sorry to seperate the thread mike but i think this is a good discussion but didnt want people flooding the quest for the daughters martial art.

how do you guys feel about boxers?

i don't really consider them a martial art as such, i mean (like thai boxing and sorts) you take a punch to give one back, so you get trained to keep your guard up and take the hit, what if its a hit you cant take? from the movements of boxers (the way they swing out when being attacked) there seems to be no stability, thier balance is non existant and a martial artist will be able to use this quite well.

plus boxers dont train for attacks coming to the legs, and the only fighting scene they see is the ring so the get dependant on using the roaps.

i often think about this as i walk home past a boxing club and some people in thier seem arrogant as hell so i go through what i think id do if they attacked me.

Good idea - these threads always go off at a tangent.

It's bizarre how many MA threads there are in this part of the forum!

I guess if faced with a boxer I'd try to stay out of range of their devastating punches and kick to the legs, but easier said than done. I think many are scared of boxers because they do so much contact sparring and are used to taking hits.

This is an interesting read:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8185

I would consider boxers to be excellent martial artists; they just aren't typically included in that category.

Considering the amount of cross training they do (fitness, weights, running), the dedication to perfecting a small range of techniques (jabs, hooks and uppercuts), and then developing combinations this would be equivalent to any punching based martial art.

As for balance, I believe a boxer starts off learning footwork and movement and it is only when this is masters that punching is developed. I feel they would be more moblie and balanced than many (especially japanse based) martial artists, who typically train while moving in a straight line up and down the dojo.

The lack of kicking is a vaild point, and is an imposed limitation. When kicking is allowed you get Thai boxing, which is respected as a devastating art the world over.

Boxing is not classed as an art but many forms of it are just that. The footwork, head movement, punching & countering and balance all take much mastering. I have to admit out of all the disciplines I have trained in boxing has always been my greatest love and its what I have competed more at and been more successful in.

Leg kicking would work against a boxer but I think a more successful route would be takedown. Get the boxer off their feet and takeaway their best weapon and hope they don't have any ground skills.

what do you people consider cross training?

i think fitness, weights, and calisthenics are all fundamental to any style, so i wouldnt call it bross training, i think cross training is more a boxer who takes up tkd to fill the gaps in his system.

adam s not sure how much balance is an issue in shotokan but in the japanese art i study it is one of the main areas.

lickszz - true but i shudder at the thought of trying to get to a boxers legs, lol, i wouldnt like to attempt it from the front, and give him the height advantage on my head.

Originally posted by tombodojoj
what do you people consider cross training?

i think fitness, weights, and calisthenics are all fundamental to any style, so i wouldnt call it bross training, i think cross training is more a boxer who takes up tkd to fill the gaps in his system.

adam s not sure how much balance is an issue in shotokan but in the japanese art i study it is one of the main areas.

lickszz - true but i shudder at the thought of trying to get to a boxers legs, lol, i wouldnt like to attempt it from the front, and give him the height advantage on my head.

I consider cross training just as you mentioned it. Learning other techiniques that are not associated with your chosen background. It's just if you went for a takedown (properly disguised), They wouldn't be expecting it and you would be too close for any boxer to get decent leverage and I think the boxer would be more concerned with trying to not go down than hitting you. Of course they might have a decent takedown defense, IE spreading their legs, in which case you could be in trouble.

They are supposed to be better for your sperm count apparently
:thumbsup:

Originally posted by Belle
They are supposed to be better for your sperm count apparently
:thumbsup:

lol, they do look better but don't give the much needed support to the lower region when taking part in physical training.

How about this idea ?? ...

Make out like you're going to box them (option: look like you are afraid ... this will fill them with confidence ... which is good for you).

If you can get them coming to you ... even better.

As a soon as you're at an appropriate range.

Quickly drop to the floor ... and sideways roll in to their legs (they might not be expecting this) ... you need to do this bit very fast.

Take them down to the floor (you will need to control their lower legs / feet).

You are now in a floor grappling situation ... which the boxer will not have experience with and you will (in an ideal world).

I like boxers.
Always make sure you wash them first though or you could end up with a nasy rash on yo' ass.

:D

Does anyone know of any decent boxing gyms in the town centre/devonshire area?

