Boxers Who Should Have a Movie

Speaking of the movie Creed 3, we saw a trailer for a new biopic about George Foreman that definitely looks worth watching, just called Big George Foreman. Plenty of real life boxers have seen feature-length movies (as opposed to TV or documentary) of their lives but it's actually pretty surprising how many great boxers have never been portrayed as the main character on the silver screens: Sugar Ray Robinson (though there is talk of one going into production soon), Jack Dempsey, Jack Johnson, Rocky Marciano, Sugar Ray Leonard and plenty of others. Even Joe Louis hasn't had a film made about him in 70 years. Not that Hollywood is just churning out boxer pics left and right but fighters do make for interesting cinematic subjects. Their lives are generally tough, they do a job 99.9999999% of the population in their right minds would be afraid to do (rightly so) and can be a great model for admirable qualities like determination, perseverance and heart, triumphing over adversity.

This got me thinking about boxers who I would like to see in the movies. I'd certainly watch any from the abovementioned list but Jack Dempsey might be my top pick just because of how important he was to the sport and our culture at the time. I'm very surprised no one has even attempted this, outside of a made-for-TV movie starring Treat Williams and Sally Kellerman. Dempsey also had that classic, handsome, American icon look so you'd get a lot of high-profile actors wanting to play him and probably wouldn't have trouble filling the seats.

Although the much bigger shock is that there is no high-budget theatrical version of the Jack Johnson story. He broke the color barrier many many years before Jackie Robinson and Marion Motley, faced even more scrutiny marrying multiple white women, and also opened some interracial night clubs (one later became the Cotton Club after Johnson sold it). He faced scrutiny from both blacks and whites at the time, lived a life mired in controversy, had a professional life outside of boxing and even spent time in prison. If a movie studio wants lots of money and at least a few Oscars, this one seems to be pretty much tee'd up. 

Plus, very few people know what Jack Johnson looks like and even less know what he sounded like so we would all go in with no expectations of the man himself. This gets the filmmakers around the problem that I, as a boxing fan, have when they cast actors to play boxers. I could never get past Will Smith in Ali. Not that he did a bad job at all, he did as well as anyone could to encapsulate the Ali persona but it all came through a Will Smith filter. I had the same problem with the Tyson series on Hulu recently. The actor did a fine job but just like Ali, Mike Tyson is such a truly unique character that no one else can really play him but him. I don't have a problem with them not being to pull off the boxing part, it's just that I have such a strong association with these fighters that I can't get immersed into the story when I only see the actor, especially a really well-known one.

So if I'm a studio head, I will definitely greenlight the Jack Johnson biopic. Sugar Ray Leonard is another one of the high-profile boxers I'd like to see up on screen too. I'm a little afraid of the paradigm with Ali and Tyson I mentioned above since I have a strong association with Leonard too but he was played by Usher in the Roberto Duran film (Hands of Stone) and even though he looked nothing like Sugar Ray, I still wasn't put off by it. So maybe I could handle a whole film about his life with an actor playing him. Plus we'd get to see the other 3 kings - Hagler, Hearns and Duran - since their careers were so intertwined. Sugar Ray was a golden boy for sure but he had his share of issues in his personal life and I wondering if that is something he would want to see portrayed in a movie. I hate to say it but the best version of this story might have to come after Ray Leonard has passed on.

Speaking of Golden Boys, I expect an Oscar de la Hoya movie will emerge at some point, but maybe also down the road as Oscar's professional life is still playing out.

One much lower-profile fighter who I think has an interesting life's story is Matthew Saad Muhammed. He was left on the steps of a church as an infant, taken in by nuns, eventually adopted, and turned into one of the more exciting, underrated fighters of the 70s and 80s. His fights were exciting and often involved comebacks, perfect for a movie. He even fought in one of the very early, pre-UFC MMA-type bouts in 1991 against a grappler who submitted him in under a minute. Unfortunately, he was one of those athletes who lost all of his money and declared bankruptcy, eventually becoming homeless on the streets of Philadelphia. So it wouldn't exactly be the happiest of endings but still inspiring to see him go from rags to riches, before eventually going back to rags.

