook-uppercut” (or just “upper” or “up”), and I am referring to a jab-cross-lead hook-rear uppercut. But, I have also noticed many many people always defaulting to a rear uppercut, even when I specifically refer to it as a lead uppercut. So make sure to always keep an ear out for the "L" word.

"Left" and "Right' apply to a right-handed person - So this is a tricky one that I have gone back and forth on. Initially, the idea was that I would never say "left" or "right" when talking about which hand we punch with. That we would always refer to them as "lead hand/side" (non-dominant hand that is closest to the back) and "rear hand/side" (dominant hand that is farthest away). This way, I can use the same language for people who box in a right-handed (orthodox) stance as I do with people who box in a left-handed (southpaw) stance.

The problem I felt like we ran into is that newer folks to boxing really struggled understanding the concept of a lead and rear side. Since there are sometimes classes in which we have no left-handed people, I started saying "left" and "right" at times and it did seem to help.

But this does make it trickier for the southpaws because for them, the sides are reversed. i.e. their left hand is their rear hand and their right hand is their lead hand. And I started to let this leak into classes with lefties. Usually, these people figure things out pretty quickly and I have tried using lead/rear more recently but the basic takeaway is that if you hear me say "left" or "right," I am referring to someone in an orthodox, right-handed stance and if you are a southpaw, just reverse it. I apologize in advance to all you left-handers out there, it is nothing personal, I promise. Both of my children are left-handed too and believe me, I love them more than anything. It's just when trying to get a group of people of varying levels to learn boxing, I have to generally err on the side of the majority.

If not specifically-stated otherwise, combos begin with the lead side - this doesn't mean that we rarely start combos with a rear side punch, we do, but it is always called out as such. If we were to just say something like "Upper-upper-hook" without any other identifying words, you would assume that we start with the lead side, as that is more common.

Things That Only We Say

While most of the above is pretty common in boxing gyms across the country, there are some things we say in our classes that no else does so if you repeat them anywhere else, people will think you are crazy.

HOT SAUCE!!! - This is where you quickly hop to your rear side, changing angles, and then throw a powerful punch on the rear side, usually a cross. Optional: yell out "Hot Sauce!' and perhaps an "Ooooh-weee!" as you do it.

Torpedo Cross - The Torpedo Cross begins as a cross to the body. You start to rotate the hips and shoulder while dropping down but once the once the cross hand passes you, you stand up as you continue to rotate and extend the cross hand. This can be used for deception - make them start to defend a cross to the body and then you suddenly bring it up to the head - or as even a way to generate power - by pushing into the ground and lifting up as you rotate through the cross can transfer some of that leg drive into the power of the punch. Optional: make sonar pings right before you throw it.

Note that this is something that boxers occasionally do, I didn't just make it up, but as far as I know, no one has a name for it and I doubt anybody practices it. It just can come up over the course of a fight.

Gazelle Punch/"Gazelle" Noises - The gazelle punch is a standard term, though not something people tend to throw in traditional boxing gyms, despite it also being something that many of the greatest boxers of all time (Dempsey, Marciano, Patterson, Ali, Frazier, Hagler, Tyson, Roy Jones Jr.) have had in their repertoire but one thing I am pretty sure that no one has ever done in the history of time was made a gazelle noise to signify throwing a gazelle punch. The thing is though, I have no idea what a gazelle sounds like or if they even make a noise at all but I made something up that sounds like I high-pitched laugh. If you ever here me do it, throw a gazelle punch. Oh, and a gazelle punch is a leaping lead hook.

Rooster Punch/Rooster Noises - This is much less common but a punch Roy Jones Jr. was known for. It is just like a gazelle punch except it is more of a leaping lead uppercut, loaded up by twisting and dipping to the lead side. Roy Jones said he got the idea for it watching roosters fight on his family farm and famously knocked down James Toney with it after putting his hands behind his back and dancing back and forth like a chicken. So there are other people who refer to this as a "rooster punch" but yet again, I will occasionally make rooster noises to signify throwing it instead of just saying "rooster punch." In this case, I do know what a rooster sounds like and think my impression is pretty solid so if you ever hear me doing it, leap forward and throw a lead uppercut on the bag.

Other Weird Names For Punches - this is far less important and if I ever say this during a class, I will explain it too but I have occasionally referred to my rear hook as "Candyman" (because the titular character in the Candyman movies had a hook for his right hand), the lead hook as "Uncle Louie" (because people sometimes refer to taking a left turn as a "louie"), the lead uppercut as "Johnny Rocket," and most recently, the double-jab as "Snappy Tom."

You do not need to memorize this list. I am just putting it in writing in case it ever pops up. Eventually this stuff just starts making sense to you if you keep on boxing. If it's all a little alarming at first, don't worry. As always, there is no penalty for slipping to "wrong" side or using a different hand or throwing a different punch than when we intend. I would rather everyone learn how to properly throw punches above all else, even if they are not what we call out. And I would rather everyone have fun so don't get too bogged down in anything, the lingo or otherwise.

Special guest addendum from Steph: Teachers and students can often build a common language together when we hit points of understanding. I have a few regulars who can throw a combo based on stupid noises I usually make when demoing. A bunch of you would know exactly what to do if I said “pa pa shup.” It’s a double jab-rear uppercut. Obviously. One thing that is hard is finding understandable and quick ways to describe nuanced body movement. Everyone understands their own bodies differently and can’t always translate verbal instruction to movement. Over the years I have found a words or phrases that seemed to help successfully communicate not just punches, but how to move in order to throw them. One example is “snappy snappy boom.” Feels silly to write it down but when throwing a double jab-cross, you want to snap the jabs instead of pressing or lumbering with the straight lead in order to set up a power punch on the rear- the boom. Quick, shorthand way to say it when you’re in the middle of boxing your heart out. Or I will tell people to “scoop” their hips when throwing an uppercut. That is to describe the action of rotating inward as you come up from a slight bend in order to aim and power-up your uppers. Similarly, you’ll also hear me say “get in the tube” when asking for straight punches to the face. Please do not get in a tube. Where did you even get that tube? What I’m asking for is streamlined jabs and crosses from the guard to the target with no looping or bent arms. The origin story for the phrase is not important (remember drive through banks with the vacuum tubes connecting you to the teller?) but it has become shorthand and generally understood lingo in my classes. Not super important that you immediately understand or even remember our personal vernacular, but eventually it will make sense. In the meantime, feel free to laugh at and/or with us. Especially when Alex starts gazelling or I start barking. Rruff!