Two types of power?

Seems I was on to something after all!:kidcool: Turns out all explosive movements are (in simplified terms) a combination between 'limit strength' (max voluntary strength) and 'reactive strength' (plyometric strength, the ability to transfer force from a recoil). Some guys are much more gifted in one department than the other. Pretty accurately explains what I was seeing in the different punching styles.

Also suggests, since both components are highly trainable, the age old adage that 'punchers are born not made' is as misguided as the former belief among basketball coaches that jumpers are born not made. Both sports just have to let go of antiquated training methods (ie their obsession with non stop crippling volume and aversion to weight training).

A passage from Kelly Baggets 'Vert jump bible':
-----------------------
"Taking a Look At The 2 Different Types of Leapers

There are 2 dominant types of leapers (*or puncher) with most people possessing a tendency towards one or the other. The first type I'll cover is the strength jumper

The strength jumper tends to rely more pure strength and explosive ability to get up in the air. He tends to look a little less "springy" and a lot more “powerful” when he jumps. He may even appear and sound like he’s tearing holes through the floor when he takes off! When choosing his jumping style, he'll definitely tend to do best jumping off 2 feet and likely feel quite horrid jumping off of 1. He'll also tend to use a deeper knee bend and may also have physical characteristics like thicker muscles and joints. He will tend to have natural levels of "strength" that are greater then his natural levels of "bounce", or reactive ability.

At the extreme end of this group are athletes like olympic lifters and throwers. Many of these guys have spectacular vertical jumps along with spectacular rate of force development. They can exhibit their impressive power from a virtual standstill, but you won't see them dunking from the free throw line or winning any high jump medals.

Now realize that not all strength jumpers are strong or can jump, it's just that their body structure, muscle-tendon lengths etc. will naturally tend to make this their dominant style when they do begin working specifically for vertical jump improvement. Some people are "strength" jumpers but don't know it yet because they may not yet have any strength. Having said that, as long as this style of jumper has his strength levels up to par, he'll make further gains using plyometric and accelerative methods which, when coupled with his strength, will make him even more explosive and smoothen out his rough style. At the upper levels of sports, natural "strength" jumpers also learn to become smooth and graceful as well. Think for a minute about some of your favorite dunkers and I'm sure you can identify a few that fall into this group.

The 2nd type of leaper is the elastic jumper.

The elastic jumper, also known as the reactive, elastic, or plyometric jumper, tends to naturally be more fluid and often appears to take off effortlessly into the air when he jumps. He just looks bouncy. Most of the time, he will be gifted in the structural department with long legs, long achilles tendons, and small joints. He also tends to naturally be able to get up higher jumping off of one leg with a running start then he will be with a short 2-legged take-off or from a standstill. His levels of strength may often seem inconsistent with his performance and he probably won't be turning many heads in the weight room. The elite level high-jumper or long jumper are both excellent illustrations of extreme elastic jumpers.

The reasons the elastic jumpers tend to excel at this style of jump are due mainly to structure (length of the bones, muscles, tendons etc.), but also muscle fiber considerations. They naturally tend to rely more on the action of the stretch-reflex and involuntary plyometric ability. In contrast to the strength jumpers, over time at the upper levels, elastic jumpers learn and train to become more like strength jumpers. They do this by increasing their pure strength and voluntary rate of force development. Since the elastic jumper is naturally bouncy and gifted in the plyometric department, it usually doesn't require as much focus in his training. Michael Jordan is a good example of an athlete who was naturally an elastic jumper but who also learned to become an excellent "strength" jumper.

To illustrate how 2 people can accomplish the same task via different strength qualities an athlete who is at an elite level utilizing the short amortization phase stretch shortening cycle (1-foot jump) like a higher jumper, long jumper or someone like Brent Barry, will not necessarily be proficient in performance of the other type of jump (2-foot jump) and
vice-versa.

It used to be in the NBA most all of the good dunkers were unilateral 1-foot dominant jumpers. If you ever check out some of the older NBA slam-dunk contests that run at 3:00 a.m. on ESPN classic you'll see this! Back then, because of the lack of effective training, the thought was that there wasn't much you could do about increasing the vertical jump and the guys who were good at it were naturally good at it. Nowadays, however, take a look at the best dunkers and you'll notice the 2-foot jumpers dominate. This is in large part directly due to the influence of strength training, which really has a large impact on the 2-foot jump and allows one to take advantage of their voluntary explosive strength, which is much easier developed and under less genetic influence than speed and short response reactive ability (amortization phase of around ~.100 seconds) "

 

neither of the equations you listed are linear. WTF are you talking about? Who didn't pay attention?

 

IMO, speed and mass are major factors, but timing i think is the biggest single factor in determining whether or not a fighter is able to knock out or hurt his opponents significantly.

as they always say, it's the punches you don't see that hurt you. there's very few fighters out there who can knock you out with a punch you see and know is coming and can brace yourself for.

rather, it's the feinting, and the counter-punching, and running your opponent into shit that's gonna put him on the canvas. that's why Corrales was such a force. his left hook was so short you couldn't possibly prepare for its arrival. and it was accurate. it hit his opponents exactly where it needed to in order to jar the skull, shake the brain, and separate his opponent from his senses.

 

Im a bit this way when it comes to Joe Calzaghe's "incredible handspeed"... I cant fucken see it anywhere,..

 

he fakes it by using the doggy paddle. whereas a guy like SRL could throw lightening combinations and still have good technique, Sloppy Joe has to resort to the doggy paddle to give the impression he's some sort of speed demon. He's not.

 

Calzaghe likes to throw a flurry of slaps with one timed/turned over punch.
Then again he slapped Lacy around for the duration.::

 

I agree with the premise of this thread.

There are some guys with explosive power, like Hearns/Tyson, and there are guys with heavy hands who hit "hard" like Pavlik/Chavez/Foreman

Its certainly two types.

 

No there isn't two types of power I think it's a retarded statement to make. There is power and thus..since our universe is infinite and infinitesimal at the same time.. every punch is unique.. there are infinite 'types' of power.

 

that's stupid.

are there an infinite number of species on the planet? races? plants? trees? does our infinite universe dictate that any of these hold true?

yours is the retarded statement - a pseudo-intellectual embarrassment.

 

yawn, you trying to write a zen koan here D MAN? There is as infinite a variety of blends of red and blue as there is purple coloured things. There are infinite types of 'purple'. Does that make the act of noticing that purple is made of red and blue 'retarded'? Naw mate, naw.

 

dsimon writes:

I think people make good distinctions on this thread. Sociologically I have noticed a fact for years: boxers seem resigned to the degree of power they have. Martial artists on the other hand are taught that you can vastly increase your punching power. There is not such an emphasis on natural power in the arts as there is in boxing.

So yeah you can learn a lot in the ring and probably a lot of guys could get better than they imagine by paying attention to proper body dynamics.

 

On a long enough time line, with a limited capability to measure it.....yes.

I think defense plays a significant role, along with anticipating the punch. You could theoretically get hit with the same punch and have a different reaction depending on how rigid you are, or about a million other variables deciding the outcome of a single punch.

 

Thing is, its rather easy to make promises that aren't gonna be tested, isn't it? A Karate 'master' might well promise his students that he can teach him magical techniques to vastly increase their power and since the students are never gonna have to step into the ring and find out that this magical power gets them nowhere, why not? Meanwhile their being taught how to break blocks and other circus stunts so they happily convince themselves an opponents skull would shatter like the wood and that his master really has imparted ancient secrets he learned from a holy guru in a cave.

Whereas interestingly, if you watch full contact Karate & Kung Fu the punches are far inferior to boxing.