Then there are plenty of current fighters who might one day make for an interesting movie in the future. Tyson Fury, Floyd Mayweather Jr., hell even the Paul brothers' legacy will probably be immortalized on film after their story comes to an end. One thing's for sure that whoever gets a movie, I will be there to watch it. I will watch any movie about a fictitious boxer too. In fact, if I'm being totally honest, the first boxing hero/inspiration was none other than Rocky Balboa himself. Who knows where I would be without him!

The Double-Cross Guard in Creed 3 - Is That A Thing???

If you've seen the movie, Creed 3, you may notice that the friend/opponent character of Dame Anderson has a somewhat interesting boxing style (at least, after he returns from prison - when they show a younger Anderson fighting before prison, his style is relatively standard). Most notably, he uses something called the double-cross arm guard where he brings both hands across his face at 90-degree angles, creating almost a wall in front of his head. It looks cool and it is one of the rare times where a boxing movie actually was able to accentuate a specific style in a noticeable way.

But is it actually a legitimate defensive maneuver for boxing? The short answer is yes, at least that it used to be, but there are also multiple versions of it that differ from what we saw in the movie. From what I remember, Dame Anderson's double-cross guard was very much parallel with the ground, meaning his arms were up and both elbows were parallel with both shoulders. Archie Moore - heavyweight champ from 1952-1963 with a knockout record that will almost definitely never be broken - popularized a version of this defense but he generally had hips and shoulders tilted so that his arms were on more of a 45-degree axis, which covered not just his head but the right side of his body as well. Ken Norton utilized a version of it as well in the 70s and it was most famously used by George Foreman later in his career, who almost definitely learned it directly from Archie Moore, who was one of his trainers. The Foreman version was probably the most similar to Dame's in the movie as he really made it into a big wall, whereas Moore and Norton combined it more with head movement and footwork.

There were other boxers who used it too but in general, the double-cross guard is relatively rare. The reason is probably somewhat obvious - you are not in a great position to throw punches back when your arms are crossed. Of course the 3 heavyweights I mentioned were incredibly successful but if it were something generally effective, we'd all be using it a lot more than we do now (can't think of anyone who does currently). It should also be noted that the examples I gave were heavyweights, which makes a little more sense. Smaller, faster fighters would have a very hard time pulling it off against other smaller, faster fighters. It just takes too much time to get your hands into position and again, takes time to get your hands back to a good place to punch from. (And then note that in boxing, you are not allowed to strike with the back of your hand or your elbows so you couldn't pull off any kind of a backhanded strike).

The big pro to using this defense is that it gives you extra layers of protection and can cover a pretty big area. Punches can be blocked with the shoulder, elbows or hands. In fact in a non-boxing street self-defense scenario, it is kind of similar to something I teach called "Dracula's Cape", where you completely cover the right side of your face with the right shoulder, the front of your face with the right elbow, and then your left arm is in tight, answer-the-phone guard, adding extra protection to the left side (as most people are right-handed and take big, wild swings with their dominant hand in a street fight).

The Dame Anderson version in the movie though, was so high that it would have been really easy for someone to land a punch to the body. Not only because it was uncovered but you could use your non punching hand to pin his elbows in place for a split second so that he couldn't even try to react and defend low. But Archie Moore and Ken Norton had this solved by tilting their guard to be able to better adjust to blocking body punches.

The Philly Shell defense made famous by Floyd Mayweather involves another version of the cross guard but inside of both hands crossing over each other, only one crosses over to defend the other side of his face or body. This means the other can potentially counter but there is also less protection too. And it comes back to a general problem that if you cross one hand over to the other side of your body, the other side is unprotected and it will take additional, important milliseconds to get it back. Floyd made it work with elite-level reflexes, head movement, and a non-aggressive approach and as I've spoken about many times before, I do not think this a good model for someone who is not yet a good, well-rounded boxer with experience fighting in a more traditional guard. But just like the Dame Anderson double-cross guard in Creed 3, it looks kind of cool so I understand people new to boxing wanting to check it out.

