11-09-2011, 11:42 PM
Excellent article on adapting pre-Marques of Queensbury rules boxing techniques and lessons to MMA boxing because of similar rule sets. If you even follow MMA and boxing just a little bit, this is a great read. Probably the best article I've read all year apart from the history of BJJ series on BE.
Click here: http://www.headkicklegend.com/2011/11/4/...science-of
Quote:There seems to be some confusion amongst fans as to how one should regard Nick Diaz’s "boxing". For many, it seems incongruent for him to be labeled the best boxer in MMA when so little of what he does in the cage can be qualified as being "good" boxing; leaning too far forward in his stance while leading with his face; keeping his hands far out in front of him where they can’t be used to protect the head; feet planted instead of light on the toes; very little movement of his head. Needless to say, none of what you’d expect from an elite boxer.
And yet, the results speak for themselves, with his most recent display of prowess coming at the expense of the previously labeled "best boxer in MMA", BJ Penn. How can Nick Diaz be the exemplifier of the "sweet science" when everything he does runs counter to what entails "good" boxing? The answer lies with the fact that everything he does is exactly what "good" boxing calls for, and the only reason we fans fail to acknowledge this is because we have narrowly focused on the sport as fought under the Marques of Queensbury rules, ignoring the lessons left to us by those who competed during the earlier reigns of London Prizefighting and Broughton’s rules. Fortunately, a few of them were thoughtful enough to write down what entailed good boxing for the "sweet science of bruising".
...
Click here: http://www.headkicklegend.com/2011/11/4/...science-of
