Ortho or Southpaw Dilemma

UnderRatedGroundGame

White Belt
@White
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
So here is another one of those threads asking about which stance someone should use, but I think my case is a little different. I have been involved in semi contact sports on and off throughout my childhood and adolescence, even did some boxing in there too. A few years ago I decided to commit myself to full contact kickboxing/MMA but unfortunately long working hours and the fact the nearest reputable MMA gym is 30 miles away, I have had to learn from tutorials, breakdowns and sparring with a friend.

I am left handed, but because of the crappy kickboxing I did when I was a kid I was forced to fight orthodox (club rules IDK why). As I got older I started training southpaw and I'm at a point where both stances are useful but for different reasons. So I'm here to ask about your opinions as to what I should do. I might add that my fighting style is to start off pure counter striking and then gradually get more aggressive. Also I'm quite tall and so fight on the outside preferbly

Pros and Cons Ortho:
-I find more openings for strikes in orthodox stance, as in engaging not counter punching
-Left Hook is powerful and available as I'm comfortable throwing it.
-Jab is strong accurate and quick also a useful tool for maintaining range
-I have a Right Dominant Leg and so pushing forward is easier and opens up angles for my right hand
-Right Kicks
-Bit more comfortable due to time using Ortho

*Right Hand not as powerful as left but still have confidence in it
*Get hit a lot more in Ortho than Southpaw (not sure why maybe defense is lacking)
*Countering is harder in my experience
*The distance between me and Opponent is small than Southpaw

Pros and Cons Southpaw
-Left straight is obviously better, more accurate
-Counters way better too, I hardly ever get hit by right hand when sparring at my preferred range
-Movement backward is better (Due to Right leg in front) and thus I get hit less and counter more.
-Southpaw advantage

*Right Jab isn't as good as left, sometimes leaving me open for them to get inside
*Find less opening for me to engage the fight, a lot of work is done on the counter
*Left leg kicks not as great
*less experience, still needs a bit of work

So I'm indecisive as to what I should do. Do I focus on ortho, southpaw or both?
Thanks In advance.
 
So here is another one of those threads asking about which stance someone should use, but I think my case is a little different. I have been involved in semi contact sports on and off throughout my childhood and adolescence, even did some boxing in there too. A few years ago I decided to commit myself to full contact kickboxing/MMA but unfortunately long working hours and the fact the nearest reputable MMA gym is 30 miles away, I have had to learn from tutorials, breakdowns and sparring with a friend.

I am left handed, but because of the crappy kickboxing I did when I was a kid I was forced to fight orthodox (club rules IDK why). As I got older I started training southpaw and I'm at a point where both stances are useful but for different reasons. So I'm here to ask about your opinions as to what I should do. I might add that my fighting style is to start off pure counter striking and then gradually get more aggressive. Also I'm quite tall and so fight on the outside preferbly

Pros and Cons Ortho:
-I find more openings for strikes in orthodox stance, as in engaging not counter punching
-Left Hook is powerful and available as I'm comfortable throwing it.
-Jab is strong accurate and quick also a useful tool for maintaining range
-I have a Right Dominant Leg and so pushing forward is easier and opens up angles for my right hand
-Right Kicks
-Bit more comfortable due to time using Ortho

*Right Hand not as powerful as left but still have confidence in it
*Get hit a lot more in Ortho than Southpaw (not sure why maybe defense is lacking)
*Countering is harder in my experience
*The distance between me and Opponent is small than Southpaw

Pros and Cons Southpaw
-Left straight is obviously better, more accurate
-Counters way better too, I hardly ever get hit by right hand when sparring at my preferred range
-Movement backward is better (Due to Right leg in front) and thus I get hit less and counter more.
-Southpaw advantage

*Right Jab isn't as good as left, sometimes leaving me open for them to get inside
*Find less opening for me to engage the fight, a lot of work is done on the counter
*Left leg kicks not as great
*less experience, still needs a bit of work

So I'm indecisive as to what I should do. Do I focus on ortho, southpaw or both?
Thanks In advance.
Similarly for me, everything from my left side is heaps more powerful and stable. I couldn't throw an overhand right to save my life, but the overhand left is vicious. But since I started, I've been in orthodox. With this, I use "southpaw" attacks sparingly. I'm still always in my orthodox stance, but go SP for a brief instance to land those killer shots or to mess with my opponent.

