What are the Pros and Cons to Different Types of Punching Bags?

Punching bags come in all different shapes and sizes. Just like with most tools, each one is designed for a certain job(s). That being said, you really can do just about anything with a standard, hanging heavy bag but we've also seen specialty bags out there as well become popular. Here is a rundown of the major ones:

Hanging Heavy Bag

The standard, cylindrical bag filled with sand, cloth, and even water nowadays. They come in different weights and in different lengths. My general feeling is, the longer and heavier the better. 100 pounds at least Why? Because there is more surface area to hit and the bag will swing less. Shorter, lighter bags can swing a lot, even with proper punching technique and while this is not a terrible thing, it is not optimal either and if you don't have an extremely solid rig, it means your bag stand will move more too.  But having a strong rig is important too for the heavier heavy bags. Going with 100 pounds or more means that rig will break faster and really, hardcore training on anything other than professional rig or extremely solid metal structure with large chains/pieces will not be possible in the long term. I've tried it and broke many. As mentioned earlier, you can practice everything on these bags. While a lot of people find throwing uppercuts awkward against the flat surface, it certainly can be done and the longer the bag, means body shots are easily doable, no matter how tall you are, as well as kicks in kickboxing.

One thing I hear about heavy bag training is that you can't practice accuracy, as you have such a large surface to hit. But just because there is a lot of surface area, does not mean you can't practice targeting certain spots. This can be done pretty easily using only your eyes and mind but some people actually do mark or tape their bags for targets as well. The only limitation is the boxer, not the bag.

Freestanding Punching Bag

These are the ones you often see in martial arts dojos and at-home boxing programs. Instead of hanging, they are softer, lighter bags with a base floor-level that you can fill with water, sand, or both to keep it from falling over and moving around. One problem is that even if you fill them with concrete, they may still move around your floor. There are now better models that don't move so much but the cheaper and older ones would often slide around and leak as well. Another issue is that the bags sit on the base and lock into with plastic grooves. After heavy use, these grooves and whatever you call the other part of plastic that locks into the grooves wear down and the bag starts spinning on the base. Or if it's one that you can put up at a certain height, it won't remain at that height and start to slide down. Then finally, as these bags are softer and lighter, the workout you get from them is less intense than from a hanging, heavy bag because there is less resistance. I've used them for many years, along with hanging bags, and this is undeniably true. Otherwise, it offers the same pros as the hanging bags.

Teardrop and Ball-Shaped Heavy Bag

The most common variation of this style is the Aqua Bag, which is teardrop shaped, made of something with a vinyl base, and filled with water but there are other stuffed varieties too. The biggest pro with these bags is that they are great for uppercuts. While traditional heavy bags have a flat surface, uppercuts will feel awkward at first and you will never be able to throw that uppercut straight up the middle, whereas you can do this with the teardrop as you are able to get your hand below the bag itself. Of course that also means the problem is that you can't really practice your low punches. Everything has to go to the head or start low and come at an upward trajectory. Another problem are with hooks. Because the bag is spherical, this means that your hook will land before it reaches the mid-point, which is where you actually want it to land. So as much as I like being able to practice uppercuts from all angles, not being able to throw body shots and less-effective hooks make these bags a real downer for me, unless I just want to work one the one thing.

In regards to the Aqua and other bags filled with water specifically, it is nice that this makes the bags heavier yet softer to punch but what's missing for me at least, is that tactile and auditory feedback. Throwing a sharp punch at a traditional, leather bag makes this awesome sound and you can really feel the pop. I can't tell you why but it just feels and sounds so good. I hear this all the time from other people too. And I also like hearing them land a really solid punch with that loud, cracking sound. It's like the bag tells you that you hit it right. The water bags do not give you this. No matter how hard and efficiently you hit them, you won't get much more than a dull thud. The feel is not as good either. In fact, your hand is much more likely to bounce off it, which in some ways is ultimately what you want but YOU need to be the thing making your punches bounce off the bag - snapping them right back to guard - and when the bag does this for you, not only do you not train those skills but it makes them harder to attain.