I would say that this is kind of true for everything in a way. In boxing, and in life. Certain fighters will do some pretty cool moves, sometimes breaking the rules and making it work. Sometimes they can be really fun to emulate too. You just want to make sure you have a good, unconscious understanding of the rules and basic technique before incorporating anything that might lead to bad habits or other problems.

Why Do We Do Core?

In our club, we end every boxing session with a relatively brief-but-intense set of core exercises. Every class. There are several reasons why we do this - as somewhat of a cooldown after an even more intense series of boxing rounds, it's a good transition into stretching, we like to torture people, but most importantly, because it makes you a much stronger boxer.

Oftentimes when people think about their core, they think about their front abdominal muscles. The 6-pack. But the core goes all the way around, 360 degrees, like one of those giant, championship belts. I even like to include the gluteal muscle group as part of the core and it is the most important muscle group for boxing. The function of our core is really to connect the lower and upper body together. When throwing punches, most of that power should originate from the lower half and it will be translated to the upper half through one's core. Rotation of the hips and trunk are critical, so without a strong core, any other strength you have will not convert to power. This requires all the muscles in that core belt to be strong.

I've said many times that having gym strength and functional strength can be two very different things. Gym strength - or at least how the majority of gym-goers train - is about lifting balanced loads of weight on single planes of motion at a steady pace. Most work all the different muscle groups with different lifts but those three above-mentioned points remain the same. This does not necessarily create functional strength. It can certainly help, but the strength you need for activities of daily life and sports often does NOT involve balanced loads, on a single plane of motion, at a steady, repeated pace. And those activities almost always involve the core. Picking up groceries and putting them away, moving boxes, shoveling snow, raking leaves, cleaning things, walking a dog, I could go on and on. We don't just isolate a muscle group to do these things. Like boxing, they often involve starting with the lower body and transferring to the upper, with the core being our conduit.

Core strength also helps us with general body control - holding a posture or changing direction, which is something we certainly need in daily life and in any sport. In fact, body control is probably the most important attribute for sports but most underrated because it cannot be easily measured like speed and strength or any of the other criteria we use to rate athletes. Jerry Rice and Michael Jordan are examples of athletes at the top of their respective professions but never because of their measurables. There was certainly a mental part too, especially with Jordan, but I believe it was simply the ability to control their own bodies that set them apart from everybody else. Coordination is key but you need the functional strength to apply it properly.

Along those lines, a stronger core will help prevent injuries as well. While not as sexy as having a chiseled, six-pack, injury prevention is a big deal and something everyone, young or older, should train for. Having poor core strength means less postural control and the more chance things are being moved in a way they shouldn't, as well as repeated, unbalanced stress on joints from those postural imbalances.

When people see boxers doing things like sit-ups and other core work, they often think this is to build the abs up so they can better take punches to the body. This is somewhat true (although strengthening and hardening are not the same thing) but it's not just about taking a punch to the stomach, it is about taking punches in general. Just as a strong core gives you better body control, you can also better move with a punch if you have to, OR maintain better base stability so that you don't get as tossed around/ragdoll'd after getting hit.

So every time you work your core, remember that you are making your punches stronger, making yourself functionally stronger, improving your overall body control, helping to prevent future injuries, and even making yourself better able to take a punch. And like any exercise component, it won't happen unless you MAKE the time for it to happen so that is why we always devote the last part of our workout to this critical piece of the fitness puzzle!

 

The Way of the Fist

I just finished watching the Netflix series, Cobra Kai, for the second time. This time with my kids and it made me like the series even more. For those of you who don't know, Cobra Kai is a spin-off of the Karate Kid movies from the 80s, featuring the bad guy in the first film as a now middle-aged man who finds himself by teaching karate to kids. You don't have to have any connection to the original films to enjoy the series but it is nice, as you will appreciate all of the homages and in-jokes they have for fans.