Isn't there one on the Wincobank?! You'd think so given that Prince Naseem is originally off that Estate,

Dig the phone book out or Google for it.

i there is one, its on newman road, wincobank boys club run by brendon ingles, its quite cool, i attended for a while, coz i live right on it:)

Personally if i got started on by a boxer, i'd stand toe to toe and box with him for abit, then maybe get in close and get the elbows and knee's into play, then back off and wear him out with some nice kicks to the body and legs.. Then walk into him and take him down with the knee's..

Taking i practise in Freestyle & MuayThai i can fight at his game, and my own..

Nah, if you had the balls you could always try and confuse him. Bring your right arm all the way back like you're going to take a big swing with it and then give him a little stiff jab with the left ;)

i don't think any of that would work, i think if anyone tried to box with a boxer unless they were a boxer, (not a muay thai fighter) youd pretty much get beat badly, so you wouldnt have the strenght to wait, boxers are not people you can play with, (and i also study mauy thai) a boxing friend of mine went to a local kick boxing club and the top students thought he would be easy and tried to out box him, needless to say they got beat, to beat a boxer would take tactics, not going up against him with what he does best.

take shoot fighters, they take the kicks/knees/elbows of muay thai, and the punchs from western boxing why?because its the best tools for the job. and i can see any type of kick/thai boxer not keeping a boxer at a distance with his legs gettin his ass whooped if he tries to out punch him, and i dont think a little left jab would do much to a trained boxer, lol, like i said i dont view them as a martial art really but i think they would make a bloody hard opponant.

I was only joking.. the boxers I know and indeed myself would see that a mile away.

Don't forget that you're not in the ring, a low blow won't deduct points ;)

Things boxers aren't trained for are getting hit with solid punches (bare fist) to the upper chest and the neck.

Smashing dogs, prefer Collies though myself.:thumbsup:

Prefer Japanese Akita's, with Wolf coats..

Had a sparring session once with a (reasonably good) amateur boxer, and was blown away by his hand speed. I found a useful tactic was simply staying just beyond jabbing distance and picking one's moments wisely - no use going toe-to-toe with someone who's far moreused to it.

Having been in situations with people who obviously have some boxing experience, I've found that targeting those areas that they're not conditioned to defend (neck, joints esp knees, kidneys) can be advantageous. Although (obviously) each attack determines one's reaction.

Originally posted by tombodojoj
sorry to seperate the thread mike but i think this is a good discussion but didnt want people flooding the quest for the daughters martial art.

how do you guys feel about boxers?

i don't really consider them a martial art as such, i mean (like thai boxing and sorts) you take a punch to give one back, so you get trained to keep your guard up and take the hit, what if its a hit you cant take? from the movements of boxers (the way they swing out when being attacked) there seems to be no stability, thier balance is non existant and a martial artist will be able to use this quite well.

plus boxers dont train for attacks coming to the legs, and the only fighting scene they see is the ring so the get dependant on using the roaps.

i often think about this as i walk home past a boxing club and some people in thier seem arrogant as hell so i go through what i think id do if they attacked me.


well im sry to break this to u but if u can't take a hit that hits ur guard u must be a #$%#$%# panzy! But i can tell u are not well informed because kickboxing/boxing/mauy thai involes sliping, weaving, and bobbing. U use these to avoid punches and kicks and you come back with a counter of your own. But the kickboxing school iu go mixes aall the best martial arts into 1 making it a very successful martial art. But once u start opening up your fists (ex. gung fu) you are gonna start breaking your fingers. It best to keep them close unless grappling or stuff like that but mainly i prefere closed fist mehod.

Originally posted by Rurouni_Roni
well im sry to break this to u but if u can't take a hit that hits ur guard u must be a #$%#$%# panzy!

Even if the hit breaks your wrists?

If someone has a guard up, then it is pointless going to hit their head, unless you are aiming to break the guard. You can either wait for them to lower thier guard or take the guard away by hitting it.

Ive seen how hard people hit, i wouldnt like to use my guard to take the punch, the guard/kamae/stance is there for more reasons than to just take a punch.

Boxers are hard Period!!!

now we can talk all day about being able to leg kick them or take them down but if its a pro boxer, easier said than done.

Boxers DO have overall core stability too.

naah its touch and go when fighting a boxer, you cant guarantee anything.

