Stopping the jab.

[MRBOOMER]

How do you guys stop the opponents jab? Which counters do you use?

[mconstantine]

I'm southpaw...I do what Rigo did to Donaire. Hold my lead hand out in the punching lane and touch my opponent's lead hand. Works like a charm against orthodox fighters.

I also like to slip to my right and shoot the straight left while my opponent jabs. Anytime you punch WITH an opponent's punch, they will begin to hesitate to throw that punch.

When I box other southpaws, I change my stance a bit, turn sideways a bit more, catch the jab with my back/left hand and hook over the jab with my lead right hook.

[greynotsoold]

Why do you want to stop the jab? You really shouldn't be getting hit with it- catch it, or just be out of reach of it. If he stops throwing the jab, then what? It isn't like he'll abandon the jab and start throwing other punches you can work with. He'll probably just stop throwing; if you are just starting that may sound good, but, if you know about fighting, you want him to punch. So you can counter and land real good punches.
If he is jabbing and stepping away, that is hard to work with and you need him to step with the jab, or to throw other punches behind it.

[mconstantine]

Why do you want to stop the jab? You really shouldn't be getting hit with it- catch it, or just be out of reach of it. If he stops throwing the jab, then what? It isn't like he'll abandon the jab and start throwing other punches you can work with. He'll probably just stop throwing; if you are just starting that may sound good, but, if you know about fighting, you want him to punch. So you can counter and land real good punches.
If he is jabbing and stepping away, that is hard to work with and you need him to step with the jab, or to throw other punches behind it.

Sure less jabs may mean less counter opportunities...but I would say as a rule, the benefits gained from a guy NOT jabbing will usually outweigh the negatives. Jabs set up other offense...without jabs, you should be able to see everything coming. It should also allow you to break your opponent down.

Ask Mike Tyson some reasons why you'd want your opponent to not jab. He systematically broke his opponents down by stepping in with their jab and letting them feel his power. Once they stopped jabbing, he destroyed them. The guys who KEPT jabbing despite feeling Tyson's power and were able to survive his early onslaught were the guys who gave him problems.

But this is where boxing IQ comes into play. What I am saying is a rule...but sure, if you got a guy with slow reflexes and it throwing a lazy jab, and you're able to counter him, and he doesn't adjust, by all means, don't stop him from jabbing lol. But to your point, this isn't as prevalent as you step up in skills.

[greynotsoold]

Sure less jabs may mean less counter opportunities...but I would say as a rule, the benefits gained from a guy NOT jabbing will usually outweigh the negatives. Jabs set up other offense...without jabs, you should be able to see everything coming. It should also allow you to break your opponent down.

Ask Mike Tyson some reasons why you'd want your opponent to not jab. He systematically broke his opponents down by stepping in with their jab and letting them feel his power. Once they stopped jabbing, he destroyed them. The guys who KEPT jabbing despite feeling Tyson's power and were able to survive his early onslaught were the guys who gave him problems.

But this is where boxing IQ comes into play. What I am saying is a rule...but sure, if you got a guy with slow reflexes and it throwing a lazy jab, and you're able to counter him, and he doesn't adjust, but all means, don't stop him from jabbing lol. But to your point, this isn't as prevalent as you step up in skills.

Tyson loved having guys jab, having guys throw punches at him. He was the type of guy that did his damage on the way in, after avoiding a punch. He didn't do well with guys that grabbed him, held on and tied him up. he wasn't a good inside fighter, really, but he was a great transitional fighter. His whole game was geared around what he did on the way in.
What you say about boxing IQ... this is more prevalent as you step up in skill levels. Think about it...how many rounds have those guys spent doing nothing but playing defense. It is almost impossible to hit a good boxer, especially when his concentration is on not getting hit. You want him punching, and punching boldly, so you can hit him with better shots.
And this goes beyond some lame with a lazy jab you can pot shot around. If he has a sharp jab, has confidence in it, get him throwing it. He'll commit to it and then you can hit him with something meaningful. Or, he'll start coming with something behind it, and then he is no longer stepping and moving; you're fighting.
The Tyson example is a bad one; his power, the reaction of his opponents to that power, and his reactions to there reactions to their reactions skews it. A better place to look is at a guy like LaMotta- the guys that fought him said he was easy to hit with a jab, hard to hit with everything else- see what I'm getting at?