I'm not going to go into the plot too much more but for the point of this post, I will say that the aforementioned bad guy from the 80s movies, Johnny, starts up his own dojo under the name, "Cobra Kai." It was the dojo/system he trained at as a kid. The Cobra Cai motto is "Strike first, strike hard, no mercy" and their general ideology is to be more badass and tough, as opposed to the gentler, more defensive-minded, more traditional karate styles. 

The show isn't really able to differentiate the styles - it's more of just a story conceit - but I am seeing somewhat of a clearer paradigm in real life, when it comes to other boxing gyms/trainers. The vast majority of people who come to our club have never boxed before but there definitely is a subset who come in with previous boxing experience, some even significant experience. What I have noticed and experienced at other boxing gyms (and viewed online) is that during heavy bag workouts, most people do not throw particularly powerful, explosive strikes. There are plenty of exceptions, for sure, and I am not saying this to criticize other gyms or trainers at all. It's just a stylistic thing. We've had amateur boxers come to the club and tap/touch up the bag for 10 rounds, never really exploding with speed or power.

To me, this is somewhat strange, as the heavy bag is the absolute best tool to practice power and there is certainly nothing stopping you from working on your speed as well. I realize I am not the only genius to have figured that out and there are reasons that I often see other boxers go light (light by my standards). In this post, I am going to go through some of those reasons and not rebut them, as they are certainly legitimate and logical, but explain my particular take on them.

#1) Not all punches in boxing are meant to be particularly hard or fast

As a single statement, this is absolutely true. There are set-up punches, throwaway punches, distance-gauging punches, rhythm punches, off-speed punches in an effort to catch your opponent expecting something different, and more. Then of course, you throw fast punches and hard punches. Boxing is all about shifting gears, I like to say. Changing states suddenly, creating rhythms and breaking rhythms. It is one of the things that makes it so exhausting. But you still have to switch gears. What I often see at plenty of gyms and people coming from other gyms is really just one gear. And it's rarely powerful or fast. Can everybody hit really hard or punch really fast? Relative to them, yes! We ALL have gears. Some people's power gear is harder than someone else’s, but you can and absolutely should make that state change. Doesn't matter how old you are or what kind of shape you are in. This is the way you develop speed and power - by practicing it! Again, the heavy bag is the perfect opportunity for this.

#2) If I just slug it out and go for power, my technique will suffer and I really want to focus on that

When hearing people philosophize about boxing (or anything), there is often a very binary approach to their analyses. It is either this OR this, with both options being mutually exclusive. Sure, you could throw wild, looping, haymaker punches with poor technique when going for power but you certainly don't have to. It is very possible to throw heavy, powerful punches with perfect technique. Watch Mike Tyson in the 80s. 

Not only that, proper technique translates to power. When you learn how to throw a lead hook properly, it can end up being the hardest punch you throw, despite being on your non-dominant hand. This is purely because of  technique. Shifting your weight, getting your elbow behind the punch, getting your hips slightly ahead of your hands and then catching up at the end are all technical cues that will make your hook significantly more powerful. This is true for everything. To a lesser degree with speed but still true. Like for instance if you were to drop your hand every time you were about to throw a jab, that jab would not travel as fast as a perfectly straight shot. Same if you were too tense in your arm. Or you let your elbow flare out. Proper technique = Power; proper technique = Speed.

#3) If I just slug it out and go for power, I will be more open for counter-punches

This is a truer version of #2 above. Every time you throw a punch when facing your opponent in striking distance, you are open for a counter. The more you physically commit to that punch, the window of time you are open tends to increase. This cannot be changed. What you can change is the size of your window and there are things you can do to mitigate that risk. Again, watch Mike Tyson in the 80s. He was vicious and explosive but his style was a defensive style and his constant head movement and quickness made him difficult to tag.

