Combat sports - Boxing , UFC etc

hello there fight fans ,

I know this is a little off topic or maybe not so much . But I must admit I love fight sports . any kindred souls out there.

by the way , previously it was asked how to keep fit at the trading desk - do shadow box, non stop as fast as you can, for as long as you can with 10 sec breaks in between sets , guarantee you'll lose weight .

wisestguy said:

hello there fight fans ,

I know this is a little off topic or maybe not so much . But I must admit I love fight sports . any kindred souls out there.

by the way , previously it was asked how to keep fit at the trading desk - do shadow box, non stop as fast as you can, for as long as you can with 10 sec breaks in between sets , guarantee you'll lose weight .

Click to expand...

SON, THE FIRST RULE ABOUT SHADOW BOXING IS THAT YUO DON'T TALK ABOUT SHADOW BOXING

AND SO ON

- CAR KEY BOI
100% LEAN MEAN FIGHTING MACHINE, ESPECIALLY ON THE GOLF COURSE - BRING A DOGGIE BAG FOR YUOR TEEF!

Put my fist through the screens many times :cheesy:

My mouse hand has developed considerably over the years. I cannot crush walnuts with it yet though.

I sometimes like to squat one legged at my desk with other leg resting on thigh. Change legs every few hours or it gets a little stiff.

twalker - sorry to hear about your hand. Are there any other parts of your anatomy which are similarly inhuman....?

However, you seem to have a fairly laissez faire approach to the use of various legs though - guess you must have a good stock.

Sliding back on topic just for a second though - For fun, fitness (and very occasionally profit), you can't beat full contact origami.

It's fast, furious and can be done anywhere and you don't even have to wear special clothing (or any actually). Paper cuts can be a hazard, but the frisson of potential blood-letting only adds to the thrill.

On a daily basis, I am afraid I practise more of the 'softer' sports to keep fit, i.e. jogging, aerobics, walking and yoga, though I do take some martial arts training now and then. And, instead of sitting, I stand in front of the computer all the day. Much better for my stomach.

However, despite all the efforts, I am still not a size 6. Ah well, I know there is my appetite to blame, but I do enjoy my food...

stand in front of the comp all day ?

hahaha . are you sure ? , that MUST be tiring and boring !

No, not at all. Maybe I have been used to it; I have been doing this for over a year. Now I can stand in from of my computer non-stop for several hours.

Cly,
Why make it so difficult for yourself....bodymass control is 80% dietary and 20% perspiration and the 20% perspiration is more than adequate to maintain muscular and cardiovascular activity to a point suitable for most people's everyday needs...the fabled six pack (being 'cut') is all about what you eat/drink coupled with a modest amount of excercise (or it is unless you are a professional athlete with all day to train)...consequently you could obtain more benefit from a set of crunches (done in a minute) than you do by standing up for several hours..there are no points for making something harder than it needs to be..just trying to be helpful

Thanks indeed for the information, chump . Not sure I want the six pack, but I will try the crunches. Are they also suitable for females?

I think all began in my last work placement in which I worked in an office environment. I spent so much time sitting, I got into the habit of standing up whenever I could. Now I simply prefer to stand if possible.

I agree with you that diet is an important part in keeping fit; I blame my appetite for the fact that I am not as slim as those models despite all the exercises. Does one have to go through the punishing diets as many of the models are rumoured to have done in order to obtain a shape like theirs ?

