The Castration of Boxing

[Vuk]

Am I the only one who believes that modern boxing is a disgrace? Seriously, even the greats in modern boxing (like the Pacman, whom I am a great fan of) would be destroyed by skilled boxers from the 1800s in a bare-knuckle fight. It is a style that has developed from unskilled amateurs who are punching with tons of protection that makes things that would work in real life not work and things that would not work in real life work in a boxing match. If you add on to that the BS rules that neuter modern boxing (for Pete's sake, you are not supposed to try to knock out your opponent in amateur boxing, and do not get any points for doing so! WTH! Why even hit the person?

No, I don't agree with everything he says, but I really liked this article.

should supersede the absurd, more or less vicious, indefinite, swinging, swiping efforts of the average amateur, who flounders about without aim or system...

-from the article.

While not perfect this is real boxing.

Want to make boxing more effective? Here is my plan:
1 Get rid of the gloves. Have boxers fight with cloth and leather wraps. (regular cloth hand wraps on the inside, with a single layer of leather over it)
2 Make style important again. Make boxing an effective art once more. Teach real defense, and effective attacks.
3 Throw out 80% of the rules. Less rules = more effective. Encourage gentlemanly behavior within the sport, and penalize people who deliberately kill or injure other sportsmen, but overall, cut down on the rules.
4 When you do this, boxing will be a lot more dangerous (but that is not a bad thing. If it is not dangerous, then why box at all? Don't forget that it is simply a gentlemanly version of an effective killing and self-defense art), so you will have to be more selective of who is allowed to compete. People will be judged not only on performance and how well they follow the rules, but also gentlemanly behavior in competitions. Most televised fights would be done away with as you would have less people able to make the cut. Professional boxers would be far fewer, but the fights much more worth watching.

Boxing would be respectable again, and effective. Right now a bunch of toothless rednecks and city trash love to sit down and watch their brutal blood and sweat fest, but really know nothing about real fighting (that is why modern boxing appeals to them). New boxing would appeal to people who actually knew something about fighting, and eventually the morons who love modern boxing would catch on and come over.

[Fragony]

Even cage fights wouldn't allow that, bare hands ok, much less brutal than something wrapped around your hand

[Vuk]

Even cage fights wouldn't allow that, bare hands ok, much less brutal than something wrapped around your hand

Of course not...that is why I am saying we need change. We need to start off with one State to get the laws changed to as to allow it, and then start up schools and small, local competitions.

[HoreTore]

Boxing is a sport for immature girleboys.



Proper males play football.

[Vuk]

Boxing is a sport for immature girleboys.



Proper males play football.

lmao...football...
Honestly, American football has been neutered as well, but that is another discussion. People should just play Rugby instead.

[johnhughthom]

Instead of throwing knives at them, why don't you capture mice and make them work to sate your bloodlust.

[Vuk]

My bloodlust? Perhaps you didn't notice, but one of my biggest beefs with modern boxing was that it is a blood sport where extreme aggression and a complete disregard for your opponent's safety is not only allowed but expected.

[HoreTore]

lmao...football...
Honestly, American football has been neutered as well, but that is another discussion. People should just play Rugby instead.

Yes, of course HandEgg is for girlieboys too.

I said real men play football. Not handegg.

[Vuk]

Yes, of course HandEgg is for girlieboys too.

I said real men play football. Not handegg.

Soccer, I believe you mean. Soccer is for girly Eurowieners my friend. No really contact, great for upper body, but ignores the lower body. A good sport works both the upper and lower body (like baseball, which is the king of all sports), and it helps make it more hardcore if there is some real contact...like in hockey.

[Fragony]

My bloodlust? Perhaps you didn't notice, but one of my biggest beefs with modern boxing was that it is a blood sport where extreme aggression and a complete disregard for your opponent's safety is not only allowed but expected.

Skipped a week

[johnhughthom]

My bloodlust? Perhaps you didn't notice, but one of my biggest beefs with modern boxing was that it is a blood sport where extreme aggression and a complete disregard for your opponent's safety is not only allowed but expected.

Fair enough then, the best way to combat that does seem to be taking away the safety equipment and dumping most of the rules. Oh yes, and penalizing for deliberately killing someone, that's worth at least a two point deduction.

[Vuk]

Skipped a week

huh?

Fair enough then, the best way to combat that does seem to be taking away the safety equipment and dumping most of the rules. Oh yes, and penalizing for deliberately killing someone, that's worth at least a two point deduction.