Space Capsule & Other Curved Heavy Bags

There are some different shapes here that are not flat like a traditional bag, nor completely circular like a teardrop bag. They are just various mixes of both. The idea being to give you the best of both worlds. Sounds great on paper but not so much in practice. In fact, I would not recommend using any of these. We used to have one at our club and I took it down because the inconsistent surface area can lead to hand/wrist injuries. 

  One might think that if you were punching a person, having

inconsistent surface area would be something you'd have to get used to and that is true but that does not mean that curved bags simulate this better. In some ways worse, especially with ones that are fatter at the top and get skinnier as they go down. Plus these bags generally weigh less so you are going to get more non-helpful swinging.

Double-End Bag

Double-end bags are not heavy bags but instead, small, spherical or ovular-shaped balls held together by 2 cables. One is anchored into the ground, the other is anchored into something overhead. The tension in these cables can vary and this varies the experience as well. When you punch the small bag, it bounces around quickly. As such, this can be a great tool for practicing the accuracy of your straight punches in particular. The quick, jittery movement is more similar to that of a person and the small target forces you to really lock in and work on timing, something you can't really do with these other tools. It also helps you to keep your hands up and even move your head as the bag will come back at you quickly as well.

The downsides are that while it that like a teardrop or spherically-shaped bag, you lose out on the opportunity to work on body shots (other than throwing a straight to the lower cable). Hooks to the head are also a little more challenging as once you land a hook, it will be very hard to land another shot immediately after without either stopping the momentum of the ball or slowing down and timing it. You also can't really work too much on power and it is less satisfying to hit for sure but again, a great tool to use for its specific purposes.

Reflex Bag/Ball

These are a lot like double-end bags except they anchor only to the floor and have nothing holding them from the top. It's another small target and bounces back at you when you hit it, and has all the benefits of a double-end bag, although it does move in a different way than the double-end bag does. They also don't tend to last as long as double-end bags do because the parts at the base and supporting the bag can break, whereas the double-end is just a leather bag and cables (though you are on your own for finding something to attach them to). Plus depending on their base, you may have an issue with it sliding around the floor as you punch it.

Wall Mounted Bag/Striking Surface

Not really a bag at all but it is something you can punch so I will mention it. These mount onto your
wall and just look pretty much like an upside-down slight L-shaped cube. I will be honest and say that I have not spent a lot of time hitting these myself, other than a few test punches. I hear a lot of good things about them but the issue I mentioned with those other curved bags is certainly true here. There are spots and angles you definitely do not want to hit without risking injury. They are better for more traditional uppercuts though and because they don't move, that risk should be less. And even though throwing hooks are weird on these things, it can be helpful for those who don't understand how the hooks come in from the side vs. straight punches. But the cube shape means you can't really go nuts on one of these wall mounts, and you need to make sure your wall (and potential neighbors) can handle it. More for just training pure technique though only for punches to the head, so you are limited there as well.

Thus, if you want something to punch, the hanging heavy bag is always going to be the best bet. It's also the best option for kickboxing as well, as only the freestanding bag listed here would even be appropriate. Depending on how much time you time you have for training, other options can certainly be of value but none replace the classic HHB. And believe me, I am not just being an old-timer either. I love trying new stuff. Anytime someone comes up with a new thing, I will want to check it out but in this case, the original really is still the best.

The Scale

Probably the most common fitness goal people have is still weight loss. Even if just 5-10 pounds, many of us would feel better or at least, more in-shape if we could shed them. Nowadays, we acknowledge that the specific number is not always that important. The goal being to lose some weight but ultimately feel better- the amount of pounds to get there is indeterminate. People are also a lot more aware of body composition, muscle mass, etc. now and no longer want to just "be skinny," like in decades past. 

