Critique my punchbag work

Discussion in 'Ju Jitsu' started by hewho, Dec 16, 2020.

  1. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Grond and David Harrison like this.
  2. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Sorry for derailing your thread!

    Looking good, but your footwork looks a bit aimless and plodding. Maybe visualise why you are circling? More deliberate slipping and circling away from the power hand.
  3. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    Perhaps a better comparison would be between trainers and minimalist shoes like the toe shoes. I have run in them and have had success, until I pushed for more distance before my feet were ready for it. Then I ended up with a plantar fasciitis. However, I was running on concrete. The stride definitely needs to be altered when running with these shoes vs. trainers. There are proponents who feel that the bare foot is the ultimate running tool, and trainers with heavy cushioning and support simply isolate the foot from doing any work with the result of feet that get weaker and are more prone to injury. I believe there is merit to that position, but that running on grass or some other forgiving, natural surface is key. I believe humans were meant to run barefoot, but not on concrete. That is where I have had problems. I now run with a minimalist shoe, not toe shoes, although I may get some again, but most of my running is on the grass in a park. My stride is definitely different with these shoes than when I used to use cushioned trainers. Hard to describe it, but it is a more gentle stride in terms of impact with the ground. That is important.

    My suspicion is that combat boots, being heavy and wrapping the foot and ankle more thoroughly, limit the amount that the foot and ankle would naturally flex during running. This would tend to lead to injury if it is the regular and standard method.
  4. Morik

    Morik Well-Known Member Supporter MAP 2017 Gold Award

    I injured my knuckle pretty good once on a light bag (maybe a 30-50 lb banana bag). It was before a Muay Thai class and I hadn't wrapped up yet. I asked the instructor to show me how to throw the long hook (kinda looks like a cork-screwing jab). I was practicing that, lightly, on the bag, and managed to damage the extensor hood on my first knuckle.

    Due to that corkscrew motion I was impacting the bag directly on that spot (the first knuckle) a good number of times... I thought I was going light, but the corkscrew part made it hard to judge (I wasn't putting much hip/arm power into it).

    It took over 6 months to heal, during which time hitting pads/bags/etc built from 'this is pretty uncomfortable' to 'I can't punch even lightly without extreme pain' over the course of an hour.
    I did work out a way to train--putting a gel handwrap over top of my cloth wraps padded the knuckle enough to let me strike without much discomfort.

    Since then I always wrap up unless I'm doing open-hand striking or doing touch-contact (very minimal force) striking.
    Grond likes this.
  5. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    Unfortunately your rear foot is mostly out of the view when you are punching, so I can’t comment on that. However, when you kick, I would say your foot chatter is reduced, your platform foot is down on the ground better than it was in the previous video.
  6. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

  7. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    The article you linked does not discuss how the runners approached their training. Didn’t they switch and build up gradually? Did they run on concrete or on grass? Did they modify their stride so they didn’t try to run the same way that they did with trainers?

    Here is another article that was linked in the one your linked above:

    'Build up slowly' for barefoot runs

    Gives a pretty good quick overall summary of the current thinking.

    The main point is, it needs to be a gradual transition and buildup if you want to go to minimalist shoes or barefoot. In my case, I was running about 3 1/2 miles at a time, 3 or 4 days a week in Vibrams, on concrete for several months. I then increased my distance to about 5 + miles. After several weeks is when I developed the problem.

    Dr. Wilkinson in that article suggested beginning the transition on hard surfaces is best. My non-medical opinion is the opposite, and here is my reasoning: Modern Humans have been on this planet for a couple hundred thousand years, and our hominid ancestors for some millions before that. We have been runners all this time, at least for the duration of modern humans. Modern cushioned and supported running shoes have been on this planet for a few decades. Prior to that, in the modern era, people wore flatter shoes. In non-technological cultures today, people still run bare-footed. But the key issue is that prehistoric people and modern non-technological people are are/were running on natural surfaces, and not on superhard concrete, which is what we in the technologically advanced cultures like to cover everything with. It makes reasonable sense that running on a natural surface is what the Homo sapiens was designed for, and that the foot of the Homo sapiens was meant for doing this effectively and safely.

    As is discussed in the linked article, minimalist/barefoot running requires a different stride than what is possible with modern trainers.

    So my take on it: if you run with minimalist shoes or barefoot, do it in the grass or on a dirt trail, do it gradually and carefully, and make sure you are properly modifying your stride so you don’t run the same way that you did in trainers. If you do this, then you can do it without injury, although every individual needs to assess their own situation. Some people may have injuries or other long term foot health issues that make this a bad idea. It isn’t for everyone, but that does not mean it is automatically a bad idea.

    Currently I am running about three times a week in minimalist shoes (not Vibrams), on the grass, about three miles. It is working out well. Some advocates run marathon and longer distances in Vibrams or barefoot. It works for them. But you don’t just go out and do that on the first day. You approach it gradually and cautiously and you build up to it. You find your limits and if you push those limits you do it slowly and cautiously. And for many people it can be perfectly safe.
  8. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    From the BBC link. "
    Dr Mark Burnley, a senior lecturer in exercise physiology at the University of Kent, told BBC News: "Barefoot running is an interesting phenomenon as it goes in and out of fashion quite regularly.