The biggest danger is attitude. What makes a sport a blood sport or not is more attitude than equipment. I know guys who practice without armour with sharpened swords, and just are careful with each other. They have never got anything more than minor wounds. While I would never do that, I think it is a good example of attitude is the biggest factor of safety.
Taking away the 'safety equipment' makes boxing boxing again. How safe the sport is is determined by how well the refs and judges do their jobs. You cannot neuter an art, and have it remain an art. It just doesn't work! They did the same darned thing with TKD! Of course there are risks, and people will know them. You will only have people joining who are willing to take those risks, and for the most part, they will be far more skilled fighters for it.
Funny that in the UFC, they use tiny 4oz gloves and no helmets and yet you don't have people dying all the time. Also, you don't seem to be complaining about the lack of safety equipment there. I don't like the UFC because it does not encourage people to fight with the right attitude; it is that, and not the safety equipment that worries me.
Boxing could easily be done the way I have suggested with little or no more deaths or injuries than in modern boxing, and the sport would greatly improve for it. You do realize that for the longest time people did prize fights without all the ridiculous safety equipment, don't you?
Do you also realize that my bros and I box and sparr bare knuckle and with nothng but shorts and a mouth piece all the time, and none of us have ever been seriously injured as a result. We are far better able to defend (and take hits when we need to), and have a much better idea of how to survive a real fight because of it.

[johnhughthom]

Well, there seems little point in discussing anything with the self appointed 'arbiter of sport'. Perhaps I'll come back to this thread when you find 'opinion' and 'fact' in the dictionary, and work out the difference.

[Vuk]

Well, there seems little point in discussing anything with the self appointed 'arbiter of sport'. Perhaps I'll come back to this thread when you find 'opinion' and 'fact' in the dictionary, and work out the difference.

Since when did I say my opinion was fact? I said that I believe it is attitude, not safety equipment that contribute the most to safety. I'm sorry if I disagreed with you johnny, but that is my opinion, and I gave examples to back it up. I did not see anything to support your claim that removing the safety gear would make it more dangerous.
EDIT: Do you realize how arrogant you sound when you say that disagreeing with your opinion is arrogant? Just some food for thought...

[HoreTore]

Soccer, I believe you mean. Soccer is for girly Eurowieners my friend. No really contact, great for upper body, but ignores the lower body. A good sport works both the upper and lower body (like baseball, which is the king of all sports), and it helps make it more hardcore if there is some real contact...like in hockey.

Still walking in the shadow...

Believe in the Messi(as)!

[johnhughthom]

Since when did I say my opinion was fact? I said that I believe it is attitude, not safety equipment that contribute the most to safety. I'm sorry if I disagreed with you johnny, but that is my opinion, and I gave examples to back it up. I did not see anything to support your claim that removing the safety gear would make it more dangerous.

Seriously, even the greats in modern boxing (like the Pacman, whom I am a great fan of) would be destroyed by skilled boxers from the 1800s in a bare-knuckle fight
It is a style that has developed from unskilled amateurs
punching with tons of protection that makes things that would work in real life not work and things that would not work in real life work in a boxing match.
If you add on to that the BS rules that neuter modern boxin
Less rules = more effective
When you do this, boxing will be a lot more dangerous
(but that is not a bad thing. If it is not dangerous, then why box at all?
you would have less people able to make the cut
the fights much more worth watching
Boxing would be respectable again, and effective
Right now a bunch of toothless rednecks and city trash love to sit down and watch their brutal blood and sweat fest
but really know nothing about real fighting (that is why modern boxing appeals to them)
New boxing would appeal to people who actually knew something about fighting, and eventually the morons who love modern boxing would catch on and come over.

Anyway, for boxing to be taken seriously again, there is more work to be done outside the ring than in, in my view. The politics between fighters, promoters and the different associations, the standard of judging (it's absolutely farcical that it is just accepted now that if you want to beat a home champion in certain places, Germany for example, you have to knock him out) etc have turned the sport into a circus.

[Vuk]

Yes, you quoted me stating my opinion (which of course I believe is fact (otherwise it would not be my opinion)), but what does that prove? Am I arrogant to have a different opinion than you johnny?

[johnhughthom]

Yes, you quoted me stating my opinion (which of course I believe is fact (otherwise it would not be my opinion)), but what does that prove? Am I arrogant to have a different opinion than you johnny?

I refer you back to this.

Perhaps I'll come back to this thread when you find 'opinion' and 'fact' in the dictionary, and work out the difference.

[Vuk]

I refer you back to this.

An opinion is something you believe to be true (ei, you believe to be a fact), though you accept the possibility that it may not be. (that is a paraphrase from several definitions I just found) I believe what I said is a fact, but I know that that is just my opinion and that I may be wrong. Never in my post did I say that God came down and told me or that I could prove what I believe to be 100% true. You just don't like someone disagreeing with you.

