Evolution of boxing technique

[Panzerfaust]

How would you say boxing teqnique has evolved since the introduction of gloves?
One thing i have noticed is the current day focus on blocking rather than sliping punches(not necesarily a good change).

Lets say we split it into 20-30 year periods?
What are your impressions?

[dempseyfire]

Blocking became much more widespread as gloves became bigger. 4 ounces to 10 ounces is a pretty big difference in terms of the protection that glove will give you.

[Robinson]

It is interesting that in MMA we use small gloves but 'blocking' with
the forearm-arm etc is prevalent simply because at times bobbing,
weaving and slipping are considered high risk with kicks-take downs
and knees. Having said that you still get some finely talented guys
that are able to do it well. Anderson Silva Rashad Evans for example.

With boxing, I think not only with the glove aspect, but I think some
people got a bit lazier with the self preservation side of boxing, and
opted to block more often, than bend the knees and avoid the
shots. For every peak Mike Tyson you have a score of big thumpers
that are willing to take shots to deliver one.

With more technologies available as well I think it gives more people
exposure to different styles and methods of boxing. Which helped
to diversify the sport some what. For better and worse.

[Panzerfaust]

The question should have been refrased. In past vs current fighters threads and discussions i often read people writing that the past greats had bad technique and fundamentals And except for blocking replacing alot of slipping i have not really noticed any great technical changes since lets say the 30s.
There are definatly alot of more knowledgable people here that have seen and analyzed far more fight footage than i have.
Have the technical lvl improved much at all?

[Ambling Alp]

Since the 1930s? None.
Obviously some individual modern fighters had better technique than some fighters from long ago, and viceversa.

Occasionally some fighters in all eras did things that you wouldn't recommend for everyone, but it worked for them.

[BoxBuzz]

Since the 1930s? None.
Obviously some individual modern fighters had better technique than some fighters from long ago, and viceversa.

Occasionally some fighters in all eras did things that you wouldn't recommend for everyone, but it worked for them.

So is your opinion that the most talented fighters if willing to "follow the rules" will always be the best fighters?
And so these great talents choose to "wander from the rules" in order to demonstrate more clearly just how great they really are?

Sort of like "handicapping" themselves?


I'm not criticizing here I just want to be sure I understand.

[Ambling Alp]

No, that's not really what I mean. A small % of fighters can do something that most others should not do.

For example, its a cardinal rule to keep your hands up to protect yourself. Well, a few guys (such as Tunney, Ali, Holmes) often did not do this. Yet during their primes all were hard to hit. They had great reflexes and knew what they were doing. It actually helped them offensively because their hands were more free.
However, you would not advise very many fighters to do this. The vast majority of fighters would consistently get nailed if they did this.

[wsbuf]

Hands down was common up through the 1920's. I read a quote from Jimmy Slattery from circa 1928, that fighters that hold there hands up are wimpy (can't remember exact name he called them).

[bollox]

Bring back the two fisted punch I say