Kick Boxing 1930's
- Thread starter ATC
- Start date
Love the way the guy in white turns and skips away. It all looked a bit relaxed didn't it?
I guess all sports are just becoming more and more professional. Watching old footage of soccer or tennis makes the game look very lame. Everything was amateurish back in the day. Those chaps in the 1930's probably worked 12 hour days somewhere and only trained a few hours a week.
I guess all sports are just becoming more and more professional. Watching old footage of soccer or tennis makes the game look very lame. Everything was amateurish back in the day. Those chaps in the 1930's probably worked 12 hour days somewhere and only trained a few hours a week.
StudentCarl
3rd Black Belt
Not just Professional - Modern Styles, or Old Styles in Modern Times, are Increasingly Aggressive in Nature. Which I consider to be Beneficial.
I think that the comparison here might be unfair. I suspect the older clip was part of a demonstration or exhibition match, more than a real fight. The newer one featured clips from actual championship matches.
- Thread Starter
- #7
Yeah could be the case but the style is still the style. Just like looking at old time boxing with both fist with palms up and up and down motions. Handle bar mustaches and all. Until Jack Johnson came along. Look at kickboxing during 1800's to early 1900's and it all looked the same as that clip. Things changed a bit after the 50's and looked more of what we see today in the 60's and 70's.
frank raud
Master of Arts
I am assuming you are referring to the older bare knuckle style boxing, which continued until the rules changed, then the Marquis of Queensbury rules outlawed many previously viable techniques(no tripping, grappling, throwing). The arrival of Jack Johnson signaled the first time a black man had become the heavyweight champion of the world, but did not make significant changes to the fighting style of boxing.
- Thread Starter
- #9
Yes you are correct. I was simply trying to point out how old bare knuckle boxers use to fight until the more modern fighters came to be. I used Jack Johnson as an example of a more modern style era but still going back pretty far. See image below of stance and hand positions of old style vs. what we know now.
Then - Very up-right, hands rotaed palms up with hands held low.
Now - More of a crouched position, hands rotated palms down. hands held high.
You never see anyone in a stance like the top photo anymore.
frank raud
Master of Arts
Yes you are correct. I was simply trying to point out how old bare knuckle boxers use to fight until the more modern fighters came to be. I used Jack Johnson as an example of a more modern style era but still going back pretty far. See image below of stance and hand positions of old style vs. what we know now.
Then - Very up-right, hands rotaed palms up with hands held low.
Now - More of a crouched position, hands rotated palms down. hands held high.
You never see anyone in a stance like the top photo anymore.
Short answer, no fights bare knuckle boxing anymore. Gloves and rule changes changed a lot of boxing techniques. You can check in the western arts sections for discussion by Kirk Lawson and others on the development of modern boxing. The modern stance would not be any more appropriate in a bare knuckle match than a bare knuckle stance would be under modern rules.
Yes you are correct. I was simply trying to point out how old bare knuckle boxers use to fight until the more modern fighters came to be. I used Jack Johnson as an example of a more modern style era but still going back pretty far. See image below of stance and hand positions of old style vs. what we know now.
Then - Very up-right, hands rotaed palms up with hands held low.
Now - More of a crouched position, hands rotated palms down. hands held high.
You never see anyone in a stance like the top photo anymore.
Of course not. The rules have changed. In fact, someone did a really good analysis of stance changes in response to the rules changes; I recall reading it from a link here. (Maybe lklawson?) The modern peek-a-boo stance is optimized for the current rules, with limited much more limited targets, larger gloves (even for pros), and limited clinching with no throwing.
- Thread Starter
- #12
There are plenty of bare knuckle fights still. That is how Kimbo came up. No sanctioned fights but plenty of underground stuff. And they all use modern boxing stances and techniques. The old style is just obsolete.
For convenience, here is the post with the discussion of stances and how rules reshaped them.
- Thread Starter
- #14
That was very interesting, thanks for that. I think the rules are also a part of evolution as well. Is it for the better? Maybe I need to test them out. I still think the fighters of today have better movement and use science to help advance techniques. We know so much more about how to generate reach and power. Still that was a pretty good article.
frank raud
Master of Arts
Kimbo would be considered a street fighter, not a bare knuckle boxer. Again, the rules(or lack of) define the techniques and tactics. Did Kimbo fight under London Prize ring rules? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Prize_Ring_Rules
- Thread Starter
- #16
OK, I will agree with that, and after reading the thread posted by jks9199 I even understand that the changes were made due to the rules changes. However, it is still my opinion that the modern day style is a better style. With the birth of MMA as we know it today grappling was added back into the combat sport. Now true it is not as boxing was in it hay day but with take downs and grappling allowed as well as strikes and knees there are enough similarities that if the old stand up, lean back, hands low, palms up was better you would see some of that come back. I think the rules changes enlightened fighters to the fact that there was a better way.