Better technique can certainly help here too. If you throw a cross and bring your rear hand shoulder up to your cheek, you are better covered for a potential hook counter. If you keep your non-punching hand up, even better. If you throw long, looping hooks like George Foreman, they are slower and easier to see coming. If you throw shorter, tighter hooks like Joe Frazier, they are much harder to spot and defend.

There are plenty of great boxers who fight cautiously and never really commit or open up. You can certainly be one of those boxers too if that really matches your abilities but at the very least, from a workout perspective, you will get so much more out of trying to box like Mike Tyson (in the 80s) than Floyd Mayweather Jr. post 2001.

#4) If I just slug it out and go for power or throw lighting-fast quick punches, I will gas myself out and not be able to maintain that pace

This is certainly true if you allow it to be true. If you don't push yourself and go beyond your limits, you will never increase those limits. Explosive punching is very tiring, yes, especially if you include the necessary quick head movement and footwork. But would be amazed what you can do to improve your ventilatory threshold and glycolytic energy systems. The problem is that people concede this WAY too easily. Proper technique helps here too but the secret ingredient is pushing yourself/being pushed, getting out of your comfort zone and out of your pace. I have seen multiple people hit a heavy bag for 120 straight three-minute rounds with one-minute rests. That's 8 hours of almost non-stop boxing!!! And that's not just kind of noodling around or touching it up or anything. Going HARD for 120 rounds, throwing combos, using footwork, and doing non-stop rapid-fire burnouts. This would have been impossible for me to even imagine had I not seen it done multiple times. I can't even tell you how it's physically possible but nonetheless, completely possible.

Pushing beyond your limits is very difficult. It is uncomfortable. And most of us don't want to be uncomfortable. Plus, going beyond your limits may make you look bad. You may look tired. Your technique can/will suffer. The way to fix that is to train and push through. Otherwise, you won't get any better.

#5) Going too hard makes me more susceptible to injury

Perfectly logical. Could even be true but how much more susceptible does it make you? Does it HAVE to be that way. If your technique and equipment are good and you don't have any pre-existing issues, I would say the chance of injury on a heavy bag is pretty low. I've seen thousands and thousands of people do it over the years, including myself. There are other things you can do to mitigate injury too, like increase your grip and wrist strength, doing hand exercises before boxing, warming up proper, etc. I feel like the chances of injury punching a heavy bag is not even close to the chances doing exercises that more people do every day - running and lifting weights. Or sports and leisure activities like soccer and skiing. I hate to say it but if anyone is holding back for this reason, they are probably just using it as an excuse to either not work hard or learn the proper way to do it.

The general, overall mistake in a lot of the thinking here is believing that explosive speed and power, shifting into those gears, has to come at the expense of something else. It doesn't. You can truly have your cake and eat it too, you just have to put in the work and believe in yourself. 

So I guess to come full circle, I feel like our club has kind of a more Cobra Kai approach, but just without the evil. I believe that if you are learning how to box, you should learn how to throw punches with explosive power and speed, designed to hurt an opponent, to finish the fight. Not because I am a jerk and want anyone hurting anyone but because that is what professional boxing is all about, no matter how much purists want to argue otherwise. And, for the umpteenth time, throwing explosive punches with power and speed will get you a better workout than just staying in a low gear the entire time. I want to teach people how to box properly but more than that, I want to help them to get better. Better at the skill, in better shape, stronger, faster, more confident, more empowered, happier, and just feeling better in general. I believe that this is accomplished by striking fast, striking hard, and showing YOURSELF no mercy!

Learning Boxing in a Group Environment

Like anything else, there are many different ways to learn how to box. You can train 1-on-1 with a coach, you can do smaller group training with a coach/coaches, you can train on your own off of videos/books/etc., you can just lace up the gloves with a buddy and duke it out on your own based on your own respective knowledge of the sport. There are also plenty of different iterations and combinations as well. 