[johnhughthom]

Actually, I think a number of your points have merit, had you presented them as opinions there might have been the possibility of a coherent discussion. As it is, I can't really see your overall point. One minute you say that you don't like the extreme aggression and disregard for opponents safety, then complain about amateur boxers not trying to knock each other out, which is inherently disregarding your opponents safety.
You claim to give examples for your opinions, but I don't see any. As for my boxing background, I was an amateur boxer and fought in the Irish championships as a teenager. I gave up boxing after sparring with a clubmate without safety equipment, and knocking him out, leading to a blood clot in his brain. Luckily he was all right, but I hope you can forgive my reaction to your ideas, seeing as I have a lot of experience in the subject. I don't know if you have spent a week as a teenager thinking you killed a friend, but it certainly strengthens your convictions.

[Vuk]

Actually, I think a number of your points have merit, had you presented them as opinions there might have been the possibility of a coherent discussion. As it is, I can't really see your overall point. One minute you say that you don't like the extreme aggression and disregard for opponents safety, then complain about amateur boxers not trying to knock each other out, which is inherently disregarding your opponents safety.
You claim to give examples for your opinions, but I don't see any. As for my boxing background, I was an amateur boxer and fought in the Irish championships as a teenager. I gave up boxing after sparring with a clubmate without safety equipment, and knocking him out, leading to a blood clot in his brain. Luckily he was all right, but I hope you can forgive my reaction to your ideas, seeing as I have a lot of experience in the subject. I don't know if you have spent a week as a teenager thinking you killed a friend, but it certainly strengthens your convictions.

I get that John, and my brother almost died from an injury to the head (and still has problems speaking) that a sparring partner in TKD gave him even when he was wearing all his safety gear. In TKD hits to the head are supposed to be light, and my bro was training him and encouraging him to get hits in to build his confidence, and therefore was not protecting his head. It was not safety gear that caused or stopped the injury, but attitude. I have seen lots of people with full safety gear get injured because the person they were sparring had a bad attitude. I have seen very few people get injured sparring (even without safety gear) when they had a good attitude. That is what I am basing my assertion that attitude is by far the most important part of safety on.

Yes, hitting the head and trying to knock your opponent out can cause injury, but it is accepted risk in the sport. I'd think you have a much better chance of permanent injury taking a 15 minute barrage of gloved, full power hits to the head than a single, bare-knuckle strike that knocks you out.
You should want to knock someone out (which yes, is causing short term damage, with a risk of possible long-term damage), but you should not want to kill them. I can sparr an opponent, intending to knock him out, without wanting to seriously hurt them. Modern boxers just don't give a crap, and they are taught to want to cause as much damage as possible.

Boxers used to try for that knock-out, but would forfeit the match if the judges deemed they deliberately used more force than necessary to simply knock someone out.
It is my argument that you can both make boxing more realistic and useful AND safer by removing much of the gear and rules, but leaving more up to judgment and encouraging (and requiring) more sporting behavior.

[johnhughthom]

You haven't really given any real reason for taking away the safety gear, going by what you have posted, safety gear and a better attitude would be best.

[Vuk]

You haven't really given any real reason for taking away the safety gear, going by what you have posted, safety gear and a better attitude would be best.

My reason is that it makes the 'sport' an art. It greatly increases the chance of the sport preparing you for real combat. It becomes a real athletic event AND martial art, instead of a game completely removed from reality. (not actually completely of course, as boxing still can be used to defend yourself...even if not half as well as it used to)
When you take away the gloves, helmet, and most of the rules, it becomes an entirely different thing. Modern boxers would not stand a chance using their modern style. It would then teach real fighting, and could be taught as really good self-defense in addition to being taught as a sport. I don't know about you, but I love martial arts, and my main goal is to make them as perfect as possible. I don't want to be doing something that is just barely good. Boxers should love boxing, and should want it to be the best it can be; the most perfect art.
Take away the BS, and it would require a lot more skill, and the size of your muscles would become secondary to that skill.

[johnhughthom]

You could argue that taking away the BS lessens the skill required as one lucky punch is more likely to knock someone out, and I don't see that as emphasising skill. I also fail to see how taking away the safety gear lessens the impact of strength. I agree that talking away the equipment, rules etc would lead to more excitement, more drama, and more knockouts, I don't see that it would make boxing more skillful, or pure.

Personally I think professional boxing is dying a slow death as a major sport, more due to public apathy at a sport riddled with the corruption and mismanagement I touched on earlier than the actual in ring spectacle. The future will probably lie more in small regional organisations, and there is a good chance something close to your vision will become a reality in a number of them.

