What is a boxing purist? A boxing purist is someone who relishes watching fighters hit and not get hit, which is the essence of boxing. Boxing purists respect the past, not in lieu of respecting the present, but as a black and white adjunct to the Technicolor present.
By that definition or any other, boxing purists, concerned with the fate of the sweet science, are dismissed, as much is dismissed in our woe begotten times, as being traditionalists clinging to a counterfeit ideal. Arguments over size, weight, skill and conditioning will never be resolved to everyone?s satisfaction. But boxing purists are not boxing absolutists. They have nothing against all-out war, per se. There is, after all, something to be said for kamikaze pilots hurling themselves into the unknown. But when a fight is a tactical masterpiece, it is often greeted with disdain, with outright hostility coming in a close second.
Since we know what a boxing purist is, can we assume that the opposite of a boxing purist is a boxing impurist? Although no such term presently exists, it?s never too late for a little creative wordplay. The difficulty arises when we attempt to define what exactly a boxing impurist is. Based on what appears to be their position, which echoes the position of most fight fans, the boxing impurist looks down his or her nose at scientific boxing. Defense, as in the ?gentlemanly art of self defense,? is a unwelcome intrusion, maybe even an impertinence, that stops the flow of the action. It?s either blood-and-guts or nothing.
There will always be demolition derbies of the flesh, where two fighters, like Mack Trucks on steroids, crash into each other until one can no longer move. I wouldn?t trade that for the world, as it?s an integral part of the fight game. But nor would I trade it for an exemplary demonstration of the sweet science in action. That may make me a boxing purist and if so, mea culpa, I?m ready be to be drawn and quartered. There are however conditions. If I?m to submit to the ignominy of being turned into fractions, the same needs apply to the boxing impurists.
Perhaps this debate is as old as boxing itself, but I doubt it. If boxing genius were held in the same low regard in the past as it is today, we would never have heard of Gentleman Jim Corbett, Gene Tunney, Harold Johnson and Willie Pep. That we?ve not only heard of them but that they are revered in some circles suggests that times have changed, that thrill now trumps skill, that hard-fought knowledge has taken a backseat to the screech of opinion.
In the spirit of unfair play I spoke with Mike Silver, author of ?The Arc of Boxing: The Rise and Decline of the Sweet Science,? to ask about the boxing purist vs. boxing impurist, if such a distinction exists, or if I was, not for the first or last time, overplaying my hand.
?Boxing reflects society,? said Silver, ?and it?s a reflection of the times. How can you be a purist today? How can you be a true purist if you don?t know what the hell you?re watching? The last few fights I saw on TV were horrendous. They were brutal slugging matches with no science whatsoever. They appeal to the lowest common denominator in terms of who watches the sport?and that is the people who understand boxing as a street fight, a ?fight,? a brawl. That announcer who uses the ridiculously stretched out catch phrase ?Let?s get ready to rummmmmmble,? (before my stomach knots up hearing it I always press the mute button) has, without realizing it, given us the perfect clarion call for what boxing has morphed into: an artless and destructive brawl. If you cannot understand boxing?s basics and baseness, it?s equivalent to asking somebody, ?Do you understand basketball?? ?Yeah, you throw a ball through a hoop. Isn?t that it?? ?Well, what about the art of passing, the art of defense, the art of dribbling?? ?No, it?s throwing the ball through the hoop. Doesn?t matter how you do it. You gotta get that ball in the hoop.??
I could care less about basketball, but recognize a good comparison when I see one.
?So boxing is understood as Hit the other guy. Ooh, he hit you. You?re tougher than the other guy. Ooh, knock him out. Let?s check the punch count stats. There is no real understanding, and it goes from top to bottom, from the trainers down to the fighters down to the seconds down to the fans. Ignorance is rampant in this sport, but so few know it. I would say along with the disappearance of strategy, proper balance, timing, combination punching, and feinting, you have the disappearance of the purist. The purist is an endangered species and they?ll be gone completely with the last generation of purists, such as Teddy Atlas, such as Mike Casey, such as Gordon Marino, such as Springs Toledo. Shortly, unless there?s a revolution of some kind, you will see the end of any sort of purist and people will not know what they?re watching because there?s nothing to watch anymore and what they?re seeing is a watered-down, demented version of the sport.?
Mike Silver doesn?t pull his punches. And while the Marquis of Queensberry rules don?t encourage it, he hit the nail right on the head.