    "[In my opinion] There is simply not enough epidemiological evidence to demonstrate benefit either way, and an analysis of the biomechanical differences suggests that the benefits gained (reduced impact peak) are offset by the negative effects (increased stress on other structures). In short, adopting a barefoot running style is certainly possible, will save you money on shoes, but is not some injury-eliminating/performance-enhancing panacea."


    I think that says it all.
  9. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    Well no, that does not say it all. Not even close.

    That is one doctor's opinion, which of course is worth considering.

    Immediately following that section of the article, was the following:

    "Dr Wilkinson also made it clear that there was little detailed research on injury rates in barefoot running, at performance improvement from changing to barefoot running, or whether the benefits of barefoot running are definitely from changing where on your foot you land, rather than something else to do with taking your shoes off.

    Not all experts agree that you need to run completely barefoot to get the benefits though. Stuart Miller, a senior lecturer in biomechanics at the London Sport Institute, Middlesex University, told BBC News: "It appears that even with use of very thin running shoes, people will still transfer to forefoot striking. The difference in rate at which people will transfer when using [barefoot emulating] shoes compared to barefoot is likely to be minimal.

    "There just isn't a study with a large enough sample size, or enough studies investigating the matter, to warrant any conclusion on that."

    He agreed with Dr Wilkinson's conclusions about gradually transitioning to barefoot running. "Initially, the pain/stiffness can last up to about two weeks, so do take this into account when thinking about your next barefoot run; let your body adapt, and don't try to 'run through it'."

    But he is a fan of barefoot running himself, saying: "I think if the progression into barefoot running is gradual and controlled, then I don't know of any negatives associated with it… other than standing in something you don't really want to."

    The real answer is much more nuanced. There is no clear Bad or Good answer to this. If you are uncomfortable with the concept of minimalist shoes or barefoot running, then you should not do it. I would never try to insist otherwise.

    But in a discussion where the topic has come up, I put my vote in as a good thing, if you approach it sensibly. It is certainly not for everyone. Like most things in life.
  10. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    What advantages to barefoot running have you found?

    Are they the same as the ones vibram used to claim?
  11. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    I did find that i was experiencing knee problems when I wore cushioned trainers and I have not experienced that with minimalist shoes.

    I am convinced that the introduction of modern trainers with lots of cushioning and support caused a change in the running stride that is counter to what is actually optimal for the human body. Striking heel-first, as discussed in the two articles, creates a lot of force that jolts up the leg. Landing with the mid foot is gentler and doesn’t create that same force.

    In my opinion, minimalist/barefoot is a return to using out body in a more natural state, as it was really designed. I also find it convincing that when we constantly wrap our feet in heavy protection, including when doing exercise, we prevent the feet from stretching and flexing naturally and the foot does not engage in the actual work of walking or running. It becomes something of a dead platform that we just use to hold up our weight, when it ought to be an actively engaging component of the standing/walking/running/moving process.

    I am actually barefoot most of the time right now. I live in a climate where that is possible, even in winter, and with Covid I am currently unemployed so I have little need to put on shoes. I like the feeling, I like how my feet stretch and engage with the floor and this includes when I run. The downside is that’s I have hard surfaces in my home that can lead to callouses and such on my feet, given that I am barefoot all the time. As I have mentioned earlier, I do believe Humans were meant to be barefoot, but also we were meant to be on softer, natural surfaces like grass.

    When I run with minimalist shoes, I feel like my feet actually engage with the process. They interact with the ground, they flex and stretch, and ultimately they get stronger for it.

    As for Vibram’s claims, I am only vaguely aware of what they are, that they lead to stronger and healthier feet. In my experience, I would agree with that, at least in potential. As I keep stressing, one needs to approach it intelligently. Like anything, this is no magic pill. Like anything, if you go about it incorrectly, you can injure yourself. The article you posted, about the Vibrams settlement, I pointed out that nothing is said about how people went about switching to using those shoes, and whether they did it correctly or if they just put them on and then started immediately sprinting down the street, striking with the heel first, and expected an instant miracle improvement. My suspicion is that a lot of people did the latter, because that seems consistent with how people tend to behave in general.
  12. Alansmurf

    Alansmurf Aspire to Inspire before you Expire Supporter

    Thread slippage extraordinaire
    Dead_pool likes this.
  13. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    It's controversial that wrapping your hands up before bagwork or competition is unnecessary/optional? Why do you need data beyond the history of boxing? That's just weird to me. Why would you not want to wrap up your hands before hitting anything? Wraps didn't just spontaneously spring up out of nowhere. They're intended to keep it all tight and compact so that at the moment of strike they don't all crash into each other. When I say "they" I mean what Icefield said, all those little bones and fragile connective tissue.

    Honestly, I've never really competed but if you don't wrap your hands with discipline, you'll regret it later on. That's all I know, maybe some of you kung fu guys know better.
  14. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    Every boxing trainer I every met said it. It's common knowledge, isn't it? Hewho even admitted it, but I didn't mean to call anyone out.