I generally encourage this kind of thinking and though far less exact, using metrics like "how do your clothes fit?" and "how strong do you feel?" to determine health and fitness changes instead of simply, how much weight you've lost. That doesn't mean we should just throw out our scales though. Measuring and tracking your weight still has plenty of value. The key is just not to obsess too completely about it and turn it into a negative experience. Here are 6 tips to keep in mind:

1) Don't Weigh Yourself Every Day

Unless there is some medical reason to do it, I don't think you should weigh yourself every day. Weight loss usually does not function like a steady grade. Your results might be all over the place and you don't get a clear picture with such a high frequency of weigh-ins. I would recommend doing it every week. You still probably won't see a steady grade, but it will give you a better sense of where you're going. Just make sure it is the same day of the week. So if it's Mondays, weigh yourself every Monday.

2) Weigh Yourself First Thing in the Morning

Along those lines, your weight will likely fluctuate wildly throughout the day, depending on many different factors. Best way to ensure that those factors are not affecting your number is to weigh yourself immediately after you wake up. Don't do anything before. Just get up and step on the scale. It is true your weight will likely go up throughout the day so it gives you the lowest possible number but if we're tracking progress, this will be the clearest method.

3) Eliminate As Many Variables As Possible

And along THOSE lines, we want to eliminate as many variables as possible so the number on the scale is as true as it can be. Use the same scale, make sure the settings don't change, and get naked. Or at the very least, wear the same clothes you wear every time you do it. If you normally take/don't take a shower or go/don't go to the bathroom before you step on the scale, stick with that and don't change. Also make sure that you don't do anything drastically different the day before that might affect your reading. For instance, if you weigh yourself every Monday morning upon waking, don't go out drinking on a Sunday night. Or eat a bunch of super salty food when you usually don't do that on Sundays. Of course those are both wonderful Sunday activities so if they happen from time to time, maybe make your weigh day Wednesday when your eating and drinking behavior are a little more consistent and manageable. If that's not your lifestyle, that is okay. Just know that things like that will make a huge difference. Not just for calories but how you retain water. Eating out usually means a lot more sodium and can add a lot of water weight. Drinking a lot of alcohol can dehydrate you. These things will have an affect on your weigh-in. May not be a huge difference but can definitely add/subtract pounds. Healthy weight loss is generally considered a pound or 2 a week so that can drastically skew your results.

4) Don't Get Too High, Don't Get Too Low

As I mentioned earlier, weight loss doesn't necessarily work on a gradual, steady grade, even if you're doing all the right things and sticking to your plan perfectly. And everybody's body is different. If you weigh yourself every week and discover that you haven't lost any pounds one week despite all your hard work, don't get discouraged! Maybe you will lose 0 pounds one week, 5 the next. Or maybe you won't lose any weight for a while because your body is still adapting to diet and exercise changes but then it starts to steadily drop. Or you even gain some weight from building muscle. No matter how much you limit your variables, there WILL be variables and this is not an exact science. I will say this again (and again and again): every body is different. What works for someone else may not work for you. Or it may not work in the same way it does for them. You can't go into this with those kind of expectations or you will likely be disappointed.

Plus, getting down on yourself will not help you. If you are not sticking to your plan to lose weight, you can try to use this to motivate and rededicate yourself but apart from that, that negative part of your brain is not your friend. It will tell you all kinds of things that aren't necessarily true. And certainly not productive. So if you find yourself deflated on weigh day, put it out of your mind and start working towards next week. You can do this. It's not gonna be easy but you can do it. Maybe it's harder for you than everybody else. Maybe you got dealt a bad hand and have issues other people do not. But you CAN do it! Don't let anyone, including yourself, tell you otherwise!!

On the flip side, if you step on the scale and see that your hard work has paid off, maybe you even get to your goal weight, GREAT! You should be very proud. Celebrate in some way even. But don't get too high either. Even if you do hit that goal, you probably want to sustain it. Or just because you had a good week or two or ten, doesn't mean you are "through the woods." Again, this is not easy. And it's not going to be easy. It is work and don't let complacency stop all of that great momentum you have been building up.

