From: bhendrix@ledge.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Brian Hendrix)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: An ex-boxer and lurker wishes to comment...
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 13:15:56 MDT
Organization: Private Waffle 1.65

I've been following these posts on boxing and the argument as to whether 
or not it is a martial art.  While I only boxed for 4.5 years, at a 
low-amateur level (as a teenager) I would like to throw in my two cents.  
This isn't meant to put-down or flame anybody, but rather to add a few 
data points from a different perspective.  Please forgive any errors in 
the following, especially with respect to other martial-arts.  
 
Boxing is [better than|worse than|ineffective against] another MA:
 
        Maybe, maybe not.  Comparing boxing and TKD may be almost
        valid, but comparing boxing and judo would be ludicrous.
        Is it my imagination, or do these MA comparisons often
        appear in this group?  And is it not usually the case that
        everyone is in general agreement that one cannot easily
        compare MA's, particularily ones that emphasize very
        different techniques.  Why not leave it as the usual
        "sometimes art X is better, sometimes art Y is better."

Boxing is/isn't a martial art:
 
        Hardly worth arguing the point.  Boxing has been around for
        thousands of years, it is a fighting art that has different
        styles and techniques and is constantly changing.  Boxing is
        as much a martial art as any other fighting form.

Boxers can't handle kicks:

        Depends on whose kicking.  Depends on the boxer.  A boxer
        will, as previously noted, tend to place himself at a 
        favourable range for his art.  I don't know too much about
        the kicking arts, so I can't really comment.  I would say,
        however, that unless an opponent can kick very powerfully,
        very quickly, and remain very well balanced and very accurate
        in his kicks, he would definitely not finish off the boxer
        before the boxer could do some damage of his own at a range
        favourable to himself.

Boxing is too much of a sport to be "practical":

        On two isolated occasions boxing has been very helpful to
        me in a practical manner.  Being quick and able to throw a
        quick, powerful punch effectively is often all you need to
        end a bad situation.  For most "altercations" anything
        lasting more than a few seconds means big, big trouble that
        would best be avoided.  If one can end an altercation quickly,
        than one stands a much better chance to remain uninjured.
        Is it not a basic principle of any martial-art to end things
        as quickly as possible?  Boxing is very suited to this purpose,
        as are many other MA's that concentrate on multiple, fast
        strikes.

Boxers' footwork is silly:

        It took me two years of steady training to become minimally
        confident of my footwork.  There's much more to it that the
        untrained eye would see.  I would argue that proper footwork
        is the most important skill a boxer can have.  Saying the
        footwork in boxing is useless and silly because it doesn't
        look too impressive is like saying aikido (sp?) is useless
        because "everyone seems to be throwing themselves around."
        Would any aikido people care to elaborate on the difference
        between what appears to be happening and what is really
        happening?

Boxers throw punches that are easily blocked:

        This is laughable.  I would argue that a serious boxer strikes
        quicker than most MA's, simply because he practices a
        relatively limited number of strikes and gets much more
        practice at them.  This is not unlike how policemen are
        trained:  learn a few things but learn them *well*.  If you've
        been sparring with a boxer and think his punches are easily
        blocked then either:  a) he isn't much of a boxer, b) the punches
        you've been blocking were meant to be blocked as part of an
        overall strategy, or c) you're an extremely accomplished
        MA.
 
I'd also like to add a few points that should be self-evident:
        
        - boxers train at a limited number of techniques, and become
          very good at them.  This makes them formidable opponents
          as long as they are able to close within range.
        - heavyweight boxing is very different from amateur boxing.
          It is my personal opinion (and one that often results in
          heated debates) that professional boxers and not the best
          boxers.  While I have no inclination to meet Mike Tyson
          in a dark alley, his footwork and style is not superior to
          that of most Olympic-level amateurs.  IMHO heavyweight
          boxing is more of a slugfest than anything, and deserves
          to be referred to in terms of "fights" rather than "bouts."
        - there are a lot of little tricks and techniques that one
          may learn which skirt the boundries of the rules.  Boxing
          is quite capable of being a vicious and "dirty" art.  Any
          one who studies how boxing was at the turn of the century
          will agree with this.  I learnt many little tricks that
          would be very useful in a streetfight, but would get me
          thrown out of a ring very quickly.
        - to become a serious boxer requires an incredible amount
          of self-discipline and physical conditioning (just like
          any other MA).  I would say that serious boxers are amongst
          the best-conditioned athletes in the world.  People who
          haven't tried it really have no idea of the calibre of
          physical conditioning needed.  Many former boxers have
          quit because they just don't have the time necessary to
          train for the higher levels.  I quit when it became
          obvious that to continue would require at least 20 hours
          a week of training (minimum!).
        - Do not underestimate the effectiveness of training that
          prepares you to get hit hard and often.  A fighter who
          doesn't fear being struck, and actually expects it and
          trains in that manner, is formidable.  As most people
          will recognize, mental attitude is very important in a
          fight, and IMHO more important than physical training.
        - You cannot hypothesize how a match between a boxer and,
          say, a judoka (sp?) will turn out.  When different arts
          are compared it comes down to:  Who will be able to put
          himself in a position to use his art?  A judoka will win
          if he gets to grapple with the boxer, a boxer will win
          if he can close and strike fast enough to prevent 
          grappling.  You simply cannot compare different arts in
          this manner, and I wonder why people continue to do this?
          People trained in different arts are essentially using 
          different weapons.  Would you say that you can accurately
          predict the winner every time in a fight that has one
          opponent armed with a handgun and one armed with a grenade?
          There are two many possible situations to enable one to
          generalize.

Please forgive this lurker for such a long and rambling post.  I enjoy 
reading this forum and seeing the sharing that goes on.  I have always 
admired the participants for respecting each other and each other's arts. 
It saddens me when someone says:  "Art X is useless, 'cause I can just
kick and not let the guy get within range."  It especially saddens me 
when someone tries to say "Art X isn't really a martial art, but my art 
is a *real* martial art."

Is it not safe to say that the most important lesson to be learned in any 
MA is humility and respect?  Surely we don't need to elevate ourselves by 
putting down other people or their art?  How can anyone with less than 
decades of experience point at another art and say that it isn't any 
good?  Can we not recognize that every art, like every person, is 
different and excells at different things?
 
Thanks for taking the time to read this post.  And please remember that 
no flame or disrespect is intended, but that I just had to add my two 
bits to the conversation at hand.  Corrections or additions are always 
welcome :-)

Brian Hendrix:    bhendrix@ledge.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca    :Private Waffle 1.65
    DoD# 0754:          Please note new address!         :Edmonton, AB Canada
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts