Are Pumpkins Healthy?

If I were to keep a food journal of everything I eat in the month of October, reading it would be like the scene in that movie, The Shining, where Wendy Torrance finally discovers her husband's manuscript and realizes just how far gone he is. I make some pretty terrible food choices this time of year. Candy corn and candy corn variants (harvest corn, mellowcreme pumpkins and those Brach's caramel apples) are part of my daily diet. I eat other candy too, long before the trick or treating begins. I love pumpkin spice EVERYTHING. Anything sweet you can make with pumpkin spice or any fall flavoring, I will eat or drink. Even a plain old cookie in the shape of a pumpkin or skull or anything seasonal usually will get consumed too. Of course there are also donuts, pie, cider and I could just keep on going but you probably get the point. And you also probably know that none of this stuff is healthy. 

But did you know that pumpkins themselves ARE actually quite healthy? It's true - they are low in calories but high in vitamins, minerals, antioxidants and other good stuff including:

• Vitamin A
• Vitamin C
• Vitamin E
• Riboflavin
• Potassium
• Copper
• Manganese
• Thiamin
• Vitamin B-6
• Folate
• Pantothenic Acid
• Niacin
• Iron
• Magnesium
• Phosphorus
• Beta Carotene
• Fiber

These promote eye, skin, heart and metabolic health. Eating pumpkin can also help reduce blood pressure, control diabetes. There are studies that even show how Beta Carotene, something pumpkins are rich in, can reduce your risk of cancer!

So does this mean that some part of my usual October diet actually has some nutritional value? Unfortunately no. Most things that are pumpkin spice-flavored contain little to no pumpkin. And even some things that do contain pumpkin more than cancel themselves out with sugar and other empty calories. Unless you are a big squash fan, eating pumpkin on its own is not particularly exciting. But there are plenty of recipes out there nowadays that are tasty and nutritious.

Then there are also pumpkin seeds, which are pretty rich in iron, zinc, magnesium, antioxidants and even some protein. Toasted and salted pumpkin seeds make for a pretty decent snack and since they do not exactly chew easily, they can be good option if you find yourself hungry but don't plan on eating your next meal for a while and don't want to snack on something unhealthy that you would consume quickly.

Thus, if you are looking to make some healthier food choices and wondering what you should do, give pumpkins a real shot this season. Or at least don't feel quite as bad about having a slice of pumpkin pie on Thanksgiving. And if you're like me and want to get generally back on track with your diet this month yet still keep the fall flavors going, pumpkin may be part of the solution!

What is the Punch Numbering System & Why Don't We Use it Exclusively?

If you've been to classes at our club, you may have occasionally heard us calling out a combination like, "Jab-cross-lead hook-cross" and then following it up with numbers - "1-2-3-2.” Or maybe you've trained somewhere that uses only numbers for punch combinations or heard them referenced in some other way.

It is true that many boxing gyms throughout the country and world use a number system to call for punches. So instead of saying "jab,” they would say "1" to call that punch. It's like a form of shorthand. Saying something with more syllables like "lead uppercut" takes longer to say than just "5.” Makes good sense, especially when training someone 1-on-1 or even a group of people starting with the same skill/experience level. For anything else, I find it less useful and there are several reasons.

First, it is not universal. Different gyms have different numbering systems. Probably the most common looks like this:

1 - jab

2 - cross

3 - lead hook

4 - rear hook

5 - lead uppercut

6 - rear uppercut

But I have seen a bit of variation here and not just from outlier gyms no one has ever heard of. Pedro Diaz, for example, has a system that looks like this:

1 - jab

2 - cross

3 - lead uppercut to the body

4 - rear uppercut to the body

5 - lead hook

6 - rear hook

(goes on to 12)

I have also seen systems where #4 is the rear uppercut, some where it is the overhand, some where #3 is a hook to the body and so on. But then there are also more than just 6 punches. What about the overhand? Any of those punches to the body? Specifically the liver shot? Some systems have separate numbers for all of them. Some just say something like "3 to the body,” which tends to defeat the purpose of the number system (brevity). And as the numbers go above 6, they vary even more widely. Cus D'amato's system apparently looked like this!

1 - lead hook

2 - rear hook

3 - lead uppercut

4 - rear uppercut

5- liver shot

6 - spleen punch

7 - jab

(and so on)

In any case, one doesn't necessarily need a universal number system. Can just be whatever your trainers and coaches like. But for learning, I like the idea of not being locked into something you can't take with you if you move, go to a different gym, whatever. It is true that some people might call a cross a "straight right hand" but for the most part, in English, punch names are universal.

Though the names themselves may not be the greatest names we could give each punch, I do like that many of them are somewhat self-descriptive. If you tell someone brand new to throw an uppercut, without any training or experience even watching boxing, most will assume that the punch comes at somewhat of an upward trajectory. "Upper,”  right? It's in the name. I often tell people that when they throw hooks, they are making their arm into a hook shape and in the case of the lead side, actually pulling their lower body weight back, like hooking something in. Overhand comes over the top, the liver shot goes to the liver, lead side is your front side, rear side is your back side, etc. Jab and cross aren't particularly descriptive but at least they are the only ones. And calling them 1 and 2 respectively brings to mind another numbering system some of us use for the bathroom.

Now if someone brand new has watched boxing or MMA or even seen a movie/show where they reference boxing or punching in some way, it is very possible that they have heard some of these terms before. Maybe they didn't pay a whole lot of attention but the words are floating around in their mind somewhere. By contrast, it is very unlikely that they have heard the numbering system referenced. Announcers will occasionally mention the numbers but most of the time, it is just the word. Probably about the closest thing your average layperson may have been exposed to is 'the ol' 1-2" referring to a jab-cross, although they may not realize what that means exactly.

The other thing with teaching people new to boxing the number system is that it generally means I have to teach them two things instead of one, right off the bat. So if I'm showing punches and say, "Alright, this punch is called the jab, you're going to blah blah blah (explaining and showing the jab), and we are going to refer to this punch as #1", that becomes two names for one thing. Now it is possible that I never say the word, "jab". It could just be the 1 so I am only teaching them one name for everything but I think that gets awkward in terms of class presentation. Again though, working with someone 1-on-1 or a group who all starts at the same time and will continue for the same time, I see how this can be worth doing.

So, having something more universal, more self-descriptive, with some potential previous awareness (however small) and limiting the amount of terminology to the absolutely minimum are reasons why I prefer to use punch names when calling for combinations and drills. As mentioned earlier, you will often hear me use numbers as well, for anyone familiar with those and to just get more experienced students familiar with them too.

None of this is meant to say that I think teaching people the numbering system is bad or coaches shouldn't do it. We all need to do what we think is best for our particular students in our particular teaching formats. What I would raise objection to is anyone who thinks the numbering system is something significantly better or more authentic. It is shorthand, that is all. An often faster way to call for punches. Anyone who tries to tell you that it is anything else, and that everyone should use it, and anyone who doesn't, sucks, is full of #2 (if you catch my drift).

The Punch That Doesn't Exist?

I have said before that the lead hook is the most dangerous punch in boxing because it is the punch you are the least likely to see coming, in my opinion. The rear hook, on the other hand (literally), is a different story. It is easier to see coming, takes longer to arrive at its target than a straight right and can mostly only land at close range.

Probably because of reasons like these, I have heard boxers and boxing coaches alike not only say that they don't ever throw the rear hook (to the head) but that it doesn't even exist! I doubt they mean it sincerely but nonetheless, people seemingly in the know continue to express this viewpoint. Maybe you've heard something like that too or read it on the internet. Even in some punch numbering systems, the rear hook doesn't appear in the #4 spot as it does in others.

Of course if you have ever watched a boxing card on TV and tried to pay attention to what punches are thrown, you will notice this is not true at all. You will see boxers throw hooks to the head with their dominant, power hand. It is true that they throw fewer rear hooks than many other punches but they certainly do happen. Especially in the clinch or close range scenarios.

And it's not just that we see them in fights, but some very high profile KOs, still talked about to this day, were rear hook KOs like:

• Rocky Marciano's famous "Sunday Punch" vs. Jersey Joe Walcott
• Manny Pacquiao's brutal KO of Ricky Hatton
• Then Manny Pacquiao was KO'd in even more brutal fashion by running into Juan Manuel Marquez' rear hook
• One of Canelo's greatest moment was his rear hook KO over James Kirkland
• Even Jake Paul landed one of the cleanest rear hooks you will ever see against Tyron Woodley

And there are plenty more. Yet sometimes the announcers are even a little complicit in this and refer to a rear hook punch as the overhand right, even when it has no overhand trajectory at all (some even coming slightly upwards). The fighters themselves will do this too. Jake Paul called his punch an overhand that took down Tyron Woodley immediately afterwards. Maybe you could argue that some of these shots are not pitch perfect, 90-degree angle rear hooks but such is the case with plenty of lead hooks too and you would NEVER hear an announcer or fighter refer to them any differently. 

So is there some conspiracy against calling a rear/right hook a "hook"? I am sure there isn't but this has always perplexed me. My guess is that it was one of those old boxing tenets that just kind of floated around for years and years but wasn't worth challenging out loud so people just fell into not acknowledging it at all. If you've heard some boxing coach say there are no rear hooks or you should never throw rear hooks, you may just simply be conditioned into not talking about them, despite what we you clearly see in the ring.