5) Monitor Your Energy Levels

No matter how you feel about food or particular macronutrients like carbs and protein, we use food for fuel. Changes to your diet will likely lead to changes in your energy levels. Especially at first. This is true of exercise as well. Can go both ways. Can give you more energy, can make you more tired, and once more, your body's initial reaction it may be different than once it gets settled in. The idea here is to just monitor it in some way. Maybe if you keep a food journal (highly recommended), you can just note what your overall energy level was that day. You don't have to spend a lot of time on this. Could even just rate it on a scale of 1-10 and write in a number for each day and then if there is anything additional to say, note that separately. Then compare it to what your weight numbers are (e.g., if you lost 5 pounds one week, did you feel more tired for most of that week, etc.) This is important, as it leads to my final thought, which is in itself very important:

6) Sustainability

I know there are outlier cases here where maybe somebody just wants to fit into their wedding dress and then doesn't really care what happens afterwards. Or maybe making a lower weight class for a fight that you will never compete at again or whatever but for the most part, I am guessing that if weight loss is your goal, that goal also involves keeping the weight off in the longer term. Does that mean you have to diet your whole life? No. Once you get to where you want to be, you may be able to sustain it with less restrictions but you have to be careful that the methods used to get there were not so extreme that any return to regular patterns won't destroy your hard work. So if you're doing intense workouts 5 days a week and eating only 1,200 calories a day (highly not recommended), you will almost definitely see relatively quick results but if you suddenly stop doing that, those results can reverse themselves just as quickly. Some people are able to very slowly taper something like this into a more sustainable lifestyle but plenty of others are not.

Even just for the duration of the diet period, if you are able to lose weight by making a significant dietary change but have absolutely no energy throughout the day or you find yourself getting sick more frequently or just generally feel down, I would not consider that sustainable. Time is also a major consideration. If you spend a lot of time planning meals, exercising or doing whatever you need to do for your plan, make sure you actually can make that time without it causing major stress and aggravation in your life. For these reasons and others, I would highly, highly recommend you talk to your doctor about your weight loss goals and let them know what you are planning to achieve those goals. 

You can continue to keep weighing yourself indefinitely, and if that helps keep you in-line without adding extra stress and anxiety, great! But if I were you, I'd suggest doing it a lot less frequently. Like once a month. Or more. Or not at all. For me, personally, it is about those things I mentioned at the beginning. How your clothes fit, how you feel, etc. Pay attention to them and don't let numbers rule your life.

Was Boxing Better in the 80s?

A lot of things were better in the 80s - music, movies, general human relations to name a few. But a lot of things are way better now - hair care products, Yoda, serial television, cell phones, etc. What about boxing though? Was boxing better in the 80s vs. Now?  There were certainly some great boxers in the 80s and some great fights. Although when people talk about golden eras of boxing, the 1980s doesn't get brought up. It is true that the sport reached it's peak many years earlier, back in the 1920s, becoming almost like what football is now in terms of popularity, and continued to enjoy more cultural relevance through the next few decades, culminating with the great heavyweights of the 60s and 70s. And generally, when the heavyweight division is strong, people beyond the hardcore fans tend to care about boxing. This is why you will generally hear that boxing was best in the 70s (or 60s & 70s). 

Even in that decade though, while of course you had the likes of Muhammad Ali. Joe Frazier, and George Foreman, that was pretty much the heavyweight division for the 70s. Ken Norton and even Ron Lyle deserve honorable mention and Floyd Patterson was still fighting though not nearly the same guy he was in the 60s but I think people tend to forget how there really wasn't much else- even in the smaller weight divisions (though the later 70s saw the rise of Roberto Duran and Sugar Ray Leonard). The great thing about that era though was that everybody fought each other. Ali fought Joe Frazier 3 times, 2 of which were as classic as it gets. Ali fought Ken Norton 3 times as well. Foreman fought Frazier twice, Norton once, and of course there was the very famous Rumble in the Jungle with Foreman and Ali. This is not something that happens as much any more so boxing fans will always long for that golden era.