Personally I feel its too much effort to re-learn everything after adjusting to your primary stance. Not only do you have to relearn how to strike, balance, speed. You need to have your body reconditioned to take blows. I can dish great damage in southpaw, but eating leg kicks to what is really my rear leg, I end up folding much faster than my real lead leg.

And if you train both stance simultaneously, its gonna take too long to get good at something.
 
So here is another one of those threads asking about which stance someone should use, but I think my case is a little different. I have been involved in semi contact sports on and off throughout my childhood and adolescence, even did some boxing in there too. A few years ago I decided to commit myself to full contact kickboxing/MMA but unfortunately long working hours and the fact the nearest reputable MMA gym is 30 miles away, I have had to learn from tutorials, breakdowns and sparring with a friend.

I am left handed, but because of the crappy kickboxing I did when I was a kid I was forced to fight orthodox (club rules IDK why). As I got older I started training southpaw and I'm at a point where both stances are useful but for different reasons. So I'm here to ask about your opinions as to what I should do. I might add that my fighting style is to start off pure counter striking and then gradually get more aggressive. Also I'm quite tall and so fight on the outside preferbly

Pros and Cons Ortho:
-I find more openings for strikes in orthodox stance, as in engaging not counter punching
-Left Hook is powerful and available as I'm comfortable throwing it.
-Jab is strong accurate and quick also a useful tool for maintaining range
-I have a Right Dominant Leg and so pushing forward is easier and opens up angles for my right hand
-Right Kicks
-Bit more comfortable due to time using Ortho

*Right Hand not as powerful as left but still have confidence in it
*Get hit a lot more in Ortho than Southpaw (not sure why maybe defense is lacking)
*Countering is harder in my experience
*The distance between me and Opponent is small than Southpaw

Pros and Cons Southpaw
-Left straight is obviously better, more accurate
-Counters way better too, I hardly ever get hit by right hand when sparring at my preferred range
-Movement backward is better (Due to Right leg in front) and thus I get hit less and counter more.
-Southpaw advantage

*Right Jab isn't as good as left, sometimes leaving me open for them to get inside
*Find less opening for me to engage the fight, a lot of work is done on the counter
*Left leg kicks not as great
*less experience, still needs a bit of work

So I'm indecisive as to what I should do. Do I focus on ortho, southpaw or both?
Thanks In advance.


You're left handed. So be southpaw. Having your left hand in front might be nice because its the more accurate hand, but you need the more accurate hand in the back so that you don't turn into a one handed fighter who's right straight misses the mark.

Also a southpaw typically only needs to do a few things well to success, land the right check hook while pivoting outside the opponents lead foot, land the left straight and the left body kick.

Practise southpaw and only southpaw for the first year or so until you're very comfortable, then start occasionally switching stances for certain techniques.

I know switch hitting and having a left handed left hook and jab are very appealing, but honestly I think when you start out you're just going to make things harder on yourself in the long run. There are plenty of great fighters who are converted southpaws like De La Hoya and Cotto, but they were taught right handed because their coaches didn't know how to teach southpaws - today with the internet you've got tons of resources if you're ever unsure of how to do something left handed, and why throw away the southpaw advantage for a harder jab.
 
So here is another one of those threads asking about which stance someone should use, but I think my case is a little different. I have been involved in semi contact sports on and off throughout my childhood and adolescence, even did some boxing in there too. A few years ago I decided to commit myself to full contact kickboxing/MMA but unfortunately long working hours and the fact the nearest reputable MMA gym is 30 miles away, I have had to learn from tutorials, breakdowns and sparring with a friend.

