The deadlift and boxing

[AlexKid]

I think the argument between boxing and weight lifting being put together will ALWAYS be argued. It has been around for years and years and will be around for even more. Too much of it comes from opinion, everybody hears different facts on this matter I find, so people run with either A) What they have been told/taught or B) What they feel personally works for them.

What one guy teaches, another guy slanders. And that is not to be too negative, it is just what it seems to be like in my opinion.

My trainer told me recently that if you insist on lifting weight for boxing, then you can use weights all you want but if you are not fighting fit, you will reap no benefits in terms of boxing. I guess what he meant was if you feel as though it benefits you, go ahead, but if you aren't ready to fight do not expect weights to get you there. I must state however, this is just an opinion of an old man telling me something and me then sharing what he said, this is not what I am preaching to people.

Personally, I feel if people want to use weights in one degree or another in their boxing training then go ahead, I do a little myself but not too much, no deadlifting I am afraid in regards to your point, but I feel the better for it compared to where I started from. Personally I feel as though the only time weights could become a negative issue is if there is a guy who trains for power lifting types of results and becomes too 'bulky', as I saw a friend do just that and it didnt turn out too well for him over time in regards to boxing.

Again though, this is just me personally based off stuff I have been told, people I have seen use different methods and things that work for me, I am not here to tell guys they are wrong or wasting time etc.

Not really it doesn't come down to opinion.

Athletes have been weight lifting for long enough to know for a fact that if used correctly it increases endurance, power strength and speed more so than without weights.

However the old school way of training still seems like a viable and superior option because so many people use weights incorrectly.

Too much body building has crept into athletic training and it creates big, low endurance low performance hulks that would get whipped by someone that trains in the old school method of running long distance and body-weight exercises n bag work etc (Left hook lacy vs calzagge springs to mind)

Calzagge trains old school and it has served him well. However what would have served him better is a bit of strength training on a periodized program that DIDNT increase his muscle mass only gave him more strength. It then would have translated to even more endurance power and speed if he followed it up with a conversion to power endurance phase.

If you dont know what you are doing stick with the old school methods of training. They work, they are proven and they are still effective to this day. BUT they are not optimal, advances have been made, weight training used correctly is superior and thats a fact.

[SthPaw]

Not really it doesn't come down to opinion.

Athletes have been weight lifting for long enough to know for a fact that if used correctly it increases endurance, power strength and speed more so than without weights.

However the old school way of training still seems like a viable and superior option because so many people use weights incorrectly.

Too much body building has crept into athletic training and it creates big, low endurance low performance hulks that would get whipped by someone that trains in the old school method of running long distance and body-weight exercises n bag work etc (Left hook lacy vs calzagge springs to mind)

Calzagge trains old school and it has served him well. However what would have served him better is a bit of strength training on a periodized program that DIDNT increase his muscle mass only gave him more strength. It then would have translated to even more endurance power and speed if he followed it up with a conversion to power endurance phase.

If you dont know what you are doing stick with the old school methods of training. They work, they are proven and they are still effective to this day. BUT they are not optimal, advances have been made, weight training used correctly is superior and thats a fact.

Thats what I mean bro...I agree with everything you have said but my point was that there will no doubt be many people that do not. There will be guys that would advise to leave weights alone totally, there will be guys that will use them a little, and some guys that do too much. This debate may have its facts and myths but people will more often than not go with their opinion, is all I was trying to say.

You raise a great point about Lacy vs Calzaghe too. If there was a ever a fight from the recent era that featured a man more muscle bound losing to a man who is not, it would be that. This fight is a good example of how being muscle bound isn't too big of a factor, but correct weight training implemented for boxing no doubt is, because as you say Joe would have very most likely benefit from some.

Yes advances have been made and people who train in this day and age will see the advantage that weight training can bring to the table, but the older generations would be filled with more people telling you to stay away from them, and that is what I meant by opinions affecting peoples attitudes towards them. At the end of the day I feel as though if weights are used for strength/explosiveness and not just size then you can not go wrong as a boxer. The only time I would tell a guy he was wrong would be if he was intentionally trying to become bulky and big. Coz as we all know muscle doesn't win us fights, being primed to fight does, so if weights bring some bonus to that then their correct use should be seriously considered, as you said.