One thing I will acknowledge is that punches are thrown very fast and in the heat of the moment, it can be really hard to even tell what was thrown. We often have to watch a replay or two, especially when dissecting combinations. And as the rear hook is shorter, bent-arm punch, it is much harder to perceive than something like a jab. That can also be why it works in certain cases too. You're in close, punches are flying, your opponent sees your rear hand coming and braces for a cross but you come around their guard and hit them in the side of the jaw or temple area. The rear hook is often the most powerful punch that someone can throw. It doesn't need to be a haymaker like in the movies or a street fight. It can be short, explosive and powerful, travelling a little farther than a lead hook for more force and being on your dominant hand, potentially thrown with more coordination.

Then of course there are rear hooks to the body that are more commonly thrown and plenty effective . I feel like we should start acknowledging rear hooks and end the stigma that they are not useful or even more preposterous, don't exist at all. The next time you hear someone make a cavalier statement like this, tell them to watch a full boxing card, go to YouTube, or better yet, tell Ricky Hatton or Manny Pacquiao or James Kirkland or multiple Roy Jones Jr. opponents that the punch that knocked them out so brutally is not actually real.

Do Pro Boxers Train To Throw Specific Combinations?

This is a good question and something I have been asked several times. If you train in boxing for
fitness, chances are you throwing specific combinations of punches on the heavy bag, mitts, air, etc. This is a great way to train as the alternative is just winging it and I can 100% guarantee you that winging it will NOT significantly improve your boxing skills or your fitness. Even if you are an accomplished boxer, there needs to be a specific goal in your training and without measurable parameters, there is no way to track progression. But do boxers training for a particular fight practice throwing combinations?

The answer is generally "yes" but to varying degrees, based on the fighter and their opponent. While combinations are infinite, there are probably about 8-10 you see thrown over and over again in a fight. Professional fighters throw these a lot with their coaches on the mitts and sometimes the bag as well. When they show boxers backstage before a fight, you will often see them doing this very thing. Basic combos and counters with their trainer on the mitts.

There are some (not many), who rarely throw combinations in a fight and if they do, the combos are super short. Instead they throw mostly single punches. Floyd Mayweather Jr. is the main example and obviously, he makes this work for him and his style but like most everything else Floyd does, this is not a great way to learn. Combinations teach us how to flow between strikes, set up bigger strikes, create openings and keep our opponents off-balance and overwhelmed, as well as simply hit them more. When you throw a punch at someone, they will generally react in some way. Going off this reaction allows an opportunity for another punch and then another, which keeps you in control of the fight.

Unless the opponent is hurt and/or on the ropes, most pro boxers rarely throw longer combinations (more than 3-4 punches) because their opponents tend to move by then, punch back, etc. but there is still plenty of value in practicing longer combinations for the same reasons I mentioned above. You never know at any given time what will be open so learning how to transition efficiently from punch to punch will help you in all scenarios. As punches are meant to flow together, combinations can help you better understand the mechanics behind a single punch. Like for instance if you were to practice throwing a lead body shot-lead uppercut-lead hook combination, it would make each one of those punches on their own better than if you just practiced them individually. The key with longer combos is to just make sure you are executing them quickly, once you have the proper form.

Then there might be specific combinations fighters work when preparing for a certain opponent. Every fighter has their own tendencies and style so any good game plan should include ways to exploit those tendencies when possible. If you were going up against someone who say, likes to parry straight, inside punches, you might practice faking the jab and then throwing the lead hook to try to catch them bring their right hand out to parry the jab. Or if they like to charge straight in, you might practice throwing combinations off of straight punches to the body. Or you can practice throwing a certain combination as a trap, to get your opponent to expect it, then change it up and catch them off guard.

There are also certain combinations that individual fighters just like to throw and are usually successful, becoming kind of known for it. Mike Tyson was the biggest example here and he did practice those combinations over and over again on the heavy bag (at least, when he was well-coached throughout the 80s). That can be used to trap your opponents too, as mentioned in the paragraph above. They see you throwing that rear body shot-rear uppercut-lead hook combo a lot on film, prepare for it, but then you throw a new variation of it in the fight they are not expecting, like a rear body shot-rear head hook instead.

Chess games like this can go on and on but since a fight presents so many ever-changing variables that require constant adaptation, you can't get to stuck on on throwing any specific combinations. You have to always adjust for distance, angles, counter attacks and overall movement and must be able to change on a dime. When these other factors prevent you from being able to throw a combo you want to land or even power punches in general, you can't let that frustrate you and take you off of your game. I always talk about one of my favorite and most effective combos was the jab-cross to the body-lead hook but if someone is constantly moving laterally and don't set their feet when the jab lands, I have to abort completely because they won't be there for the next two strikes. Then I have to figure something else out. This is why fighters may not get as attached to combinations as those who train in boxing for fitness but practicing them is still extremely valuable to both camps.