I am left handed, but because of the crappy kickboxing I did when I was a kid I was forced to fight orthodox (club rules IDK why). As I got older I started training southpaw and I'm at a point where both stances are useful but for different reasons. So I'm here to ask about your opinions as to what I should do. I might add that my fighting style is to start off pure counter striking and then gradually get more aggressive. Also I'm quite tall and so fight on the outside preferbly

Pros and Cons Ortho:
-I find more openings for strikes in orthodox stance, as in engaging not counter punching
-Left Hook is powerful and available as I'm comfortable throwing it.
-Jab is strong accurate and quick also a useful tool for maintaining range
-I have a Right Dominant Leg and so pushing forward is easier and opens up angles for my right hand
-Right Kicks
-Bit more comfortable due to time using Ortho

*Right Hand not as powerful as left but still have confidence in it
*Get hit a lot more in Ortho than Southpaw (not sure why maybe defense is lacking)
*Countering is harder in my experience
*The distance between me and Opponent is small than Southpaw

Pros and Cons Southpaw
-Left straight is obviously better, more accurate
-Counters way better too, I hardly ever get hit by right hand when sparring at my preferred range
-Movement backward is better (Due to Right leg in front) and thus I get hit less and counter more.
-Southpaw advantage

*Right Jab isn't as good as left, sometimes leaving me open for them to get inside
*Find less opening for me to engage the fight, a lot of work is done on the counter
*Left leg kicks not as great
*less experience, still needs a bit of work

So I'm indecisive as to what I should do. Do I focus on ortho, southpaw or both?
Thanks In advance.
Just use both man. The idea of orthodox or southpaw is fucking retarded. It makes you predictable and limits your options. Different stances work better against different people. Of course there will probably be a stance you feel more comfortable in. I am right handed but prefer southpaw. But i always have the ability to switch if the situation requires. Being able to fluidly change stances keeps you from becoming robotic.
 
Just use both man. The idea of orthodox or southpaw is fucking retarded. It makes you predictable and limits your options. Different stances work better against different people. Of course there will probably be a stance you feel more comfortable in. I am right handed but prefer southpaw. But i always have the ability to switch if the situation requires. Being able to fluidly change stances keeps you from becoming robotic.

Honestly this isn't the best advice, especially for someone who is still learning to adjust to full contact fighting. You might think it's retarded, but the truth is that there's a reason most people aren't switch hitters.

Switch hitters are just as predictable as conventional fighters. You never see a switch hitter who operates equally out of both stances, they are nearly always an orthodox/southpaw who occasionally switches to another stance for certain techniques.

All a switch hitter is, is a guy with certain techniques that he happens to throw from another stance, now this CAN throw an opponent off I agree - but people look at a switch hitter as if they're somehow 'better' or more confusing to fight than a single stance fighter like Mayweather, Lomachenko, Anderson Silva etc - yet these fighters confuse and baffle their opponents just as much.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not one to say switch hitting doesn't have it's place, after all I do it myself (and because I'm more of a knee fighter i kinda have to in order to advance easier) but I dunno if its the best idea to say southpaw/orthodox makes a fighter predictable and limited.
 
Honestly this isn't the best advice, especially for someone who is still learning to adjust to full contact fighting. You might think it's retarded, but the truth is that there's a reason most people aren't switch hitters.

Switch hitters are just as predictable as conventional fighters. You never see a switch hitter who operates equally out of both stances, they are nearly always an orthodox/southpaw who occasionally switches to another stance for certain techniques.

All a switch hitter is, is a guy with certain techniques that he happens to throw from another stance, now this CAN throw an opponent off I agree - but people look at a switch hitter as if they're somehow 'better' or more confusing to fight than a single stance fighter like Mayweather, Lomachenko, Anderson Silva etc - yet these fighters confuse and baffle their opponents just as much.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not one to say switch hitting doesn't have it's place, after all I do it myself (and because I'm more of a knee fighter i kinda have to in order to advance easier) but I dunno if its the best idea to say southpaw/orthodox makes a fighter predictable and limited.
Fair enough. I'll admit I only have about 1.5 years of training. In my defense though, I did say that you would probably be more comfortable in one stance or the other. You do make a good point. He should get more skilled in one so he can translate it to the opposite stance.
<5>
 
Honestly this isn't the best advice, especially for someone who is still learning to adjust to full contact fighting. You might think it's retarded, but the truth is that there's a reason most people aren't switch hitters.

