Boxing and stuff

Bill's forum was the first! All subjects are welcome. Participation by all encouraged.

Moderator: Available

Post Reply
User avatar
Bill Glasheen
Posts: 17299
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY

Boxing and stuff

Post by Bill Glasheen »

I am very interested in this debate, but personally am vehemently ambivalent when it comes to my personal feelings on the subject.

On the one hand, I hear well respected martial artists end conversations with comments like "Well a good boxer would..." as if we who "play" in the gym could never measure up. To some extent, there is truth in that. It's one things to shatter air molecules with emotional content. It's a second thing to actually hit something or someone. And it's something altogether different to attempt to do that while your opponent is trying to take your head off. I don't care what kind of techniques you think you will use on the street, do you actually practice them full force on an uncooperative opponent while (s)he is attempting to do the same to you? That's very, very different.

I've personally seen Muhammed Ali more than a few times back when he lived in Rockfish Gap south of Charlottesville. With all the protection of those gloves, it's clear that the man still suffered in the ring. He is now permanently and seriously disabled. How many of us can claim to have taken that kind of abuse?

On the other hand... That's professional boxing, and a handful of fighters in the upper echelon. The best of any martial art are to be feared. I wouldn't want to meet either Iron Mike or Royce Gracie in a dark alley - whether you want to call it sport or MA. But...the vast majority of boxers wear Fruit 'o the Looms just like the rest of us mortal MA practitioners.

When I began to train with the Charlottesville Boxing Club (a Parks and Recreation activity in the Charlottesville "inner city"), I had...oh...maybe 4 years of karate and some weight training under my belt (I was not yet a black belt). Back in the mid seventies, a "karate man" seems to have had some currency on the fear front - deserved or not. Well after the coach taught me a right cross and left hook, he brought me over to the bag. Cooool!! I may not have been particularly graceful, but I could put a hurt on the heavy bag. In any case, the boxers all stopped when they saw the "karate guy" hit the heavy bag. It was...different from what they were used to seeing. I buried my punches in that bag.

Mind you, a handful of those dudes would have been more than I could handle. However...nobody would spar me. They were...scared! Of me, the geek. Imagine that! Image

The unknown always does generate quite a bit of fear. That's why I love to jump into those arenas - so I can bottle that fear.

Call it what you want, but those boxers respected me, and I them.

- Bill
candan
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Canada

Boxing and stuff

Post by candan »

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> On the other hand... That's professional boxing, and a handful of fighters in the upper
echelon. The best of any martial art are to be feared. I wouldn't want to meet either Iron
Mike or Royce Gracie in a dark alley - whether you want to call it sport or MA. But...the
vast majority of boxers wear Fruit 'o the Looms just like the rest of us mortal MA
practitioners.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The odds of tangling with them are low..and if I lived I would have a story for my Grandchildren Image
My opinion has changed somewhat as this debate progressed. I still think that boxing is not a Martial art. However, since martial arts were not developed in a vacuum , the effective technical skills that boxing has produced is being used as martial. If boxing (western)had existed in i.e. Fuchow.. I am certain it would have influenced all the martial systems that observed it.
What would Seisan kata look like if we could send Iron Mike back to 1880 Fuchow Image
Harlequin
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Isle of Man

Boxing and stuff

Post by Harlequin »

Just an idea but a lot of you seem to be mistaking martial arts for self-defence when the 2 (while similar) have one intrinsic difference martial arts were developed for war and by their nature are offensive and designed to kill. Self-def isn't. Just s'thing to keep in mind. I'd say boxing and Judo aren't independant martial arts but instead are sports developed from them. Judo was developed from Ju-jutsu with the aim of making it suitable to teach in schools and boxing developed from simple universal principles which could be learnt by all. Original (bareknockle) boxing matches also consisted of a round of staff combat and a round of swords.