Health, Wellness, and LIES

I've said before that one of the reasons I got into the fitness industry was because I found myself out of shape, tried hard to get back into shape, failed repeatedly, got frustrated and found a lot of diet and wellness culture to be even more frustrating still. I eventually overcame some of my own obstacles, and decided I wanted to help other people do the same. Social media has grown exponentially since then and looking at a lot of the misinformation or at least, misleading information continues to be frustrating to me because I know what a struggle this can be for so many of us. And it's not just randos on Twitter giving suspect fitness advice, it is sometimes comes from larger media outlets as well. I remember reading Men's Health magazine promising me "5 killer ab exercises to melt away my gut". But I quickly learned that I could do 5 million ab exercises and while I would build a stronger core, it would not do anything to flatten my big gut. Plenty of people still believe this to be true and it is not even close. This is pretty much the case with all of those attention-grabbing headlines and bylines.

For the record, creating a caloric deficit is the only universally successful way to get rid of belly (or any) fat. Though fat accumulates in different ways/areas with different people, you cannot spot treat it. You certainly can target certain areas for muscle growth but the sub-cutaneous fat will remain until the overall caloric deficit and body fat loss has been achieved.

WHO HAS THE POWER?

Unsustainable diets, workout regimens that promise anything, and brazen statements that challenge conventional wisdom simply to generate clicks are more examples of the problem. Every body is different and any one who tells you that if you do specifically X, then specifically Y will happen and it really is that simple, is misleading you. They may not be doing this on purpose, they may even be coming from a place of trying to help, but it may be a lot more harmful than helpful. Most of what people know about health and wellness comes from marketing. And much of it is like a game of telephone too, where someone hears something from someone else or read an article somewhere, tells it to a friend who tells it to a friend, etc. 

Fitness is also a multi-billion dollar industry and besides just selling product, people also have to write articles, promote their publications, get readers, get likes and most of all, get your attention. On the other side of this, there are literally millions of people who are desperate to get healthier. Desperate in a way like no other. Their/our very lives hang in the balance, to different degrees, and everything depends on it. So who has the power here? Someone can say or write anything and someone else will be very inclined to the listen to and believe them in the hope that maybe it turns out to be true. This naturally creates a pretty bad dynamic.

THE BACKLASH

Speaking of bad dynamics, everything I mentioned here has understandably led to a backlash. A counter argument that says, "Hey, screw these guys! I don't have to lose my belly or be thin at all!! I don't have to look like people want me to look. I can be seriously overweight and that is okay because that is just me. And I love myself!" Once again, this is often well-intentioned and I don't necessarily disagree with any of these points, but it sometimes turns into another extreme where we have people who live an unhealthy lifestyle and do nothing to change it in the name of general resistance and being their "true selves."

We know that there is value in making exercise/physical activity a part of our lives. We know that proper nutrition has value too. Exactly what we eat, how much, is up for lots and lots of discussion. Same is true for exercise and physical activity. But we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater and reject it all entirely because so much of the modern diet, health and fitness culture is corrupt.

Your trainers, physicians, and any therapists are all on Team You. The people in your life that you engage to help you get healthy and fit are going to be the people with the best advice for you. (And feel free to bring us together! Sharing information about your health is never a bad idea!) Remember that someone you follow online, while possibly smart and well-intentioned, doesn't know YOU. 

Why Do Boxers Hold On To Each Other?

We have been working on fighting in the clinch this week at the club, something you see a lot in boxing, kickboxing and MMA. Several people asked me why fighters often come together and hold onto each other when they get in close. I thought it was a great question because it is something that is not talked about a lot and if you're not super familiar with the sport, may seem strange. There are several reasons why and oftentimes it will be for more than one. The amount of time spent holding onto each other can also be highly dependent on the referee. Some will separate the two fighters quickly, some give them more time, and some change their tolerance level based on the specific fighters. Here the 6 main reasons you will see boxers clinch. These reasons are all true for kickboxers and mixed martial artists but they have some additional reasons (like throwing knees or going for a takedown) that of course don't apply to boxing.

The Sea of Arms

When 2 people stand at close range and try to punch each other simultaneously, arms are going to get entangled. Especially the bigger they are. When this happens, it may be hard to safely untangle. Going into a grab/clinch can be a good way to stop the punches and then disengage.

