IS there merit to leading with your stronger hand?

there can be. most of the time it is better to lead with a jab b/c a jab sets up your combination but a lead cross can be useful at times

Perhaps inadvertently you have asked two separate questions!

First, the occasional lead from your stronger hand when you're in your normal stance - e.g., Calzaghe using a left-hand lead - has always been tried for its surprise value. Someone once said "it's the punches you don't see that hurt you".

But it can only really be done effectively when a boxer has very quick hands or when an opponent's "matching" eye has limited vision. You can also get away with it if you dummy your normal lead and then throw the other hand if your opponent has reacted to the dummy.

But for most fighters it simply won't work - there's too much distance to make up, and it leaves you open for a counter.

Second, some trainers think that there's an advantage in learning boxing with your stronger hand as your leading hand - someone who's naturally a southpaw adopting the orthodox stance - and so you'll have an unusually strong jab and hook. I've heard that Tyson is a lefty, and that he was taught to fight in an orthodox style for that reason - note how powerful his left hook was.

If ever you see a boxer who does seem to have a more powerful jab and left hook than normal, it's plausible that he's a converted lefty.

I agree with Stephen G. But to add to his point or argue a different point of view. I have been trained to fight both southpaw and orthodox. The Right hand as a stiff jab for a righty fighting southpaw can create disruption during a fight with someone who is unaware of fighting such a style. Although being trained both ways has it problems it is an effective way to fight example would be prince haseem even though he didn't last long after it was understood how he fought. Speed and power are key to boxing, being able to lead with your strong hand is a tactic used to present a quick attack that has a powerful impact in the fight but it must be used sparingly. If the right hand lead is timed or thrown off balance it an be disastrous because the hook is sitting in ****** position ready to fire or if unbalanced there is no power thus creating a paradox of surprise yet unsurprised because it lacks the twerk and thrust to be effective.

The overuse power hand leads in my opinion will not revolutionize boxing because if every one can do it than no one can do it because it is just as easy for all. I think the old wisdom is still strong as steel but can be added through modern technology.

From a strategic point it wouldn't be wise to guide with your leading strong hand starting off the fight. I also think that the traditional teachings and tactics work for most boxers and using combination punches (therefore both hands) is more effective than dominating with one hand. Being able to deliver a variety of punches creates more uncertainty in your opponent and then hopefully allowing you to come in with your stronger leading hand and deliver the deciding blow.

Using the leading stronger hand has worked for few boxers like tyson and foreman.... am not sure what the newbies are doing these days but can only imagine that most boxers benefit from traditional strategy.

If your intention is to hook off the jab, it's more effective to lead with your power arm. Other than that guys like Michael Moorer are the exception rather than the rule, converted southpaws are usually no more effective than regular southpaws. It varies it the skill level of the fighter.