Cly,
Crunches are one of the better excercises to perform for stomach muscles in that they isolate the movement to only the muscles that should be excercised and put very little strain on the lower back when done correctly...I see no reason why a female should not do that excercise amongst others...but weight loss/gain is systemic...that is it occurs over all the body..not just a part..for example the stomach so finding excercises for ALL the body is much more useful..I just suggested crunches ,because you referred to standing being good for the stomach....you'd be surprised how much you can tuck away without gaining weight if you moderate just a small number of ingredients that are in most people's diets...if you want a place to start it should be with sugar/starch..this is the culprit for a lot of people who struggle with their weight...get as much as possible of this out of your diet and your body will start burning fat for fuel rather than excess sugar that it does not need..problem is you'd be surprised at the number of foodstuffs you consume that are heavily loaded with sugar/starch...eg bread...potatoes..cereals...take a look at the labels before you buy them..you will be aghast at the sugar you take in
Also to control your weight you shouldn't excercise like mad for short bursts as our friend mentions above..it's a simple fact that taking regular excercise at very moderate levels of intensity that you can maintain for periods of say 30-45 mins is much better for weight control as it burns more calories overall and in doing so gets your metabolic rate to help you with the process...short bursts of excercise are really just for speed / recovery and muscle bulking ..

As for superslim models...LOL...if you were not born with the bodytype no amount of diet ing is going to change that..but don't confuse appearance with physical fitness..they're completely different issues

Many thanks really, chump. The information is much helpful, but I had better not ask any more questions as I have robbed the thread enough...

Lynn,
If you stand still for hours you are likely to get blood pooling in your legs and an increased chance of varicose veins - and anyway, don't try to change anything, you are perfect as you are ;-)
Richard

"you are perfect as you are "....what a smoothie

On the thread..yes,I'm a boxing afficionado...my father was a boxer..bought me my first gloves when I was 4 years old and I have followed the sport all my life...warts and all

so who was your father ? maybe I've heard of him .

My father was a boxer.......













my mother was a french poodle :cheesy:

"so who was your father ? maybe I've heard of him ."...LOL...I doubt it...no 'champions' hidden in my family tree..he was a decent amateur back around WW2...boxed for the services and so forth..he loved the sport and passed that on to me ....I still have a bag as part of my gym setup...a useful outlet for when I screw up...so , boxing...I have Sugar Ray Leonard as my overall alltime boxing champ for a variety of reasons..not least because he beat perhaps the two 'hardest' fighters of modern day boxing by using the space between his ears ..a very intelligent boxer/fighter ... who's yours ?

Oatman..I didn't know you knew my mother

favourite boxer ? all time , I have a few , off hand :

sugar ray robinson

james toney

larry holmes

evander holyfield

floyd mayweather

tommy heans

"Favourite" would not be the same as "Greatest"..the criteria would not be the same...when I assess them I tend to cut off at 1960 arbitrarily ,because to me post and pre 1960 were different in many respects...changes to the individuals physical makeup through dietary and training techniques and then also changes to rules..eg from 15 round to 12 round contests etc..
Post 1960 I go for Leonard on the definitive basis of who he beat
Old Stone hands (should of been called stone head) Duran
Marvin Hagler
Tommy Hearns
Wilfredo Benitez
Any of these 4 would be well up in the lists themselves so to beat them all speaks of exceptional talent. To win also at 5 different weights is extraordinary as well. Taken in conjunction this puts him at the top of my list.
Holmes in my view was better than Ali in that he was a more complete fighter,but neither of them get to the top of the list ,because they didn't beat an array of exceptional fighters like Leonard did. There just were not enough other 'great' fighters in that division for them to beat.

Pre 1960 I'm torn between Robinson and Joe Louis , but on the above criteria I think Robinson get's the vote.

well , favourite is more relevant than greatest to me .

why cut off at 1960 , some of those in that era would cream the fighters of today , diet and all . and don't pressume modern training is all that superior to old school stuff.

leonard to me is a bit over rated , so was hagler . in hearns 1 , the fight was stopped too early , leonard just clipped him one and hearns was definitely not hurt badly.

the 2nd fight I thought hearns with 2 KD should have won , but they called it a draw.

he runs a little too much for my liking .

if I had to go for a greatest on the basis of record , then I guess Ali would be the pick , but I also thought he was over rated , that's why I have Holmes ahead of Ali. technically a better boxer and fought a lot of tough fights too.