Frustration

Every boxer goes into the fight with a game plan. Some fighters plan to put a lot of pressure on their opponent, some want to keep their opponent at a distance and pick them apart with longer-ranged punches. With both of these diametrically different game plans, those fighters would find it frustrating to be continually tied up by their opponent. The pressure fighter wants to overwhelm with punches but they can't do that while their arms are being held/stifled. The long-range outboxer can't execute their strategy either when they are being held at close range. An element of boxing tactics is to take whatever your opponent seemingly wants and not let them have it. Tying someone up can accomplish this. Of course it doesn't always work though. Frank Bruno attempted to do it in his rematch with Tyson and it not only did not work but made Bruno look like he didn't really want to fight (which I am guessing he didn't). So it's not going to make you a fan favorite but if used intelligently, can help take your opponent out of their game.

Wear 'Em Down

Particularly with heavyweights, this tactic is to hold on to your opponent and put your weight on them in an attempt to tire them out over time. Another Tyson, Tyson Fury, used this in his second fight against Deontay Wilder pretty well and it's generally more effective when you are the taller, heavier fighter. Of course you will wear someone down even more by hitting them but of course it requires more energy and puts you at more risk.

Survival

This is probably the most common reason you see too fighters clenched up. When punches are raining down on you, sometimes the best thing to do is simply tie your opponent up. Hold their arms so they quit punching you for a second. Get your bearings and then start fighting back. Kind of like I discussed in the frustration paragraph too, you can hopefully break the rhythm of your opponent by tying them up as well.

Exhaustion/Break

Along the same lines, fighting for your life is just about the most physically exhausting thing anyone can do. Heavyweights once again in particular, can get tired quickly carrying around that extra mass and you will often see them start clinching more as the rounds go on. It's can be a safer way to take a break other than just moving out of range and dancing around. 

"Dirty Boxing"

This is an MMA term but good boxers are able to use the clinch as an opportunity to do damage to their opponent. Not necessarily with illegal blows that the ref doesn't catch (though you do see this sometimes) but with smart techniques that allow them to hit, control, frustrate and generally rough up their opponents. Pull them down into an uppercut, knock them off balance before striking, turning them into a corner are just some of many tactics which can be used effectively.

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.

Boxing Stance - The Great Debate

What is the best boxing stance? Should it be wide? Or narrow? How much should the feet be turned? Should they be in a straight line? This is somewhat of controversial topic when it comes to boxing training and you will often hear one side say there is only one answer, one type of boxing stance, that everybody should use. I will tell you that this is 100% not true. There is no one, single way when it comes to a topic like this, where people have different body types and styles. And I am not saying this because I know everything there is to know about the sport. In fact, the more I learn, the more I realize there is to learn! This is one reason I don't ever like to say there can only one way to do anything. I can be absolutely sure about this point, too, because I have seen hundreds of pro boxers and many thousands of people train for boxing. There are many variations on the classic boxing stance that have been successful. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just plain wrong. Now of course many coaches - great, reputable coaches who have trained great fighters - have a way they prefer to teach and believe all new people should be taught their way, but if they really think their way is the only way, they are not as smart as they think.

First and foremost though, I guess I should explain what the heck I am even talking about. As you may know, there is a particular way that boxers like to stand when they fight. It involves their non-dominant foot forward and their dominant foot back. It is a staggered stance that gives them the ability to move in all directions quickly and keep the hips oriented towards their target. But how far away should the feet be? And what way should the toes be turned? This is where the debate can kick in. Here is a general diagram of different foot positions that I have used in the past but I actually do not agree with its representation of "perfect". AND there are many more permutations that I have seen coached where the front foot is turned more to the right and the back foot is turned more forward.

In fact, there are many reputable teachers who will tell you that your front foot MUST be turned at least 45 degrees to the inside (more than any of these images show). I definitely don't agree with that one personally, but it works for many great boxers so it should not be discounted. The problem I have with "Perfect" up above is that both feet are too close to that line, which in my opinion is too narrow. And I don't like narrow for teaching boxing to brand new people because of something I have discussed several times before: the hardest thing to teach, by far, is how to use their whole body to throw punches. Most new folks only use the upper body while the legs and hips remain frozen. Getting them to use the hips and the legs can be a real challenge. What a wider, more square, stance does is give them better balance in all directions and allow them to shift their weight from the left foot to the right and vice versa, which is the essence of just about everything we do in boxing.

Looking at that diagram, I myself lean towards "Too Square". To me, that is just a better stance for learning and a better stance for power. And looking at the bullet points below, I honestly have no idea what they are talking about other than the very first one ("Offer the body as an open target"). It is true that a squarer stance opens up the body, but this may depend a little bit on you, your style, and your build. Some of the greatest technical boxers ever use that stance - Tyson, Canelo, Innoue and Lomachenko to name a few - and good luck finding footage of them taking a lot of body shots. So while technically accurate, it may not actually be in practice depending on the boxer. The next two make no sense to me. I don't feel any more open to falling backwards as long as my feet are staggered (and I turn my back foot out a little more) and not totally square and can jab just as far in the Too Square stance. Then the last bullet point is just a repeat of the first one.