If youre a good low kicker or grappler you stand a chance

You should watch Ultimate Fighting. In the ones I saw it was pretty clear boxing is not a good way to fight if you want to win. The jiu jitsu guy seriosuly kicked the boxers guys arse. Basically all he had to do was knock the boxer over and then he was screwed becaue with the gloves he couldnt grapple....not sure how it would go without the gloves - but then presumably he cant hit because the damage it would do to his fists?

It's more down to the individual not the style.

Hello

This is a long shot
Do you know Prince Naseem or have the ability to contact him?

I have painted a large portrait of him alongside his hero Muhammed Ali and wish him to at least see it. I believe he is the potential puchaser of this work of Art.

"Prince and King"
Acrylic on Canvas
1,80 x 1,80m
2000
by Pete Kilkenny

www.kilkennygallery.com

Best Regards
Pete kilkenny

There would be absolutely no contest if a pro boxer fought with the likes of a pro "thai boxer" boxer only use there fists, where as a thai boxer are trained to use kicks,elbows,knees,fists etc

I train at the wicker camp & do group classes me + 3mates & we get trained by christian di paulo (world champion) the training can be really intense, & there as been times i have felt like passing out.

I heard a story about this bareknuckle fighter who was brittish champion who challenged 1 of the thai boxers from the gym. I think this was mick mulany the owner of the gym, & apparentely mick just kicked the guy & he couldn't walk for a month... this is no suprise to me as i have taken shots to my leg even though i had pads to protect me, but still got dead leg, I'm not sure about other martial arts but in thai boxing you kick with you're shin... which can have pretty devestating affects once you have the right teqhnigue

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lista
[B]Personally if i got started on by a boxer, i'd stand toe to toe and box with him for abit, then maybe get in close and get the elbows and knee's into play, then back off and wear him out with some nice kicks to the body and legs.. Then walk into him and take him down with the knee's..

OOOO yeah! pretty much what I'd do too muhahahahaha!!!

:heyhey:

Originally posted by Scottyb
There would be absolutely no contest if a pro boxer fought with the likes of a pro "thai boxer" boxer only use there fists, where as a thai boxer are trained to use kicks,elbows,knees,fists etc

I train at the wicker camp & do group classes me + 3mates & we get trained by christian di paulo (world champion) the training can be really intense, & there as been times i have felt like passing out.

I heard a story about this bareknuckle fighter who was brittish champion who challenged 1 of the thai boxers from the gym. I think this was mick mulany the owner of the gym, & apparentely mick just kicked the guy & he couldn't walk for a month... this is no suprise to me as i have taken shots to my leg even though i had pads to protect me, but still got dead leg, I'm not sure about other martial arts but in thai boxing you kick with you're shin... which can have pretty devestating affects once you have the right teqhnigue

I'm afraid your facts seem a little distorted. They don't actually have a recognised bareknuckle championship in Great Britain. All the stuff on the cobbles is mainly word of mouth and reputation. Do you know the name of this bare knuckle champion? Did this fight take place on the cobbles or in a ring, it makes a difference!

I keep emphasising this point in these kind of debates, it's nothing to do with the style it's down to the respective individuals.

A member of pubic would not have a chance in HELL against a boxer as they dodge really quick.
(I should know I have sparred with one at a boxing dinner!)

The fake big swing/ jab wouldn't work. Boxers are trained to deal with feints etc. Best way to fight a boxer si to go to the legs either kicking or take down. However, just cos somebody boxes doesn't mean that they don't know other forms of combat. I know boxers who also wrestle so tou could be in trouble. There is a boxing gym just outside city centre called st vincents

Originally posted by Scottyb
i have taken shots to my leg even though i had pads to protect me, but still got dead leg

I did the kicking, remember? Put a mattress on your leg and I'll still make it dead 8)

Originally posted by kkmohind
The fake big swing/ jab wouldn't work. Boxers are trained to deal with feints etc.

Actually, I do this in sparring and it confuses people more than you think. I never do the same things over and over, I mix up all my punches and kicks in the ring.

Originally posted by rarstar
I like boxers.
Always make sure you wash them first though or you could end up with a nasy rash on yo' ass.

:D

Why dont russian power workers wear boxer shorts?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Because Chenoble fall out

Boxing hand work is the best PERIOD!

