Is the Sweet Science the essence of Prize fighting?

By Boxing News - 01/30/2016 - Comments

Image: Is the Sweet Science the essence of Prize fighting?By Gerardo Granados: How many times, have we read or hear the voice of boxing purist, claiming that the best prize fighters are the ones who are pure boxers? Days ago I read a comment in which it was argued that the best fighters are the ones with the ability to adjust to any style, and not the ones who are capable to win in a devastating way. But, is it better to watch a slick boxer win a 120-108 decision or to watch two lions in a fight of the year nominee?

I consider that the personal boxing taste and the variety of styles only enrich prize fighting. There cannot be only one truth about the subject, and no one should be entitled to claim to be the only one to know which boxing style is the best.

I can’t recall the first time I heard someone say that the sweet science is to hit and don’t get hit and at the same time hear them despise brawlers. Also, how boxing purists praise Pernell Whitaker, Floyd Mayweather Jr or Ray Leonard boxing style, but even if I do appreciate the art involved in a slick crafty technician I doubt it is the essence of prize fighting.

The beauty of a boxer puncher, that special breed of lion, who has the boxing skills to go along with an innate killer instinct and the pride to prove he is the best, without hesitate to take a punch or two. This ring warrior might be the perfect mix for me and not pure boxers who take little to none risks.

But, the heart and hunger of a skilled limited brawler have no match when you see him go against more skilled boxers, and slowly see the brawler maul the skilled boxer into submission. After all, in the beginning of prize fighting didn’t all or most of the fighters were brawlers who showed courage, determination, strength and stamina to win.

In the beginning, there were no real rules in prize fighting and it was an illegal activity. Can you imagine those days? No Promoters ordeals or TV people blocking a fight because of contracts or low Pay Per View projected numbers, no modern performance enhancement drugs but maybe just a jar of liquor, and also no politics but just prize fighting.

Back then people gathered to watch two brave fighters engage in knuckle fights, fights would go way beyond 15 rounds, between rounds they would drink whiskey, and the last man standing was the winner. Can the reader imagine the emotions those fights could create in the audience.

It was raw and brutal, real dangerous. Then the Marquee of Queensberry rules brought boxing to the masses, so it was not as brutal as in the beginning, but it kept its essence. Years later, the craft of boxing evolved and I consider that’s when the Sweet Science was born.
Let´s say that former heavyweight Champion Gene Tunney, might be the example, of one of the first boxers to epitomize the Sweet Science before it became the new trend. But when was it that it became the only fighting style worth of praise?

When we watch the MMA or Muay Thai fights, we can appreciate the technique involved but nothing beats a brutal grudge fight or a violent knockout. Maybe the only things that can be compared are courage and the superb ability to absorb punishment. When you see a fighter walk thru clean hard punches or when you see them hurt and then pull themselves off the canvas and fight back.

Jake LaMotta, Julio Cesar Chavez Sr., George Chuvalo and Juan Manuel Marquez come to my mind, Fernando Monstruo Castro, Arturo Gatti, Micky Ward, Jeff Harding, Marco Antonio Barrera, Evander Holyfield, Azumah Nelson, Michael Katsidis, Johnny Tapia, Ruslan Provodnikov, Rocky Marciano and others are example of granite chinned fighters who had a heart bigger than their chest.

I don’t pretend to convince boxing purist, but just let them remember that in the beginning fight fans made no distinction and gave same merit to the skills and to courage and bravery.
I believe that the “Sweet Science” is only a part of Prize Fighting, but not its essence. But, what about the readers, do you agree?



Comments are closed.