[Elroy1]

Two points Alex..

You are entitled to your opinion and I am not knocking it, each to their own but..

- ANY resistance exercise that MIMICS a direct boxing movement using heavy weights will reduce boxing performance by interfering with the neural adaption.

- The deadlift doesn't interfere at all.

- The Squat is an exercise that probably doesn't do any harm to a boxers performance either, except, it does not fire the muscles in the correct sequences like punches and other boxing movements, the deadlift does.

- The squat is an unnatural movement that doesn't fully activate the core by transferring load from feet through shoulders to hands which aren't actually connected to the weight. It is not a full body exercise and it is not a test of raw strength. We were designed to lift things like a deadlift, not a squat.

- IT might FEEL like you use your quads more when you hit a punching bag, but when you hit a person or a "man bag" or a free standing punch bag which give a better impression of proper distance and ranging, you'll find the technique then becomes more like the muscles of the deadlift. In fact the squat does nothing really to build up and stabilise the upper back stabiliser, shoulder girdle, arms and forearms like the deads.

- I don't discern between high and low reps for deads for boxing. The exercise is so strengthening that even higher reps deliver full body strength gains and do so with less risk to injury and greater carry over endurance work which I feel benefits overall boxing performance even better. I never claimed power was the only consideration for deadlifting.

[stephenmc]

Two points Alex..

You are entitled to your opinion and I am not knocking it, each to their own but..

- ANY resistance exercise that MIMICS a direct boxing movement using heavy weights will reduce boxing performance by interfering with the neural adaption.

- The deadlift doesn't interfere at all.

- The Squat is an exercise that probably doesn't do any harm to a boxers performance either, except, it does not fire the muscles in the correct sequences like punches and other boxing movements, the deadlift does.

- The squat is an unnatural movement that doesn't fully activate the core by transferring load from feet through shoulders to hands which aren't actually connected to the weight. It is not a full body exercise and it is not a test of raw strength. We were designed to lift things like a deadlift, not a squat.

- IT might FEEL like you use your quads more when you hit a punching bag, but when you hit a person or a "man bag" or a free standing punch bag which give a better impression of proper distance and ranging, you'll find the technique then becomes more like the muscles of the deadlift. In fact the squat does nothing really to build up and stabilise the upper back stabiliser, shoulder girdle, arms and forearms like the deads.

- I don't discern between high and low reps for deads for boxing. The exercise is so strengthening that even higher reps deliver full body strength gains and do so with less risk to injury and greater carry over endurance work which I feel benefits overall boxing performance even better. I never claimed power was the only consideration for deadlifting.

Thats why the squats are used to build your legs and nothing more,to stop the shaking when they get tired in the ring.
i personally think just shadowboxing whit very lightweights in your hands dose a great deal more than lifting weights,it also helps whit keeping your hands up. strap an ankle weight on and your building all (or nearly all) your muscles without jeopardizing your boxing skill,and increasing your speed which in the amateurs (and sometimes pros) is the most important thing then power. unless your like a heavyweight and want nothing more than to pack a big punch, but for lighter weights more notably in the amateurs it should be speed and getting in and out scoring a few points.

[AlexKid]

I responded to your points in bold within the old quote below

Two points Alex..

You are entitled to your opinion and I am not knocking it, each to their own but..


Its not my opinion its what a famous world class strength coach recommended to me when I emailed him after buying his book, if you look at what mayweather or pacman are doing in prep for their fight, its far more like what I have said than what you have said.


- ANY resistance exercise that MIMICS a direct boxing movement using heavy weights will reduce boxing performance by interfering with the neural adaption.

I didnt say use a heavy weight for the sport specific stuff, I said use a plyometric exercise rather than a deadlift for the sport specific exercise.


- The deadlift doesn't interfere at all.

It doesnt do much to improve performance either, if done with high reps and a low weight


- The Squat is an exercise that probably doesn't do any harm to a boxers performance either, except, it does not fire the muscles in the correct sequences like punches and other boxing movements, the deadlift does.