Now look at all the full contact martial arts for example :
Kickboxing (proper kickboxing not that lau gar crap or dliuted plastic karate or kickfit and all that non/semi contact ********) , Muay thai, Mixed martial arts ,..etc
They all incorporate boxing style handwork and in my opinion they are probably the most vicious form of self defense there is!

Boxers can bloody punch! they can take a punch and theyre fit!

I've no idea why you wouldn't consider it a martial art. Most martial arts have areas they concentrate in and other area's where they aren't so hot.
Most of the competitive martial arts have competitions with rules.

If I new someone was a boxer, I'd probably run the hell away. And hope that he's not in the mood to chase me since his cv is probably better than mine.

If you have to fight them then closing them down and taking it to the floor from the clinch is probably the best option you have. Just be prepared to get hit very hard as you try the closing down bit.

there is a good gym on welligton street, nice people there!

Gerbutt yeah your right about wellington street boxing gym
thats where i go to for the kickboxing too
its run by Brett Stocks and his dad.

Cyclone you are spot on about boxing being a martial art too
a lot of traditional martial arts guys have delusions about being able to take on a boxer.
Boxers are fit, strong, tough hard people
thats not opinion, thats a FACT!

And i thought was gonna be an interesting thread bout mens undies. :D

Originally posted by Freddylee
Boxing hand work is the best PERIOD!



That goes without saying. The thing that so often goes unnoticed is that a talented boxer usually has excellent balance and footwork. Everything else usually stems from these. A decent boxer always keeps the target moving, when they are not moving they should be punching.

Woah, this thread has been going for over a year.

Just a General Question to everyone:

If your a martial artist and you think that a boxer has the best footwork, handwork and balance then why are you doing martial arts? why not take up boxing?

The way i see it, a martial artist should be able to easily win against a boxer, if they cant they are not a martial artist.

To keep with the thread. I see boxers as being athletes (very good and very hard athletes :-) ) not martial artists.

Ste

Originally posted by battouchan
Woah, this thread has been going for over a year.

Just a General Question to everyone:

If your a martial artist and you think that a boxer has the best footwork, handwork and balance then why are you doing martial arts? why not take up boxing?

The way i see it, a martial artist should be able to easily win against a boxer, if they cant they are not a martial artist.

To keep with the thread. I see boxers as being athletes (very good and very hard athletes :-) ) not martial artists.

Ste

what makes what they do not a martial art? Is it a lack of the martial side (i don't see that), or a lack of the 'art' side?

I do a different martial art to boxing because my interests are slightly different. I keep planning to start cross training in boxing as it has some good skills to learn and good lessons to teach.

The main argument I've seen before for boxing not being a martial art, is that it's western. I've never found a reason though that only eastern arts are martial arts.

Originally posted by battouchan
Woah, this thread has been going for over a year.

Just a General Question to everyone:

If your a martial artist and you think that a boxer has the best footwork, handwork and balance then why are you doing martial arts? why not take up boxing?

The way i see it, a martial artist should be able to easily win against a boxer, if they cant they are not a martial artist.

To keep with the thread. I see boxers as being athletes (very good and very hard athletes :-) ) not martial artists.

Ste

they are obviously also missing kicking, grappling, groundwork, locking and throwing as part of the art. In just the same way that pretty much all martial arts have areas of focus so does boxing.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!

It really depends on how you veiw a martial art, personally i equate the words to the japanese word budo, very loosly translated to the Warrior Way.

Areas of focus is an interesting one. I have seen loads of people do one martial art and then take up another one to fill the gaps! Personally i think that is a really bizzare idea, if your martial art has gaps or is focused on one thing then drop it and find one that isnt. If people do multiple MA, it is as if they dont believe that the training they do will work.

When a Samurai's sword got broken on the battlefield, you didnt see them switching martial arts and going into a boxing stance or a referee shouting stop. Swordsmanship, Grappling, Striking is all in their budo. They favoured weapons, but they were adept at everything else, unlike most martial arts nowadays that focus and only know one thing.

Boxing is a sport and that is their focus. Of course it will probably be usefull out side of the sport, the same way say ....chess would be. So i guess if i were to call Boxing a martial art, i would have to call chess one too.

Ste
"Banpen Fugyo"

why am i not doing boxing?
im doign a martial arts system that incorporates boxing handwork
the same way that kickboxing and mauy thai do

Originally posted by battouchan
Woah, this thread has been going for over a year.