Here is a video where I further discuss my stance on stances: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hm9JD-vrfs&t=9s

As a good test, I recommend getting into your boxing stance and having someone push you in 4 directions - forward, back, left and right. You should be able to resist each push equally. If you find you can resist really well in some directions and not others, I think you need a squarer stance than you currently have. Another test is to get down as low as you can and try to shadow box. If you feel really off balance, I would say that your feet are too close together.

When I have seen this discussed online, sometimes the conversation can get muddied up by kickboxing and MMA stances. They are different from traditional boxing stances and what I often read is someone chiming in and talking about versions of the Too Square stance above being better for kickboxing or MMA. This is actually true, in my opinion, but it does NOT that it can't be a boxing stance too. Plenty of boxers use it, including the ones I named earlier. It may not be the best one for you and your particular style but going back to my original point, different boxers have different stances that work for them and that is okay.

Be wary of anyone who claims that their way is the only way for anything. Or that if you do X, Y will happen and that's it. Y is not always true and as sweet scientists, we should always be questioning and learning. The sweet science is never settled. There are strong fundamentals and guidelines - and I recommend everybody at least learn "the rules" before thinking about breaking them. Then stay humble and always be open to things that are new and different, even if you initially disagree.

8 Myths For Those Who Already Train In Boxing For Fitness

When it comes to those who haven't boxed before, of course there are always going to be things they
don't understand until they actually start training. But even then, I have seen people box for years and still have some misperceptions about the sport and training practices as it relates to fitness. Here are the Top 8 myths I have heard repeatedly

#1) The More Punches I Throw, The Better the Workout

Besides the general quality vs. quantity argument when it comes to the skill portion of boxing, imagine you jogged for 20 minutes and counted the number of steps you took. Then imagine you sprinted for 10 seconds, at close to max speed, took a 45-second rest doing nothing, and then sprinted again 20 times. You would spend more time jogging for 20 minutes and take significantly more steps but how do you think you'd feel after each respective session? I would say try it and find out but you I would not recommend this to most as sprinting is significantly, significantly more physically challenging and physically beneficial (provided there are no outstanding health issues that make it a bad thing to try). Boxing is about sprints. Many, many tiny sprints. It is not a steady state jog.

If you are able to incorporate dynamic footwork, head movement, feints and concentrate on making the punches you throw more explosive, you will get a better workout than standing in front of the heavy bag and throwing twice as many punches. If you don't believe it, try it some time!

#2) The More the Heavy Bag Moves, The Harder I Am Punching

I think a lot of people know this already but just in case, if your heavy bag moves when you punch it, you are likely pushing your punches and that is not a good thing. It is actually not more powerful, nor does it allow you to significantly improve your power, nor does it help you get better at boxing.

#3) I Am Not Going To Be Doing Any Fighting in the Ring So...

There are a lot of ways to finish this sentence that are incorrect. I will go through some of them specifically but something that applies generally is something I say almost daily and will continue to say it: the better you get at boxing, the better your workout will be. I am sure that there are those out there who think I am just saying that, as I am biased and really love boxing and want people to get better at it, but it is scientifically undeniable. And the more you learn about boxing, the more you realize it is true. For anyone who doubts, I would say that is one of those cases where they don't know what they don't know.

Here are some common sub-myth examples:

....slowing down to work on different techniques will not necessarily help me achieve my workout goals.

This can seem quite true as it will be so in the very short term. If you are throwing non-stop hooks and I ask you to slow down and just work on the lead hook, your heart rate will may very well slow down a little bit for the time it takes to get something down. And if that was the last time you ever boxed in your life, yes, you would have burned a couple less calories that session. Maybe. Depending on how the rest of the session went. But from there on out, your lead hook gets a little better. The benefit becomes far reaching, and then you burn a few more calories in EVERY session thereafter.

One of the great things about workouts is that they are addictive. And while getting out of the comfort zone and pushing yourself can be tough for some, there are others who thrive on it. They always want to push themselves and if they don't, they get antsy and feel like they are not working hard enough. On the surface, this may seem like a good thing- and it certainly can be- but it has one fatal flaw when it comes to boxing: your workout is never going to get much better if you don't get better. It will just be the same, with small, incremental changes at best.

