BoxRec

This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

I think you answered your own post with this

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Think you might be putting a bit too much into it, you don't need to be letting your hands go with any kind of force, all your doing is warming up and if your throwing correctly (don't need to fully extend your punches or follow through) it should help your muscle memory which will help your technique in the long term, and don't forget shadow boxing isn't just about throwing punches its a chance to work on you feet and head and lateral movement

You can't beat a bit of shadow boxing in front of a mirror good for the ego as well.

Could it have been a form of aerobics before we knew what aerobics was? Unintentional heart conditioning.

Interesting you wrote this. I'm between bags, so I was shadowboxing, and the question hit me: Do I really need a bag?


People spend thousands on products like the Aerobisizer 2000 (yes made up name) and then you realize you get a damn good workout for free: shadowboxing, knee bends, squats, that tae kwon do thing where you squat like on a horse with feet parallel throwing body punches, leg kicks etc. Damn good free workout you can do in a small room.

Beating up on an aging Hank Marvin or any of the others seems pointless to me.

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Shadow boxing is the most productive element of your training. You shadow box in front of a mirror to check out your form... You should likewise shadowbox a few rounds from the opposing stance, and switching back and forth to promote symmetry in your stance. You're not trying to become a switch hitter, you're ironing wrinkles out of your stance. Don't just throw punches. Move in and out, move left and right, slip, duck, roll, block, parry, counter, and practice a lot of feints and check out your combinations during shadow boxing. You're going to miss a substantial number of punches when you fight. You have to be under control and not exhaust yourself. Check out Mayweather-Canelo because Floyd didn't throw hard shots, just accurate, well timed shots with better patience and control.

Here's an experiment you should try... Punch your right palm with a left hook -- and your left palm with a right hook nice and easy... You'll see that you don't need to generate a lot of force for a really powerful impact if your opponent is moving into your punch. Now punch your right palm with a left hook while moving your right hand away almost as fast as your punching hand is moving... You're throwing harder, but not generating significant force or impact. This is the main reason shadow boxing is so important -- to smooth out your stance, footwork, feints, punching form, and delivery so your opponent doesn't SEE your punches coming and elude them, or lessen their impact. Check out the first round of the Golovkin-Lemieux fight. Why was GGG able to land so many jabs when the taller Hassan N'Dam was unable to jab Lemieux effectively??? It's all about stance, footwork, timing, form, and delivery. It's not about throwing hard. If you're super fit and very strong you're going to punch hard without trying to.

Put your improved form from shadow boxing into practice in sparring... Try to land and elude instead of throwing hard and getting into heated exchanges.. More guys will show up for sparring if you don't beat them up.. Shadow boxing and sparring are the 2 most productive elements of training.

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Just ran across this in an old Ring magazine: according to Alan Shelton (don't know who that is) - thought you might like to know.

"In the late 1800s, heavyweight Champion James J. Corbett drew quizzical looks when he became the first fighter to incorporate shadowboxing into his daily workout."

APerno wrote:

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Just ran across this in an old Ring magazine: according to Alan Shelton (don't know who that is) - thought you might like to know.

"In the late 1800s, heavyweight Champion James J. Corbett drew quizzical looks when he became the first fighter to incorporate shadowboxing into his daily workout."

I wonder where he got the idea. What did boxers do before that?

Cutman Scabbers wrote:

APerno wrote:

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Just ran across this in an old Ring magazine: according to Alan Shelton (don't know who that is) - thought you might like to know.

"In the late 1800s, heavyweight Champion James J. Corbett drew quizzical looks when he became the first fighter to incorporate shadowboxing into his daily workout."

I wonder where he got the idea. What did boxers do before that?

"Shots" - followed by a beer chaser.

Interesting. Corbett was truly one of a kind and a genius inside and outside the ring.

While we're on the subject of history and innovation, I wonder who actually sat there and grasped the mechanics behind the techniques of boxing? Like pivoting and swinging the shoulder to deliver force with a hook, shifting body weight and hips for a right straight, etc. They must have had an incredible grasp of physics and anatomy for their time.