Just a General Question to everyone:

If your a martial artist and you think that a boxer has the best footwork, handwork and balance then why are you doing martial arts? why not take up boxing?

The way i see it, a martial artist should be able to easily win against a boxer, if they cant they are not a martial artist.

To keep with the thread. I see boxers as being athletes (very good and very hard athletes :-) ) not martial artists.

Ste

Before retiring from competition I was a competative boxer for 14 years. A previous job encouraged and gave me the opportunity to learn and be compete in various martial arts and other combat sports.

No one system is full proof, and no one particular system always defeats another, it's individual based.

Originally posted by battouchan
Areas of focus is an interesting one. I have seen loads of people do one martial art and then take up another one to fill the gaps! Personally i think that is a really bizzare idea, if your martial art has gaps or is focused on one thing then drop it and find one that isnt. If people do multiple MA, it is as if they dont believe that the training they do will work.


People who train in multiple MA do so because they believe that all MA systems have gaps – there may be some MA’s that do touch all the bases, but compared to specialized arts, they simply don’t do so well enough. For example, some systems incorporate groundwork, but the groundwork they do is not as good as that found in BJJ. Training in multiple MA’s is therefore perceived as the answer, and it’s a methodology that has been used for a long time. If one MA provided (for arguments sake), the hand skills and footwork of boxing, the knees and elbows of muay thai, the throws of judo and the groundwork of BJJ, I sincerely believe that Bruce Lee would have had no basis for JKD, and the recent popular explosion in MMA would not have happened. The fact that they have happened is testimony to the fact that those with an open mind and vast amounts of experience in several martial arts have acknowledged that MMA is necessary to attain the highest levels of excellence. On Monday night I was training with a competitive MMA fighter – he’s trained in BJJ, Shootfighting, Muay Thai, Greco-Roman wrestling, boxing and Ju Jitsu to name but a few – I hardly believe that he would do all this if all his requirements were fulfilled from one style, and neither would the likes of Bas Rutten, Frank Shamrock, Rickson Gracie or any other notable names from MMA.

For me, to oppose the idea of training in multiple MA is to oppose the ideas of martial arts legends such as Bruce Lee and Dan Inosanto, successful MMA fighters such as Bas Rutten and Frank Shamrock, and respected ‘reality based self-defence’ instructors such as Geoff Thompson and Dave Turton. I’m not suggesting to oppose such people automatically makes one wrong, but personally I have no where near the amount of experience necessary to do so myself.

One final point, accepting your distinction between boxing and ‘martial arts’ (for arguments sake), Bruce Lee, Geoff Thompson and Marc ‘Animal’ MacYoung have all been quoted as saying something to the extent that they would fear a boxer more than a martial artist. Again, I’m not saying to disagree with them is automatically wrong, but they have an awful lot of experience between them to make such an assertion.

Originally posted by battouchan
The way i see it, a martial artist should be able to easily win against a boxer, if they cant they are not a martial artist.


someone who does martial arts is a martial artist - period. it does not matter if they are good or bad, beat a boxer or lose to a boxer, they are still a martial artist.

Cheers for your posts anvil. I actually agree with alot of the stuff your saying. And i completley respect the skill that boxers have and that MMA's have.

Before say 200 years ago, there wernt that many martial arts. Now we have 1000s of different martial arts and clubs that have self proclaimed grand masters, and that train for tropheys and belts. People only know, 'specialised' martial arts and a lot of what people call traditional MA, are those that have been invented in the last few hundred years. There arnt that many martial arts out there that cover everything. but they do exist and they have evolved over 100s of years.

someone who does martial arts is a martial artist - period. it does not matter if they are good or bad, beat a boxer or lose to a boxer, they are still a martial artist.

That is very inspired :-)

Bruce Lee, Geoff Thompson and Marc ‘Animal’ MacYoung have all been quoted as saying something to the extent that they would fear a boxer more than a martial artist

Agreed, but they do make a distinction between Boxing and Martial arts.

Some things for thought. Being able to cook doesnt make you a chef. And being able to fight doesnt make you a martial artist.

Originally posted by battouchan
It really depends on how you veiw a martial art, personally i equate the words to the japanese word budo, very loosly translated to the Warrior Way.