[mconstantine]

Tyson loved having guys jab, having guys throw punches at him. He was the type of guy that did his damage on the way in, after avoiding a punch. He didn't do well with guys that grabbed him, held on and tied him up. he wasn't a good inside fighter, really, but he was a great transitional fighter. His whole game was geared around what he did on the way in.
What you say about boxing IQ... this is more prevalent as you step up in skill levels. Think about it...how many rounds have those guys spent doing nothing but playing defense. It is almost impossible to hit a good boxer, especially when his concentration is on not getting hit. You want him punching, and punching boldly, so you can hit him with better shots.
And this goes beyond some lame with a lazy jab you can pot shot around. If he has a sharp jab, has confidence in it, get him throwing it. He'll commit to it and then you can hit him with something meaningful. Or, he'll start coming with something behind it, and then he is no longer stepping and moving; you're fighting.
The Tyson example is a bad one; his power, the reaction of his opponents to that power, and his reactions to there reactions to their reactions skews it. A better place to look is at a guy like LaMotta- the guys that fought him said he was easy to hit with a jab, hard to hit with everything else- see what I'm getting at?

Agree to disagree I guess. We may just have different philosophies and like I said, my philosophy might change depending on the situation and a NUMBER of different variables. I don't FULLY really agree with your assessment of Tyson though. Once Tyson got inside on you, if you wasn't punching, he was going to find an opening regardless. Go look at his highlights, there are plenty of gun shy guys getting knocked the **** out while in defensive postures. So while I agree that guys jabbing at Tyson gave him opportunities in the transition, he had NO PROBLEM breaking down gun shy/overly defensive guys. Once a guy gets into that state mentally, he's already lost anyways. It's a matter of time. A confident guy with a jab will ALWAYS be more dangerous.

This is why a prime Tyson probably still doesn't beat Lennox Lewis and maybe not even Wlad Klit. They fully commit to the jab and know how to fight tall. Tyson would have a helluva time trying to get in on those guys. But if he took their jab away, the entire dynamic of the fight would immediately change.

Of course, in this instance we're dealing with the variable of Tyson being the much shorter fighter and may not be relevant in all cases which goes back to my prior point about this being situation based.

[Suckmedry]

I like the parry with your right and then counter with your own jab, parry with the left counter with the right, and slip and counter with the right. Also slip and counter with own jab to the body. Or slip inside and counter with a right to the body. But mix these up otherwise a good boxer will draw these counters and counter you.

It can be risky and you have to time it well, but an overhand right over the top of your opponents jab while slipping your head inside his can have a devastating effect too.

[LoadedWraps]

How do you guys stop the opponents jab? Which counters do you use?

I stop them the way my trainer taught me, and I counter with everything.

[mconstantine]

I stop them the way my trainer taught me, and I counter with everything.

Love the detail man. Very descriptive.

[BG_Knocc_Out]

Simply put;

Generally, if I'm in the position where my jab is landing, he certainly won't get his off. My jab seems to be authoritative, and when your in a battle of the jabs, the jab with the most authority normally comes out on top. Authority is key as well as ring generalship.

Ring Generalship: I'd choose the ability to have great ring generalship over a great jab any day when it comes to nullifying my opponents jab. Granted, the two can be one in the same at times, which brings me to,

If his is better than mine, I simply don't stand in range of it, or I slip inside. I tend to engage in spurts. I'll either be black or white; defensive by staying out of range, then my offensive spurts to offset the predictability of his jab.

I suck at explaining ****, but it makes sense in my head.