Then again does it really matter what we call them provided we know what we can usefully take from them and apply to what we want to learn?
User avatar
f.Channell
Posts: 3541
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 1999 6:01 am
Location: Valhalla

Boxing and stuff

Post by f.Channell »

Remember September 11th a Judo champion was on the plane which didn't make it's target.
I believe he said "lets roll". Someone must have forgotten to tell him he studied a sport and not a martial art.

Here's a good article www.judoinfo.com/sport.htm
It touches on some good points, including eye gouges.
f.
2Green
Posts: 1503
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 1999 6:01 am
Location: on the path.

Boxing and stuff

Post by 2Green »

Boxing is a sport for sure, but is also an art.
I think Ali was a Martial Artist who surfaced in a sport. Bruce Lee admired him, perhaps because he showed the art in the sport?
Ali raised the bar and elevated boxing, but not in a manner of brute force, but rather in a manner of grace, speed, lightness and movement. Some of his re-broadcast matches are pure lessons in "not being there".
I was never a boxing fan, but my involvement in Karate has revealed the special quality of Ali to me.
How's that for a paradox?!
Guest

Re: Boxing and stuff

Post by Guest »

Tony-San wrote:Why wouldn't it be a martial art? If I where to visualize a couple of Lbs. of Hamburger, and then repeadetly punch someone in the face until their face looks like the hamburger, well... then I would have effectivley expressed myself in accordance with my inspiration and thus Art happens...
HAH HAH! Hey! Thats me!

Look! This ain't the first time Me and Jim disagreed...
AAAhmed46
Posts: 3493
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:49 pm
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

Post by AAAhmed46 »

Just recently I used to see myself as open minded about fighting styles...but i really wasnt.

For some reason, i had a bias against wing chun and TKD. Simply because i thought both styles had no depth. "What you see is what you get"

But i thought to myself, and saw well, im being stupid. And yeah, there are some stupid WC and lots of bad TKD schools. I respected boxing because of their toughness, but also saw it as too simplistic.

But honey, Wing chun IS an effective fighting style.
TKD IS an effective fighting style.
Boxing is very effective. Sure, there are no groin strikes or eye gouging, but can you really gouge a boxers eyes while he is throwing jab after jab after jab? Can you kick him in the legs and fell him, when in order to do so you have to get in range with his....jab? Or if he has buddies who thai box, he could easily get used to raising his knee to block. Is boxing weak then?

Seems martial to me!
Guest

Boxing/Karate Differences

Post by Guest »

In boxing evasion and firing of technique are continuous.
In karate deflection, capture and/or control precede the execution of a technique.

Evasion and firing of techniques are both arts.
Defensuive arts in karate precede the offensive technique.

Boxing seeks to exhaust the opponent and dominate.
Karate merely seeks to subdue.
Stryke

Post by Stryke »

In boxing evasion and firing of technique are continuous.
In karate deflection, capture and/or control precede the execution of a technique.

Evasion and firing of techniques are both arts.
Defensuive arts in karate precede the offensive technique.

Boxing seeks to exhaust the opponent and dominate.
Karate merely seeks to subdue.
In karate evasion and firing of technique should be as continuous as boxing .... maybe less evasion if your grappling

Defense and offence should be simultaneous in any art , in fact there often the same thing .

The objective of boxing is to score more points or knock the opponent out , conditioning plays a big part .

Karate seeks to survive and impede motor function of the opponent .
Guest

Re: Boxing/Karate Differences

Post by Guest »

John Giacoletti wrote:In boxing evasion and firing of technique are continuous.
In karate deflection, capture and/or control precede the execution of a technique.

Evasion and firing of techniques are both arts.
Defensuive arts in karate precede the offensive technique.

Boxing seeks to exhaust the opponent and dominate.
Karate merely seeks to subdue.
Horse hooey if you ask me!

Boxing is about taking people out.

Your Uechi might not have premptive techniques, but it should.

If a defensive technique is always first how did your Sensei win a fighting title?

Pretty amazing feat if we go by what your claiming John.