In the 80s, the heavyweight division was not as intriguing. The luminaries from the 70s were retired and/or faded. Muhammad Ali tried to make a slight comeback in the beginning of the decade but his fights against Larry Holmes and Trevor Berbick never should have been allowed to happen as Ali was a sad shell of his former self. Larry Holmes was the champ and his reign lasted longer than we had seen in a while- winning 48 fights in a row and leaving him one short of Rocky Marciano's record of 49 before he lost to Michael Spinks. Holmes beat some formidable fighters but certainly none of them were great. Boxing was starting to receive a backlash in the early 80s as well for being too violent. There were several high-profile deaths in the ring and there was even some talk of banning the sport entirely.

Mike Tyson emerged in the middle of the decade to revitalize boxing and bring a new generation of fans. It wasn't just that he won fights, it was the way he won them that captured everybody's attention. There were no legitimate challengers like in other great heavyweight eras but it didn't matter because Tyson was just so incredible, like a wrecking ball smashing through the division. Like nothing else we had ever seen before. George Foreman destroyed some people too, most notably Joe Frazier and Ken Norton, but it was not the same sudden, dynamic explosion of speed, power and technique that Tyson brought to the table. Although this was exciting and compelling, without great competition the heavyweight division was not going to continue to thrive, nor ever stack up to any other great decade.

What I think set the 80s apart, though, was how many great fighters we saw in the lighter weight classes became household names. There were the 4 Kings - Sugar Ray Leonard, Roberto Duran, Tommy Hearns, and Marvin Hagler - and also rising stars like Ray Mancini, Julio Ceasar Chavez, and Hector Camacho. Sugar Ray was at the top of heap in terms of popularity and many thought of him as the second coming of Ali- just in a smaller weight class. He also was surrounded by the other aforementioned kings, fought all of them, and won. The first fight against Duran, both against and Hearns and the one against Hagler were all classics. But the greatest fight of the decade (as well as one of the best ever) belongs to Hagler and Hearns in 1985. It was only a couple of rounds but there was more action than you might see in a year of fights, both men just looking to finish the fight from the first bell. You rarely see that kind of unrelenting intensity ever, especially from 2 Hall-of-Famers at the same time.

So the 80s had no shortage of special, exciting fighters but without the classic heavyweight pedigree, it can never be considered one of the top decades in boxing. But how does that compare to now? Going back to my original question, is boxing better now than it was then? I could go on and on about the state of boxing currently and there are plenty of criticism to be had but I will say this for the modern era - there is LOT of talent. Well, at least there is a lot of talent in all of the weight classes except for the one that matters the most. It is true that Tyson Fury has breathed life into the heavyweight division, as he is a very interesting character, an extremely talented, smart boxer and at his size with his movement, would present a matchup problem for any great heavyweight from any era but at the same time, has not had a significant challenge to keep the sport more relevant. And he's been the only compelling heavyweight for the last 20 or so years, in my opinion.

Just like the 80s though, the true talent is in the smaller weight classes now. Except even smaller. Naoya Inoue is absolutely brilliant and easily my favorite fighter of this time and he competes at 118 pounds. Then there are a ton of exciting fighters in that 120-160 pound divisions. Vasiliy Lomachenko and Canelo Alvarez are most definitely going to end up in the Hall of Fame and there may be plenty of others from this era when it is all said and done. The biggest problem though, besides the lack of exciting heavyweights, is that there are now more weight classes than ever as well as 4 different sanctioning bodies. So we can have over 60 different people holding recognized, championship belts at a given time. That's just in men's boxing. Women's boxing has really emerged and we are starting to see some amazing talent there too but it might be too splintered for your average layperson to really get into, especially now that we have MMA in the mix as well. That's kind of the key for a sport to take off. It has to appeal to mass audience. It can't just be the hardcore fans that follow it, it has to cross over into cultural relevance. And boxing does NOT have that now, by any stretch of the imagination.