    It's actually really strange to me that people forego it. It takes minutes and can spare you decades of pain. Not to mention its fun to do, and fun to teach others. Maybe it's just me.
  15. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Sorry Grond, that's not data. You haven't even given any compelling anecdotal evidence. How many people do you know who have messed up their hands because they didn't use wraps?

    Lots of pointless, or even harmful, practices have been done because it was "common knowledge" that it was beneficial. Don't mistake asking for evidence as me taking a position against hand wraps. "Everybody says so" is just not a viable explanation.
  16. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    I’ve got to be honest, I have been a bit dumbstruck to discover this level of opposition to the idea of hitting a heavy bag without wraps and gloves. I’ve been training since 1984 and a heavy bag has been a component of my training for much of that time. I’ve never used wraps, and I only used a thin bag glove in the beginning because my first heavy bag was canvas and It would rip the skin off my knuckles if my fist in any way slid on the surface. So I wore the gloves so I wouldn’t bleed all over the bag and then need to lay off the bag work until the scabs healed. I finally got rid of that bag and have never used gloves since.

    I absolutely understand why folks who are interested in competition would use wraps and gloves. That makes perfect sense to me.

    Outside of competition, people ought to do what they feel most comfortable with. If you are concerned about injury, and the wraps and gloves help alleviate those concerns for you, then you should use them.

    But seriously, this is no big deal. I’ve never had an injury from the bag that was worth mentioning. It’s just never been a problem. But people need to decide what is best for them.
  17. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    You claim it's anecdotal, and then ask me "how many people do you know"? Weird.

    You're arguing as if this doesn't exist and isn't already well documented in combat sports medicine, which it is. So if you don't find this compelling then nothing I say or claim will move you, I suppose. But seriously, don't have this kind of attitude in any real boxing gym they will laugh you out of the place.

    Boxer's fracture - Wikipedia

    Last edited: Dec 23, 2020
  18. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    ^ See this is what an actual anecdote looks like. Wraps are not just for competition, they're for anyone who trains for long periods of time (years) on heavy bags. But it doesn't take that long to cause any of these injuries, newbies get them all the time in boxing gyms or regular gyms all over the world, which is why coaches stress it.

    Again, you're weirding me out by basically denying one of the basic tenets of pugilism as if it's a "nice to have". Sorry, you're 100% wrong. Inflammation, carpel tunnel, and boxer's fractures are considered one of the worst occupation hazards in the whole history of boxing going back to the Roman and Greek eras.

    All About Hand Wrapping for Boxing | Gloveworx

    There are a few things boxers need for training: gloves, good shoes and hand wraps. Hand wrapping is usually the last thing boxers think about. However, your ability to punch lies just as much in your hand wrapping as it does in your mind. Without a good hand wrap, you may be open to injury and hesitate to take a punch.
    The History of Hand Wrapping

    The first time that hand wrapping for boxing was mentioned in history was in Ancient Greece in 688 B.C.E. Boxing was a part of the very first Olympics and was often used in gymnasiums among the Grecians as part of their education as young men. The Ancient Greeks used strips of oxhide softened with olive oil, called himantes, to wrap their hands.

    Boxing was outlawed in Rome after 500 C.E. So, it went underground, and bare-knuckle matches became the norm. In 1743, a rudimentary padded glove was used during training but was not used in professional fights. That changed in 1867 when the 9th Marquess of Queensberry, John Douglas, endorsed the code of modern boxing. Gloves were finally considered normal boxing equipment. From the 19th century up to the 1920s hand wrapping became popular. In the 1920s it became the standard for glove boxing to protect the hands.

    In the 1920s, gauze and tape became the norm for hand wrapping. With the invention of masking tape, boxers had the ability for the first time to have an adhesive to secure the gauze.
    The Purpose of Hand Wrapping

    The purpose of hand wrapping has a few objectives. One is to provide a protective barrier for the fighters’ hands. The hand structure consists of small joints and small bones that are fragile and subject to fracture from the impact of repetitive punches. Hand wrapping also protects the tendons, muscles and cushions the impact of the wrist.

    The second purpose of the hand wrap is to keep the loose or moving joints in place. It provides restriction for these joints, so the shock is absorbed and redistributed across the entire hand. If your joints are moving around when the fist makes contact with an object, a fracture could occur. Additionally, there could also be other injuries to the tendons and muscles. These injuries could interfere with your everyday activities."
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2020
  19. Flying Crane

    Flying Crane Active Member

    Clearly you should train with wraps and gloves. I would never stand in the way of you doing that. :)
  20. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Come on, Grond, throw me a bone here. All I've been asking for is a link to some evidence. If it's well documented in sports medicine that bag work without wraps causes inflammation and carpal tunnel, then why can't you just hit me with some knowledge instead of scolding me for not accepting your word for it? It strikes me as a strange attitude.

    Speaking of strange attitudes, if a gym were to laugh at me for asking why they do something, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with them anyway. That attitude is a good example of a toxic training environment.
    Flying Crane likes this.

Share This Page