...my technique does not need to be perfect anyway

Of course it doesn't need to be perfect and in fact, no one's technique on anything in boxing is perfect. There is no such thing (more on that later) and EVERYONE can get better at EVERYTHING. When technique gets better, it becomes faster, more efficient, more powerful. Besides the physiological effect, there is a psychological one too. When you get better at something, you can feel it. And you feel better. And that is good. Not just for your general well-being but it makes you work that much harder. Once you level up, you feel more compelled to level up even more. Like playing Candy Crush Saga but healthier.

...defense isn't that important since no one is ever going to hit me

Hopefully no one ever does take a swing at you but defense is still important. I could get into some deeper details here but will just say this, for now: defensive moves in boxing actually help you physically understand the core concept behind the sport, which is how loading and unloading works. Everything in boxing is shifting weight from one foot to the other. This can be harder to perceive when we throw punches but the defensive aspect allows you to witness it more clearly. I have learned that people do not learn this intellectually. I can say it to them, they can certainly understand what I am saying, but their body doesn't understand it. Not until they have practiced it and executed it. But once your body learns, then the lesson is not over. Like everything else, it gets better and better. Then you can start incorporating defensive movements into everything you do, which takes the workout to a brand new level, as mentioned earlier.

...footwork isn't important either as I won't be moving around and am just here to punch.

Beyond reiterating the point about how footwork increases the intensity of the workout through additional movement, learning boxing footwork will actually make your punches better even while standing still. Or it can. I can teach someone a fighting stance, explain how the base works, how you use your feet and legs and hips to throw punches but once again, their body will not truly understand this until they do it a lot. Moving around forces you to check in with your base and your balance and the physical way that punches work. There are some pitfalls here too but when done properly, good footwork has a positive effect on everything you do.

#4) Once I Have the Basics Down, I Can Train On My Own

You certainly can train on your own, even when you don't have the basics down, and it may be a great thing to do but I will tell you this again: you are not going to get much better. There is also a chance you will actually get worse, not know that you have done this, and then build up bad habits that become harder to fix later. All boxers need coaching. All athletes in any sport do too. You can box casually on your own but if you are looking to get healthier, stronger, more fit, etc., you will need some help to get to that next level. Of course it is important that the coaching itself is good as well.

#5) My Jab (or anything) Is As Good As It's Gonna Be!

I will guarantee you that right now as you read this, there is at least one highly-talented, professional boxer throwing jabs somewhere in the world. Or working any particular punch/movement. Tom Brady is probably also throwing footballs (depending on what year you read this, I guess/hope). Why would he need to keep throwing the football? Hasn't he done it enough? He's won twice as many championships as anyone else. He is unquestionably the greatest quarterback of all time. Hasn't he figured out how to throw the football? Not only can you always get better at everything in boxing but the better you get, the better you can get. No one has ever mastered anything perfectly. No one ever will. You can always get better and you don't have to be Tom Brady or Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Now you might feel like it's been a while since your jab (or anything) has gotten better. Like maybe you have plateau'd once you know all of the basics. There are plenty of potential reasons for this but they can all be fixed. You just have to commit to fixing them and believe that you can. Doesn't necessarily mean more training either or different training. A lot of times, it is really just a mindset. Allowing yourself to get out of the comfort zone. Allowing yourself to learn, which is not always as easy as it may sound.

#7) I Should Switch Stances To Work Both Sides Evenly

I could (and have) go on and on about this point and how it is wrong on multiple levels but you may have heard it before and may not believe me anyways. How about this? Go onto to Google and look for pictures of boxers. Maybe search for "boxers weigh-ins". You will see boxers without their shirts, usually flexing. Take a look at their arms. Does one look significantly larger or more defined than the other? If the above statement were true, every right-handed boxer's left arm and shoulder would be very different-looking. Because in the ring, I would say that 70-80% of their punches come from the left side. Their non-dominant hand. So how come that arm doesn't look any different and then have enormous triceps on one side vs the other? They're definitely not switching stances in an attempt to work both sides evenly.

Now I do acknowledge that the first time you box, you may feel it a little more on the left side (if you are right handed). Those muscles are not used to working in that particular way. But switching stances doesn't work both sides evenly. It doesn't help you become a better boxer or help you learn boxing. The opposite, in fact, at least for several years of training. And it makes your workout less effective. I have seen examples time and time again. Are there any actual benefits? Yes, but the 3 statements I made above are 100% true. So if any of those benefits are worthy of not helping you learn boxing or get a less effective workout, then by all means, go for it.