Areas of focus is an interesting one. I have seen loads of people do one martial art and then take up another one to fill the gaps! Personally i think that is a really bizzare idea, if your martial art has gaps or is focused on one thing then drop it and find one that isnt. If people do multiple MA, it is as if they dont believe that the training they do will work.

When a Samurai's sword got broken on the battlefield, you didnt see them switching martial arts and going into a boxing stance or a referee shouting stop. Swordsmanship, Grappling, Striking is all in their budo. They favoured weapons, but they were adept at everything else, unlike most martial arts nowadays that focus and only know one thing.

Boxing is a sport and that is their focus. Of course it will probably be usefull out side of the sport, the same way say ....chess would be. So i guess if i were to call Boxing a martial art, i would have to call chess one too.

Ste
"Banpen Fugyo"

So you don't believe that pentjac silat, or capeoira(sp) or Judo are martial arts. The first two aren't japanese (as of course many martial arts aren't), the last one clearly has a competative side with rules, ie a sport.

If you believe that there is one 'perfect' martial art, then I believe you are mistaken. If there were then that one would have spread as it's efficacy was proved. The people who tend to win the ultimate fighting style competitions have generally got experience in more than one martial art.

How about kendo, that's japanese, but it doesn't make you able to fight. Well, not without a sword anyway. Or Iaido, the art of drawing the sword. These will both be far less effective than boxing in a self defence situation. Which leads me to the conclusion that 'self defence' is only ever part of what makes a martial art, indeed you can be taught self-defence and/or be a great brawler without having any martial arts training.
So, in order to define what a martial art is, it has to have an aspect of the martial, ie something to do with conflict, boxing qualifies as does every style i've listed above. And secondly it needs to have some 'art', this is much more difficult to define, but you can probably see the 'art' in boxing, whereas you won't see it in a brawler.

Originally posted by ANVIL
someone who does martial arts is a martial artist - period. it does not matter if they are good or bad, beat a boxer or lose to a boxer, they are still a martial artist.

well said.
Knowing your art is only ever part of it.

There is always the boxer who is bigger and stronger. Most martial artists would probably get pulverised by Mike Tyson, that doesn't make them any less a martial artist.

I'd be interested to here what these arts that have evolved over hundreds of years and turn out the perfect fighter.
I'd also be interested to here why these students are winning the MMA competitions?

Kung Fu has evolved over several thousand years, however I doubt that many practitioners would argue that it's the perfect martial art or that it covers all the bases.

Lets turn the question around, why do you not believe that Boxing is a martial art?

Personally I'm open to persuasion re: the defintion of a martial art. A noted martial art historian, Donn F. Draeger, defines martial arts (and i could be slightly out here because this is from memory), as fighting arts that are borne out of conflict and developed on the battlefield. Of course his definiton is open to challenge as much as anyone else's. The thing that i find particularly interesting from his definition however is that arts such as Judo, Aikido and BJJ would be excluded as being a MA, because although they are derivative of battlefield arts, they weren't borne from conflict or developed on the battlefield.

What I do think important however, is that if boxing, judo, BJJ, etc. are to be classified as for example, 'combat sports' rather than 'martial arts' (and i'm not saying they should), they should be afforded no less credibility. if i was a blackbelt in BJJ and Judo, as well as a boxer of several years, i think, if push came to shove, i'd fancy my chances against a 'martial artist', whether they regarded me as a 'martial artist' or a sportsman.

just another thought - i'm in no way intending to belittle traditional or any other martial art/combat sport here. IMO, both martial arts and combat sports have a lot more to offer than learning to fight and/or defend oneself, and i think training in any of the arts/combat sports that i'm aware of would be preferable to not training at all.

Anvil, that is more or less what i think, it doesnt really matter the names you give to them but i do make a clear distinction just like draeger does. And i completley respect any other martial art/combat sport.

There are people that have been studying 'old battlefield born martial arts' for years that would get completly pasted by a boxer. You get good and bad people in every martal art.

Whatever classifications we choose, i think we all agree that 'generally' boxers are hard! and would win over the majourity of people doing martial arts/combat sports.

But it doesnt mean boxing has the best hand or footwork. There are many different types of hand/footwork.

i think training in any of the arts/combat sports that i'm aware of would be preferable to not training at all

There are a few that i would recommend NOT doing, but on the whole yeah :-)