[Vuk]

You could argue that taking away the BS lessens the skill required as one lucky punch is more likely to knock someone out, and I don't see that as emphasising skill. I also fail to see how taking away the safety gear lessens the impact of strength. I agree that talking away the equipment, rules etc would lead to more excitement, more drama, and more knockouts, I don't see that it would make boxing more skillful, or pure.

Personally I think professional boxing is dying a slow death as a major sport, more due to public apathy at a sport riddled with the corruption and mismanagement I touched on earlier than the actual in ring spectacle. The future will probably lie more in small regional organisations, and there is a good chance something close to your vision will become a reality in a number of them.

It increases the skill needed because it makes it all about human interaction and your fighting relationship with your opponent, rather than just you and how you can train to punch hard and toughen yourself. It is now a game between two people, where the stakes are high. Rather than being able to be careless and just charge in there and take a bunch of hits, but hit harder yourself (which is what happens in a lot of ameteur fights), you need to be able to avoid being hit, as just one punch to the face is likely to take you out. It emphasizes defensive skill, footwork, feinting, predicting your opponents movements, counter-striking, etc, and a lot less beat them till their eyes pop out.

Fights are actually a lot less exciting to watch with no gloves. Very few punches are thrown, and when they start flying, the fight is over almost instantly. Fighting with gloves on makes fights a lot more enjoyable, because there is lots of back-and-forth trading of blows, and fights last much longer.

When someone knows that the first punch that lands on their chin could take them out, they will be a lot more protective, and learn to master those split seconds of making contact, which really decide most fights. (ones between skilled fighters that end decisively...not stupid, drunk brawlers)

You should try going down to 4 oz gloves and see how much harder boxing is, and how much more skill is required. Then try it bare-knuckled if you got someone willing to take the risk, and you will see that it takes a whole different skill set.

[johnhughthom]

I disagree that it's more skill, it's a different mentality. It's more about the risks, knowing one mistake and it's game over, the stronger will wins more often than the stronger boxer without the equipment.

[Vuk]

I disagree that it's more skill, it's a different mentality. It's more about the risks, knowing one mistake and it's game over, the stronger will wins more often than the stronger boxer without the equipment.

One of my favorite sayings (and I forget who said it) is "Whoever wants to taste his enemy's blood the most will live."
That really is the truth most times in a real fight. Having a fighting will is the most important thing for a fighter. Technical skill is the second most important. I believe that gloveless boxing would improve both.

I see we can a fundamental disagreement that it would improve skill, and I think that may get down to our definitions of skill, but I'll agree to disagree on that for now. My opinion is based on the fact that I trained for sport for years, and then my first time of training without gloves and gear, I got my butt whooped. I did though, develop the skill do very well in that setting, and IMHO, that takes more skill.

Anyway though, I think you would agree that it really would better prepare people for real fights. Even my arch-enemies, the Gracies agree on the primacy of street training over sports training (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e864iZ4sB8Q).

I believe that boxing in a pure form is an incredibly effective martial art that could compete with any other in a life-and-death situation. I don't think that modern boxing is though, and that is shame.

[johnhughthom]

I think we probably are just differing on semantics. To me, skill is all about physical ability, reflexes, footwork all that stuff. I consider mental toughness and willpower something completely different, though no less important.

[Vuk]

I think we probably are just differing on semantics. To me, skill is all about physical ability, reflexes, footwork all that stuff. I consider mental toughness and willpower something completely different, though no less important.

I agree with you that mental toughness and willpower are not part of 'technical skill'. However I judge 'skill' in a fighting art by how effectively it keeps you alive and takes the other guy down...not just how good you are at your style. Meaning if you are really skilled at a style that is all about crumpling up on the floor when attacked so that your attacker takes pity on you, I would say that you are not as skilled a fighter or martial artist as someone who is skilled at an art that teaches you to effectively neutralize an opponent using strikes to vital areas.
Those I would deem a boxer who is proficient at 1800s boxing to be more skilled than one proficient in modern boxing, because his style demands more and better reflexes, and because he is better suited to survive a real fight.

[Major Robert Dump]

Um, while the sport itself has become silly

To say that modern boxers would "stand a chance" is a little harsh. I would bet that against about 95% of the population they would whip that a$$, to include many martial artists. Much of it depends on how the fight starts and who gets the first punch.

I also do not understand your fascination with preparing people for "real combat." I mean, I understand why you want to be prepared, and why many people would want to be prepared, but I don't understand why you think a professional boxer would need to be prepared, if he cared if he was prepared, or why you care if he or anyone else is prepared. This whole Entertainment must Mimic Life mentality defeats the purpose of entertainment, and thats what most pro sports are these days. They are athletes with no other functional use.

I suggest you move to a pacific island and start your very own bloodsport deathmatch business. I will be in Guam, so I can help you