APerno wrote:

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Just ran across this in an old Ring magazine: according to Alan Shelton (don't know who that is) - thought you might like to know.

"In the late 1800s, heavyweight Champion James J. Corbett drew quizzical looks when he became the first fighter to incorporate shadowboxing into his daily workout."

Boxers have been shadow boxing for hundreds of years in the West -- and thousands of years going back to the ancient Greeks and Romans... It a natural way to practice your form when you're warming up for a fist fight or for sparring... It didn't have to be "invented."

There is even a reference to shadow boxing in the Bible... It's comparing the sacrifice athletes make to become winners with the sacrifice the righteous make to enter Heaven's Gates.. Corinthians 1, 24., “Do you not know that while all the runners in the stadium take part in the race the award goes to one man? In that case run so as to win. Athletes deny themselves all kinds of things. They do this to win a crown that withers, but we a crown that is imperishable. I do not run like a man who loses sight of the finish line. I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing.” ... That was written thousands of years ago... Boxing and shadowboxing go back a long way.

Kalan wrote:

APerno wrote:

Cygnus475 wrote:This afternoon I was shadow boxing and realized how incredibly taxing and tiring it was. I felt so relieved when I finished and could finally hit the bag as part of my drill.

I understand the practical reason for it: commiting combinations, movements, and punches to muscle memory so that you can move instinctively. However, swinging and missing a target really tires you out. It's why even if you've been fighting for ten, eleven, twelve rounds if you're at least hitting the opponent you won't be nearly as tired as if you were simply chasing him all night and missing by a mile every time.

So is shadow boxing really worth it? Should it really been done every single day for aspiring boxers for extended periods of time? Hitting the heavy bag, mitts, speed bag, and sparring all offer the same benefits and then some. Is it just some outdated practice that hasnt died because its always been there and people assume its still worth doing? Maybe I'm just ignorant and someone can enlighten me.

Just ran across this in an old Ring magazine: according to Alan Shelton (don't know who that is) - thought you might like to know.

"In the late 1800s, heavyweight Champion James J. Corbett drew quizzical looks when he became the first fighter to incorporate shadowboxing into his daily workout."

Boxers have been shadow boxing for hundreds of years in the West -- and thousands of years going back to the ancient Greeks and Romans... It a natural way to practice your form when you're warming up for a fist fight or for sparring... It didn't have to be "invented."

There is even a reference to shadow boxing in the Bible... It's comparing the sacrifice athletes make to become winners with the sacrifice the righteous make to enter Heaven's Gates.. Corinthians 1, 24., “Do you not know that while all the runners in the stadium take part in the race the award goes to one man? In that case run so as to win. Athletes deny themselves all kinds of things. They do this to win a crown that withers, but we a crown that is imperishable. I do not run like a man who loses sight of the finish line. I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing.” ... That was written thousands of years ago... Boxing and shadowboxing go back a long way.

Interesting - I have no reason to dispute you I was just sharing a quote I found - keep in mind that you are reading an English translation of something that was originally written in early Greek - again Kalan I am not saying that it is not what it is saying, it may very well be the correct translation, but it is also possible that a contemporary translator may have been confronted with something that the term 'shadowboxing' was the best way to explain it to a contemporary audience, but wasn't actually occurring - Although if this is a quote from the King James version of the Bible, then the Ring quote is still wrong, because that translation took place between 1603-1620, which means they would have had to been using the term as early as the very early seventeenth century. - But then again if you you are using the New American Standard translation were the word "manna" has been re-translated into "bread" then . . . well you get my point - bible translations can be very tricky - I will say it again the term and concept may very well go all the way back to ancient Greece and the Ring quote is just plain wrong. . . .or that the concept and term were lost for several hundred years and only returned . . . sorry I just can't stop it is the historical methodology that I get off on

Well... What is not so tricky for me is that when athletes prepare for fights and sparring they always throw punches in the air... Baseball players take swings in the warm-up deck... You may take a few practice swings before teeing off on a golf ball... You're hitting air... but It still helps.