Obviously, some ways are far more effective than others. Maybe even infinitely more effective than those last two options I mentioned. Training 1-on-1 with a coach is usually the fastest way to learn boxing skills, provided of course that the coach is good. It can also be the best scenario for fitness training but not always. Depends a lot on the coach, the student and the program. 

I have seen hundreds of people learn in a group environment too. Certainly not as fast as 1-on-1 but still pretty darn fast, if the minds are willing. And there are many different ways group training can go down. I've learned systems where a group of brand new people all start at the exact same time, like a flight of classes where we develop together. I've done classes with different levels like Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced, etc. I've also done classes with all different experience and ability levels. 

For certain martial arts, the first two examples (which group people by experience) make a little more sense. There are cons to this approach too, especially in terms of availability but most martial arts have a LOT of different, specific techniques that are sometimes stacked on top of each other so it doesn't make sense to learn something like how to defend a certain weapon if you haven't done the unarmed defenses first.

Boxing is a little bit different though. It does not necessarily involve a ton of small, separate techniques. There are the basic punches with some variance, there are combinations, there is footwork, there is defense, there is clinch work/hand control, there is strategy, there is feinting, there are some different styles, but that is mainly it. That doesn't mean you can learn it all super easily- there is literally infinite nuance in each of those categories, but compared to another martial art like say, Tae Kwon Do, just their list of all the different kicks could fill a page. 

I have seen people learn boxing efficiently and effectively in an all-levels heavy bag class environment. Sometimes there are more advanced techniques that might be a little much for a brand new person to take in, but exposing them to it is certainly not a detriment, and while they may not be able to execute the technique flawlessly, they can still throw punches, take steps, etc. Whereas if you were taking judo, for example, and you attempted to pull off a shoulder throw your first day, you likely wouldn't be able to get it started (shoulder throws are MUCH harder than they look!). 

Then on the flip side, there is no boxer who is just too damn good to be throwing jabs, crosses, hooks, etc. and working basic defenses on the heavy bag with other folks of different levels. No one. And anyone who thinks that way is very undereducated and probably a little scared too. Sure, there are different things to train in boxing you would want to do if you are competing/training to compete but the basic stuff never changes, and you are never good enough. It's not like when you get to a certain level, you are able to learn this special, secret uppercut that we can't teach to the newbies. Instead you just make your basic uppercuts better and once again, there is always more stuff to improve. In fact, the more you learn and practice, the more you realize there is to learn. You learn these things by being taught but also practicing over and over and over and over again.

One thing I have seen is that many people have it in their minds that they can't really learn in a fast-paced, cardio-intensive group environment where they are thrown into the mix. It makes sense too. There are plenty of things you almost definitely can't learn like that. Sewing, for one. Or again, even certain traditional martial arts. Or something like weightlifting, where the potential for injury is much higher. But boxing, at least non-competitive boxing, is different. I know because I have seen it happen with all different types of people. Some in shape, some not. Some athletic, some not. Some relatively young, some not.

The only obstacle, most of the time, is their mindset. People convince themselves that they can't do it, or that it's too hard, or that the environment is not conducive to learning. I've tried on several occasions to create a Beginner type of boxing class and have noticed that nothing really changes for brand new boxers. Those who struggle will struggle in a simpler class too, they just won't learn as quickly. 

Changing your mindset isn't always easy though, and it can be very hard to feel uncoordinated and like you don't know what you're doing. The more you accept those things and understand that it is all part of the learning process, the better things will go. Ever watch a baby try to stand up and take their first steps? It ain't pretty. They stumble and fall and stumble and fall until one day, they can stand up and take a few steps. Those aren't very graceful either but it builds a foundation that can eventually take them anywhere they want to go. But the baby has no problem with trying and falling down. Or stumbling and looking silly. 

So whether you are learning how to box- or just about anything- I think that last point is pretty key right there. Be okay with getting it wrong, maybe feeling like you look a little silly as you try to put these awkward, foreign movements together. Yes, it might be tougher to do in a group setting but if you can be comfortable being uncomfortable for a while, you're going to learn it quickly!