#8) I Don't Need To Go All-Out As Pro Boxers Don't Always Throw Every Punch At 100% Power

The last part is undeniably true but I think the way some people interpret this is often incorrect. First and foremost, if you are talking about how pro boxers train, then the comparison may not be applicable to how someone trains for fitness. Most pros train at least 6 hours a day and the intensity levels are different. If we are talking about the punches boxers throw in a fight, it is true that they do not throw every punch with 100% power. There are probing punches, there are set-up punches and there might be some conservation at times for strategical reasons. We can certainly practice these things in a boxing workout as long as that is being done on purpose, with a purpose. And whether it is 100% power or not does mean we don't put 100% into it. What I see often in other classes or people on their own is the "touching it up" way to punch, at an intensity level not consistent with boxing or a good boxing workout.

Top 5 Bodyweight Exercises For Boxing

While additional weight training may or may not be of help to your boxing skills and development, dynamic exercises using your own bodyweight are almost always recommended. And if you're travelling or just generally not able to get to the gym, they can help you stay active and healthy. The key is finding stuff that can be done quickly, relatively easily, with little space and has the most bang for your buck when it comes to boxing relevancy.

Shadowboxing is probably going to be the best option but will require more time for optimum benefits as well as a good plan going in so I am leaving it off the list. Also off the list are pull-ups. The are probably my favorite non-boxing single exercise but you'd need something stable to hang from, which aren't always available.

So without further ado, here are my Top 5. I also made a quick video going through each one right here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHcYuoH128Q&feature=youtu.be

#1) Skater Lunges/Side Hops

The glutes are probably the most important muscle group when it comes to boxing (footwork AND punches) and pretty darn important for everything else too. I highly recommend explosive side hops, bending the knee and pushing off the ground with one foot, then catching yourself on the other foot. Can do this like a skater lunge or without the lunge part of it. Just make sure you are pushing hard off the ground, absorbing the weight by bending the knee, and redirecting the other way. Don't check out and go with light, little hops. Make the most of it! Do this for 30 seconds non-stop, 3x, with 15 seconds rest in between and you will feel the burn!

#2) 180-Degree Squat Jumps

Still hitting those glutes but now with more quad engagement and explosiveness. Plus we are getting into rotation, which is the core element of EVERYTHING we do in boxing. Sit the hips down into a regular squat, spring upward and rotate the hips in the air about a 180-degrees (or as close as you can get), land right into that squat on loose knees (ie no stiff legs) and do it again. Same numbers as the last exercise - 30 second intervals, 3 sets, 15 seconds rest in between.

#3) Hay Balers

This is certainly something you can with weight, like a medicine ball, but if you are quick and explosive enough, you will still get a lot of out of it with zero weight. Plus it is working that rotational component again, which is the key to everything. Imagine you are holding something relatively heavy, twist a little bit to your right side, then twist quickly to your left side as if you were throwing that heavy thing over your back shoulder. Your hips should start the motion and be the prime movers. Do 2 sets of each side, 4 in total, with 30 second intervals and 15 seconds rest in between each interval.

#4) Push-Ups/Plyo Push-Ups

The push-up really is one of the best single exercises you can do, bodyweight or otherwise. They should be a part of everybody's lives. Can't do a push-up? Start on your knees but make sure there is ZERO bend between your back and your hips. Can barely do 1 or 2? No problem. Start with that. Do them every day. It won't be long before you can do 5, then 10, 15, etc. Push-ups of course work the chest and arms, which is certainly good for boxing, and hit the core pretty well too. But as boxing is all about explosiveness, I highly recommend moving up to plyo push-ups once you are able. It's just like a regular push-up but you are pressing off the ground so hard, that both hands come up - almost like a jump for your hands. This will really get the heart rate up too! You will likely need a little more rest of this so I would stick with the 30 second intervals, 3x through, but with 30 seconds' rest in between.

#5) Footwork Half-Circle Drills

According to me (and plenty others), footwork is the most important thing in boxing. It is probably one of the hardest things too. Reason being is that how we move in boxing is not really how we move in any other life activity, except for wrestling if you've done that before. The only way to make it not feel awkward is to practice it a lot! If you've got a little bit of space, give yourself a half circle and simply use your boxing footwork to move it around it. Go left, go right, move in, move out. Once you get used to it, try some angles, maybe even some pivots. Stay on your toes and bounce quickly as you start to get it down. Try to be a fast as you can without losing your footwork and form. Yes, you can add some shadow boxing punches to this drill BUT the goal here is to get used to moving in a boxing stance, staying balanced. How about this, then? Do 30 second intervals, 3x, and instead of just resting for 15 seconds, throw jab-crosses standing still. Then hooks, then uppercuts. That can be your active rest!

Pretty much all bodyweight exercises are going to be good and if you only have 3 minutes to do them, that is okay! It really is!! Not just physically either but mentally too. Just even a couple minutes a day will help you stay engaged and that can be critical, especially if you are traveling and aren't able to get to the club.