I can't believe boxers from ancient times didn't do the same thing... It's natural... The original translation is "I do not fight like a boxer who punches the air."

Caught something in the boxing rags the other day: Dempsey use to shadowbox under a 4' 6" tin roof forcing him to maintain his crouch position or risk banging his head on the roof.

For me, crouching is a massive mistake... You're leading with your head like Henry Armstrong. Even if a referee allows you to lead with your head.. which is technically illegal.. A great boxer is going to pick you off with jabs and straight rights from a distance because trying to bob n weave against a sharp boxer isn't effective.. And a great puncher is going to smash you with uppercuts and 45's as you try to push your head in. You can't give a great boxer or puncher your head to shoot at. He'll beat the heck out of you.

You can get away with the technique against the average boxer and run over a lot of average people if you're super strong and tough... but like Patterson getting battered by Liston... Dempsey getting picked off by Tunney... Frazier trying to bob and weave his way towards Foreman... Armstrong getting the crap beaten up out of him by Fritzie Zivic and Ray Robinson... any real good fighter is going to rip a croucher with jabs, straight rights, uppercuts, and pound your ribs with impunity when you're bent over. You're giving him a huge advantage.

Even a short boxer should use whatever height he has -- like Dwight Braxton when he started out, and later he changed his name to Qawi... He had the right approach for his first 20 fights or so even though he was much shorter than any of his opponents. He boxed and moved very well.. The thing to do if your really short is to get closer, into your best punching range.. and stay much busier.. They called Braxton "The Buzzsaw" when he had his thing going well.

Kalan wrote:For me, crouching is a massive mistake... You're leading with your head like Henry Armstrong. Even if a referee allows you to lead with your head.. which is technically illegal.. A great boxer is going to pick you off with jabs and straight rights from a distance because trying to bob n weave against a sharp boxer isn't effective.. And a great puncher is going to smash you with uppercuts and 45's as you try to push your head in. You can't give a great boxer or puncher your head to shoot at. He'll beat the heck out of you.

You can get away with the technique against the average boxer and run over a lot of average people if you're super strong and tough... but like Patterson getting battered by Liston... Dempsey getting picked off by Tunney... Frazier trying to bob and weave his way towards Foreman... Armstrong getting the crap beaten up out of him by Fritzie Zivic and Ray Robinson... any real good fighter is going to rip a croucher with jabs, straight rights, uppercuts, and pound your ribs with impunity when you're bent over. You're giving him a huge advantage.

Even a short boxer should use whatever height he has -- like Dwight Braxton when he started out, and later he changed his name to Qawi... He had the right approach for his first 20 fights or so even though he was much shorter than any of his opponents. He boxed and moved very well.. The thing to do if your really short is to get closer, into your best punching range.. and stay much busier.. They called Braxton "The Buzzsaw" when he had his thing going well.

Some good points - I will just debate with you about Dempsey. By the time Dempsey gets to Tunney he is an old 32, coming off a three year lay-off - he was finished as a fighter - not being able to jab off the crouch has some merit, but Dempsey had no jab anyway, he lead with a left hook - your remark about getting hit with jabs in the head is interesting, because Dempsey got warned (and was lucky he didn't end up blind) by doctors that because of his style, he tucked his chin under his left shoulder, was taking too many jabs to the eyes, it is kind of amazing he didn't end up with a detached retina - but offering only his eyes and the top of his head made it very difficult to knock him out - let me add La Motta, (who fought from the crouch) other than the 13th round of the St. Valentine Massacre, fought Robinson to very close decisions - he scored two knockdowns against Robinson (over six fights), handed him his first loss. Even the famed St. Valentine Massacre, if you watch it, was a very close fight until the 13th - they fought somewhere near 75 rounds with neither fighter getting a clear advantage until the 13th round of the last fight.