?Look,? he said, ?this sport has come full circle. We are now in the age just before Corbett came up, in terms of how the guys fight; you know, the 80-round fight, which were basically fights of attrition. We are back to the uneducated fan watching two guys mix it up to see who?s tougher. Really, if this sport were true to itself today, we would have fights to the finish. Why was Corbett seen as revolutionary? Because everybody else was a crazy friggin? slugger! You had Nonpareil Dempsey fighting with half his ear off. It was unbelievable. Why do you think those bareknucklers and all those guys died so young? The human body, which is amazing, can eventually only stand so much.?
There has been less talk of late about MMA eating into boxing?s fan base. And while I might not care for MMA, which lacks the symmetry and grace of boxing at its best, I understand why people do: its brutality is a better reflection of our age than a sport that has its roots in the 19th century. When time is short and attention spans shorter, who has the patience for all that balletic moving around? Straddling an opponent and punching him in the face is much more to the point.
?The people who say MMA takes boxing fans away and blame MMA for boxing going downhill as a mainstream sport, except for superfights, that?s wrong,? insisted Silver. ?Before MMA ever came in, boxing was going downhill, and that?s because of King and Arum and all the world champions. It?s ridiculous to have a sport with a hundred champions and people were starting to say, ?What the hell is this?? MMA is absolutely a reflection of the times. It truly is a sign that the culture is declining, in my opinion. But what does boxing do in reaction to that? It goes right back to what you said. Boxing lacks purists, lacks people who understand, and is controlled by people just looking to make money.
?But it?s a professional sport. Why is boxing seemingly more brutal than ever? Why do we see these fights and listen to these idiot announcers who are cheerleaders for this, screaming ?Oh man, what a fight, fight of the year,? when all we see are two guys slamming away at each other with hardly any science at all? It?s like having two businesses in competition across the street from each other. One is offering an inferior product and they?re lowering the price. You?ve got a great product and your price is high because you?re selling a great product?but you?re going out of business! So what do you do? You have to make a choice. Either I close shop or I start importing from Taiwan or Bangladesh or wherever. I start getting something that is inferior, something whose price I can lower, something that will fall apart in a year. But at least I?m still in business and still in competition with the guy who is selling garbage across the street.?
We may be surrounded by Philistines, but if we?re all Philistines, how would anyone know?
?In my opinion, the announcers and everyone else who is encouraging this type of boxing, this type of brutality, this type of violence?not that boxing was ever two Little Lord Fauntleroys?it was never a sport that was not brutal?approves of the diminution of technique. Somebody who really knows the sport would say, ?Did anybody ever teach these guys how to slip a punch? Did anybody ever teach these guys, if you put up your right hand you can block a left hook?? That?s what the sport has come to. And nobody wants to hear from any purist, the purists that are left. ?Yeah, okay right. Go write a history book. We don?t want to hear from you. Go away.??
Silver?s passion can be over-the-top, but no one can accuse him of being indifferent.
?In mimicking MMA is boxing raising itself? No, it?s lowering itself. MMA is a fad. MMA stepped into a vacuum. The guys who run MMA are very smart. Oh man, they are sharp business people. The guys who run boxing are also smart business people, but they couldn?t give a rat?s ass about respecting the fan or maintaining the standards. Who?s going to maintain the standards? You have trainers being praised today, trainers going into the Hall of Fame, that don?t know in their whole body what Charley Goldman knew in his little finger. Listen to them in the corner. ?Throw more punches.? That?s their big advice. ?Throw more jabs.? What does ?throw more jabs? mean? The jab can be used five different ways. They don?t know what they?re saying. The level of ignorance in this sport is astounding. But, you?ll be criticized for saying that because most people who are watching that don?t know what the hell they?re watching.
?If I produce a ballet, do I want a critic in the audience whose whole exposure has been to break dancing? Do I want him to explain a ballet and what?s going on? Will he understand someone who is not performing up to par as opposed to someone who is? Where?s the frame of reference? Where?s the perspective? To anybody who watched boxing from the 1940s through the 1970, when you still had guys like Ike Williams, Jimmy Carter, Giardello, Carlos Ortiz, Duran, Arguello and then Hearns, Hagler, and Sugar Ray Leonard, to name a few, there were still some pretty good boxers out there. One of the last great body punchers was Julio Cesar Chavez. Even good wild men like Matthew Saad Muhammad could put on a show. But the way the sport is now, it is virtually unrecognizable.?