To summarize, boxing in the 80s had more cross-over appeal, probably had more classic fighters, and I would say had more overall entertainment value than boxing does now. Currently though, there is certainly more talent, far more diverse talent, and some great female fighters worth watching. So in my opinion, given all of those things, the winner and still champion is....The 1980s!  To be fair though, we won't really have a good perspective on it until some more time has passed. Plus I grew up in the 80s so had a different viewpoint than I do now. But c'mon, you can't tell me that as great as any of these people are now, we will ever have another Mike Tyson, another Sugar Ray, Camacho, Hearns, etc. Because that was another great things about the 80s - characters. You could even say that it was the decade of pop cultural characters that will never be duplicated, although I will admit, now that I have seen Baby Yoda, I can never go back to looking at Old Yoda again.

How Hard Does Superman Punch?

According to Google, Superman can lift about 2 billion tons. Not sure we're talking about a dead lift,
bench press or bicep curls but it is safe to say he is pretty strong. So what would happen if he, or anyone with super strength, punched you in the face? Your head would literally explode, right? Well, based solely on super strength, nothing very different than being punched by another person of the same size/mass. I am not kidding either. Read on, true believers!

There are a lot of factors that go into punching hard but physical strength alone is far less significant. As we know, Force = Mass x Acceleration. Yes, we do use physical strength to produce that acceleration but it requires a different kind of strength than we use to lift things and pull things. The person who holds the squat world record cannot jump super high. It uses the same muscles, involves pushing off the ground, but requires two totally different types of muscle fibers.

Or you can think of it like being hit by a car. Even if the largest, heaviest vehicle were to run into you at 1 mph. it would push you for sure but you would not be hurt. Even at 5 or 10 mph, the result would be a strong push not much damage from the impact itself. As the car starts to go faster, the impact increases exponentially. A punch is really the same thing. You could simply extend your hand and won't create power or hurt anybody, no matter how strong you are, unless your fist is traveling fast when it lands.

And yes, I know Superman is very fast, too. Google also says that nowadays, he can move faster than the speed of light. And it doesn't seem to take him long to get up to that speed. So going back to the original question, a punch from Superman would kill you but not because of his super strength. It would be his speed/acceleration that did it. So if you are ever watching a movie where someone with super strength punches someone else and they go flying or they punch a wall, you can be a nerd and say that is not accurate if the punch travels at normal speed because strength on its own means nothing. A punch from Superman would be imperceptible. You'd never see it and the result would be an instantaneous explosion. 

Then there are other factors still that make a punch powerful. Skeletal alignment is something I think gets overlooked (which is probably why I talk about it a lot). Not just because our bones are strong but because we are able to put our center of mass more properly. For example, if you were to throw a cross and position and time it so that your fist, wrist, elbow, shoulder, right hip and knee were all in perfect alignment, your cross is going to be a lot more powerful than if your right elbow is away from your body and not in alignment with the shoulder. The momentum from your center-of-mass gets lost the further your hand drifts away from it. This is another case where classic strength lifts differ from punches. If you were going to do a push up or bench press, you would want your elbows away from the body and out to the side but it is considerably weaker to throw punches like this.

There is also timing and accuracy too. Does the punch land at the optimal time and optimal place? Sometimes you will see knockouts or knockouts that look almost fake. Ali-Liston 2 is a classic example. People thought (and still think) that it was fixed and Liston took a dive. But it is very possible that punch hurt him badly, despite looking off-balance and not particularly powerful, because the placement and timing were perfect. If someone moves into a punch, it is going to multiply its effect significantly, as does them not seeing the punch coming at all. Even when someone gets hit flush, they can withstand better just by knowing that it is coming. Our body does a lot of unconscious things to prepare for impact but if you never see the punch, it doesn't need to be that solid of a shot to finish the fight.

But if all these things are true, why was someone like George Foreman a power puncher, even in his 40s? His strikes were never particularly quick or explosive. What he lacked in the acceleration part of the equation, he made up for in mass. And mass does make a difference, which is why they have weight classes in boxing. It's not just your overall body weight though, it is also how you use that mass. George was able to shift his weight perfectly into his punches, as I touched on when I discussed skeletal alignment above. So well-thrown mass with a smaller acceleration modifier can do plenty of damage but if you can, do both! Will you be able to hit as hard as Superman? Maybe not, but definitely harder than any actor who plays Superman, or even just the strongest human on this planet.