Robinson had a clear advantage over LaMotta... So did a lot of other boxers, but LaMotta had an unbelievable ability to absorb punishment, and that's why he was able to stay in so many fights he eventually lost... If Tommy Gibbons were a Heavyweight he would have posed problems for Demspsey, as it is Dempsey couldn't knock him out and Tunney did.

For me, stand up boxing is the best way and only way to teach Boxing... You slip, duck, and roll punches -- you certainly have to be able to get under them as well as block, parry, and slip them -- but you keep your head back, your weight evenly distributed over both feet, your knees not bent too much, your stance not too wide, your shoulders, torso, waist, and hips angled correctly, and your feet right.

I never liked the crouch.. The funny think is, the crouch works against guys who can't box well.. just as the cross-armed defense works against guys who can't box.. but if you want to be the best fighter in the world you're going to have to meet and beat good boxers ... and those styles will not allow you to do that unless there's a dearth of good boxers in your division.. Many unskilled fighters pick up world titles because the competition is so weak... There's an old saying "It's better to be lucky than good" ... But if you don't want to rely on luck, learn how to box.

Frazier fought out of a crouch and only lost to two fighters his whole career, both of them hall of famers in their prime.

Rocky graziano, patterson, chavez sr, etc all had amazing careers for their limited height and reach.

Every style has its weaknesses. If it was so horrible people would have abandoned it a long time ago.

Cygnus475 wrote:Frazier fought out of a crouch and only lost to two fighters his whole career, both of them hall of famers in their prime.

Rocky graziano, patterson, chavez sr, etc all had amazing careers for their limited height and reach.

Every style has its weaknesses. If it was so horrible people would have abandoned it a long time ago.

Graziano, Marciano, Patterson, and Chavez didn't really crouch a lot... Graziano and Marciano were crude swingers, Patterson used the peek-a-boo like Tyson, and Chavez was actually a fairly orthodox boxer.. Frazier employed the crouch and gave you his head to shoot at trying to slip most punches coming at him.. Armstrong did the same, but used his head for leverage, pushing, shoving, and shouldering you to gain openings a lot more than Frazier did.. Frazier didn't have a very long career or a lot of fights, but regardless of that he took a lot of punches and suffered serious damage.. The orthodox style and defense allows you to largely escape punishment if you employ it like Tunney, Johnson, Sanchez, Mayweather, Pep, Duran, Holmes, Joshua, Ward, Kovalev, Lomachenko, Crawford, Golovkin, Brook, Roman Gonzalez, and other top boxers did in their primes.

Dude u clearly have never seen Marciano fight if u think he didn't crouch. He did it on purpose because he knew he was already short and made himself a smaller target to create awkward anukes and punches.

Cygnus475 wrote:Dude u clearly have never seen Marciano fight if u think he didn't crouch. He did it on purpose because he knew he was already short and made himself a smaller target to create awkward anukes and punches.

Not too much.. Rocky had a weird style... He leaned to his right, and ducked, and dipped primarily to his right all the time.. He didn't square up and bob n weave In a classic crouch.. He'd wait for you to punch and shove his way inside.. He pushed and shoved illegally, using his head for leverage a lot... sometimes driving his noggin right into your face...but not nearly as much as Armstrong used that tactic. Rocky would actually try to box a bit and set up some outside punches before ducking and shoving his way inside.

I never said he bobbed and weaved, I simply said he fought out of a crouch. Dude had a 67" reach he didn't have a choice.

Actually watch some fights before you talk out of your ass.

You're NOT forced to fight out of a crouch because you're short you idiot... Pep didn't.. Pacquiao doesn't.. Gary Russell doesn't.. The orthodox stance works better even for a short guy.. Ducking punches isn't fighting out of a crouch.. In a crouch you're low to begin with and giving your opponent your head to shoot at. Marciano leaned back and to his right a lot and tried to counter mostly from an upright position.

Many Heayvweights of the era and most of Marciano's title challengers were short... Moore, Cockell and LaStarza were as short as Marciano.. He didn't continuously duck down or lead with his head to the extent that Armstrong did.