The Uechi world title would amount to two guys standing around waiting for the other guy to attack because Uechi guys always start with a defensive technique. The matches must have been very long. :roll:

In the old days we had a name for this philosophy, but George thought it was rude.

If the fecal matter hits the rotating turbine I pray I don't have a peaceful warrior covering my six.

***Please note no anal references in this post. :splat:

Image
Guest

Reply to Laird

Post by Guest »

Laird wrote:
Boxing is about taking people out.

Your Uechi might not have premptive techniques, but it should.

If a defensive technique is always first how did your Sensei win a fighting title?
I might add ... Boxing is about taking people out ... Yea. Gents in tuxs take out women in slinky dresses to see action from one to fifteen rounds of three minute intervals.

"Premptive techniques..." Do you mean like the grunts and shoulder rolls in Old Style San Sei Ryu? :lol:

"If a defensive technique is always first ..." This is very basic, Laird. You haven't seen enough champion level karate. A fighter like Naskamatsu's student Master Nobuhiro Higa hops in left knee and leg raised (this is the defense)circles with his left hand (another defensive manuver)and grabs his opponent while firing at the same time a blindingly quick right reverse punch.

"... how did your Sensei win a fighting title?" He knew his opponent. He let Karl Ayliffe from Australia bring it on, parried his circular grab, was faster and beat him to the punch.
If the fecal matter hits the rotating turbine ...
***Please note no anal references in this post.
Sorry. Pass the roll. Blatant internal self-contradiction :!:
Last edited by Guest on Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Stryke

Post by Stryke »

This is very basic, Laird. You haven't seen enough champion level karate.
Well I have ... and most matches are won without grabs and controls .. in fact it`s banned in most competitions , you can grab and strike simultaneously but not in two steps ...
Current national champion Alex Pereda who was looking extremely strong was hit in the face by a spinning hook kick which broke his jaw for the trouble. His Uzbekistani opponent was disqualified in this semi-final and Alex went straight through to the final. However, the broken jaw was just a little too painful to compete with
Is this high enough a level of comp to you , a world event ?

what tournaments do you fight in ?
chewy
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:37 pm

Re: Boxing and stuff

Post by chewy »

Harlequin wrote:Just an idea but a lot of you seem to be mistaking martial arts for self-defence when the 2 (while similar) have one intrinsic difference martial arts were developed for war and by their nature are offensive and designed to kill. Self-def isn't.

I hate to complicate this subject, but... :twisted:

By this definition you would have to consider dressage a martial art. All the feats you see the horse and rider perform were developed for commanding large battalions of mounted cavalry. Many of the skills were also developed with the intention of training the horse to attack foot-soldiers (i.e., rearing-and-boxing, reverse thrusts).

cheers,

chewy
Guest

Post by Guest »

I might add ... Boxing is about taking people out ... Yea. Gents in tuxs take out women in slinky dresses to see action from one to fifteen rounds of three minute intervals.
Man that was funny. Guess it is just a social event for the folks outside of the ring.


"If a defensive technique is always first ..." This is very basic, Laird. You haven't seen enough champion level karate.
John please don't talk down to me. You have no idea what I've seen or participated in.
pass the roll
Why you going to make a sandwich?
User avatar
TSDguy
Posts: 1831
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2001 6:01 am

Post by TSDguy »

Wow, who found this thread from 3 years ago?

In boxing evasion and firing of technique are continuous.
In karate deflection, capture and/or control precede the execution of a technique.

I don't buy that at all, either. In "one step" drills or whatever you folk call them, your theory is true. In many other aspects of martial arts, it isn't true at all. Sparring and self defence are certainly situations where you can't be so dogmatic.

And hell, the very first drill I ever learned as a white belt was ducking hook punches while simultaneuosly hitting back. I got my head band knocked off. :D

Finally, who cares what you call boxing or wing chun. They're useful and martial.
Post Reply

Return to “Bill Glasheen's Dojo Roundtable”