It improves performance, the deadlift doesnt fire the muscles in the correct sequence either, but both the deadlift and the squat fire part of the sequence in the correct order though. The squat is more boxing specific, due to how the leg drives the punch-(or so I/ and the famous strength coach believe)


- The squat is an unnatural movement that doesn't fully activate the core by transferring load from feet through shoulders to hands which aren't actually connected to the weight. It is not a full body exercise and it is not a test of raw strength. We were designed to lift things like a deadlift, not a squat.


Boxing has alot of unnatural movements too, the squat is more sport specific and so has more carryover (if quads are used more than hams). If you want to work the core there are better exercises for that than the deadlift. Also the squat works the core too, but again not as well as other exercises


- IT might FEEL like you use your quads more when you hit a punching bag, but when you hit a person or a "man bag" or a free standing punch bag which give a better impression of proper distance and ranging, you'll find the technique then becomes more like the muscles of the deadlift. In fact the squat does nothing really to build up and stabilise the upper back stabiliser, shoulder girdle, arms and forearms like the deads.



I believe you use both the hams and the quads but you use the quads more. I also believe you specifically may not be activating your quads properly when you punch.




- I don't discern between high and low reps for deads for boxing. The exercise is so strengthening that even higher reps deliver full body strength gains and do so with less risk to injury and greater carry over endurance work which I feel benefits overall boxing performance even better. I never claimed power was the only consideration for deadlifting.

You are training for strength endurance, boxing is power endurance again its not sport specific.

Good debate



It may well end up that the deadlift is superior for the maximum strength phase if hams are used more than quads etc, but doing high rep dead lifts isnt a great way to train, because it isnt a very sport specific movement compared with other exercises, and its not even a power endurance exercise, its a strength endurance exercise. Its much better to do a more sport specific plyometric exercise for the power endurance phase and a deadlift/squat for the maximum strength phase of the periodisation plan.

[Biolink]

Strength training is good for boxing. People have to understand it's not just about developing a dynamite punch or power, but becoming a better athlete in general which in turn you will be faster and stronger in most areas than you used to be. The Deadlift in particular might be the GOAT lift for boxing. My gym just added one and I think they are pretty old school. I've been doing this program so far.



You get stronger, but not necessarily bigger. You get a bit more swole especially if you've never lifted weights, but not all bulky and shyt to the point that it effects your technique. Just nice defined muscle tone. IMO you can't not afford to do compound lifts if you want to really take it to the next level in terms of explosiveness. You really miss out on a lot of stuff. Only so much pushups, body weight/kettlebettle squats and burpees can do for you before you want to progress faster. Not saying there aren't amazing people and GOATS that didn't lift weights, but there's certainly not much of a downside.

[Cechmate]

The deadlift is a fantastic exercise for boxers and athletes in general.

In other news; rain = it gets you wet.

[AlexKid]

The deadlift is a fantastic exercise for boxers and athletes in general.

In other news; rain = it gets you wet.

Not according to a world famous strength coach, Im talking one of if not the best strength and conditioning coaches in the world, it isnt, according to him, it doesn't target the prime movers for a boxing punch.

Also good sports training is as specific as possible, this notion that strong is strong and translates to any sport etc is poor advice for athletes.

[Cechmate]

Not according to a world famous strength coach, Im talking one of if not the best strength and conditioning coaches in the world, it isnt, according to him, it doesn't target the prime movers for a boxing punch.

Also good sports training is as specific as possible, this notion that strong is strong and translates to any sport etc is poor advice for athletes.

Wow, never read so much nonsense in all my life.

The deadlift improves functional strength. When you're in a clinch against a bigger guy, those deadlifts are going to pay dividends and stop you getting bullied around the ring like a bitch.

[AlexKid]

Wow, never read so much nonsense in all my life.

The deadlift improves functional strength. When you're in a clinch against a bigger guy, those deadlifts are going to pay dividends and stop you getting bullied around the ring like a bitch.

who is right the world famous coach with tons of successful athletes under his belt or you a nobody on the internet, i know where id place my cash

did calzagge get bullied like a bch vs jeff lacy? did he use deadlifts? did jeff?

im done here