Switch hitters are just as predictable as conventional fighters. You never see a switch hitter who operates equally out of both stances, they are nearly always an orthodox/southpaw who occasionally switches to another stance for certain techniques.

All a switch hitter is, is a guy with certain techniques that he happens to throw from another stance, now this CAN throw an opponent off I agree - but people look at a switch hitter as if they're somehow 'better' or more confusing to fight than a single stance fighter like Mayweather, Lomachenko, Anderson Silva etc - yet these fighters confuse and baffle their opponents just as much.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not one to say switch hitting doesn't have it's place, after all I do it myself (and because I'm more of a knee fighter i kinda have to in order to advance easier) but I dunno if its the best idea to say southpaw/orthodox makes a fighter predictable and limited.
PS. Please do continue to drop knowledge on me. I need that.
 
I say give southpaw a try but if you feel like it’s too late then go back ortho
 
I've only seen one truly successful switch hitter at the world class level and that's Crawford. I guess there's also Miguel Cotto but he's better when he stays orthodox. He doesn't switch stances on his best performances.

Fair enough. I'll admit I only have about 1.5 years of training. In my defense though, I did say that you would probably be more comfortable in one stance or the other. You do make a good point. He should get more skilled in one so he can translate it to the opposite stance.

Well think of it this way, how many world class fighters do you know who are switch hitters? And how many do it against competition they take seriously? Against experienced competition switching stances won't give a particular advantage. It's far more cost-effective to perfect one stance, which is what the vast majority of fighters do and have done for decades.
 
I've only seen one truly successful switch hitter at the world class level and that's Crawford. I guess there's also Miguel Cotto but he's better when he stays orthodox. He doesn't switch stances on his best performances.



Well think of it this way, how many world class fighters do you know who are switch hitters? And how many do it against competition they take seriously? Against experienced competition switching stances won't give a particular advantage. It's far more cost-effective to perfect one stance, which is what the vast majority of fighters do and have done for decades.
I don't even know what switch hitting is. I just think you should be good in either stance in case you find yourself out of your favorite stance.
 
I don't even know what switch hitting is. I just think you should be good in either stance in case you find yourself out of your favorite stance.
It simply means what the name implies. A fighter who can switch stances. For the vast majority of people, including world-class athletes, it isn't cost-effective to spend as much time on a different stance. If you're out of stance, you should work on your footwork and positioning so you don't find yourself out of stance and to recover quickly in case you do.
 
My boxing club did something called 'Southpaw Sunday's'.. I attended there Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday, so it turned out 33% of my training I was spending in a stance I never really intended on using. This was from day one! It really fucked my training up and slowed my progress down massively.
I think it's great if you have a lot of experience under your belt but you should invest time in your foundations first.
 
I've only seen one truly successful switch hitter at the world class level and that's Crawford. I guess there's also Miguel Cotto but he's better when he stays orthodox. He doesn't switch stances on his best performances.



Well think of it this way, how many world class fighters do you know who are switch hitters? And how many do it against competition they take seriously? Against experienced competition switching stances won't give a particular advantage. It's far more cost-effective to perfect one stance, which is what the vast majority of fighters do and have done for decades.
Maybe not much in boxing, but there are tons in KB. Andy Ristie (the only one to KO Petrosyan), Cedric Doumbe, etc.
 
My boxing club did something called 'Southpaw Sunday's'.. I attended there Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday, so it turned out 33% of my training I was spending in a stance I never really intended on using. This was from day one! It really fucked my training up and slowed my progress down massively.
I think it's great if you have a lot of experience under your belt but you should invest time in your foundations first.
This is proof that southpaws should all be locked away into concentration camps, and have their gear redistributed to normal people.
 
Hagler was pretty close to world class, and he was a switch hitter... but I think that the rarity of successful switch hitters shows that they are definitely the exception, not the rule.
 
Hagler was pretty close to world class, and he was a switch hitter... but I think that the rarity of successful switch hitters shows that they are definitely the exception, not the rule.

You are talking about Marvin Hagler being "pretty close to world class" <Eek2.0><Eek2.0>

MARVIN "MARVELOUS" HAGLER WAS WORDLCLASS ;)
 
Back
Top