Now as for street fighting I have seen a few underground fights that were close to the rules of the old pugilism days and none of them fought like those days.
Evolution is evolution, you cannot go back once a better way is found. The rules changes helped find that better way. Once you start training for the new or evolved way you find even better ways. You find that you can move better, faster. You find that your head can move out of the way without blocking. You can react faster, and that you may be protected better.
Yes the rules may have dictated how they fought back in the day vs. now but now is still light years better, in my opinion. Simple test would be to toss out the rules and have someone emulate the old stance and ways vs. someone that uses todays methods. I would put my money on the side of today.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
ATC
Let me see if I get this straight… based on one video you state that modern day style is better... You really cannot judge any martial art based on an old video.
You could also say current Sanda/Sanshou fights and fighters are much better than the old Lei Tei matches and the fighters that fought in them because they have a modern (westerized) stance and look more fit…. And maybe they are.. for one thing there are rules now that dictate stance and training and no one gets seriously injured or dies during a fight these days either.. but regardless I still would not make that judgement without direct experieince or talking to one who has direct experience
More Old Savate
Count Pierre Baruzy SAVATE - French boxing
SAVATE - FRENCH BOXING - BOXE FRANCAISE
- FRENCH BOXING - 1894 - Boxe francaise
Before kickboxing it was....SAVATE - French boxing
Let me see if I get this straight… based on one video you state that modern day style is better... You really cannot judge any martial art based on an old video.
You could also say current Sanda/Sanshou fights and fighters are much better than the old Lei Tei matches and the fighters that fought in them because they have a modern (westerized) stance and look more fit…. And maybe they are.. for one thing there are rules now that dictate stance and training and no one gets seriously injured or dies during a fight these days either.. but regardless I still would not make that judgement without direct experieince or talking to one who has direct experience
More Old Savate
Count Pierre Baruzy SAVATE - French boxing
SAVATE - FRENCH BOXING - BOXE FRANCAISE
- FRENCH BOXING - 1894 - Boxe francaise
Before kickboxing it was....SAVATE - French boxing
Last edited by a moderator:
punisher73
Senior Master
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,959
- Reaction score
- 1,058
The argument behind "modern styles are better" is a logical fallacy. Old bareknuckle fights fought that way because to do power punches with the hands would usually lead to a break in the hand so they kept them a little lower to defend against body punches that they would face more. Also, you can't compare a staged photo of a fighter and assume that they all fought that way with their hand posture. Second, to compare that MMA (that has padded gloves to help protect the hands) which is a newer evolution from newer style boxing rules. So you have people who learned modern boxing and are now putting it back into a sport that has throws and takedowns (MMA) but is still too new to know what kind of innovations in guards and postures will bring in a couple of decades.
So, all you can REALLY say is that a sport that highlights punching the head will have people keep their hands there to protect it, if you are facing limited head punches and more body punches, you will keep your hands their to protect it. Has nothing to do with "better", it has all to do with ruleset.
And if you want to compare EITHER position to a "real fight" look at either boxing or MMA and where their "guard" position goes when trading punches, it is almost non-existant and you will see the best fighters winding up for punch and lowering their hands down before striking. Melee exchanges are very different then when you are at an artificial sporting distance looking for an opening.
So, all you can REALLY say is that a sport that highlights punching the head will have people keep their hands there to protect it, if you are facing limited head punches and more body punches, you will keep your hands their to protect it. Has nothing to do with "better", it has all to do with ruleset.
And if you want to compare EITHER position to a "real fight" look at either boxing or MMA and where their "guard" position goes when trading punches, it is almost non-existant and you will see the best fighters winding up for punch and lowering their hands down before striking. Melee exchanges are very different then when you are at an artificial sporting distance looking for an opening.
- Thread Starter
- #19
Very difficult to find anyone with direct experience that could be useful in determining that. Just like people try to compare old school football (american) with the game today. Just can't be done. Like it has already been stated the rules were different back then for that sport also. But all of the old time guys all say that the athletes today are bigger faster and stronger because of better knowledge of everything. All of that is a part of the evolution. The basics are the same but the advancement is in the details and the approach. Understanding better concepts that make you faster, stronger, bigger.
I have seen all the vids that you posted before, and all but the last one (which is more modern age just shot black and white) had so much bad techniques, even for a demo only.
Sorry but I still stick to my opinion.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Thread Starter
- #20
All of what you stated has already be stated so nothing new. Yes hand position is based on the rules of the target. If the body is the target then the hands will natrually come down. No disagreeing there either. However even with the rules once you protect the handd with gloves it is only logical to then use what is best for fear of not breaking the hand. You will never see any MMA fighter stand up right with hands inverted, never.
Just by saying they used this stance and this way to protect the hands you are defacto saying that the way is flawed and not the best way to do it. You only do it this way becasue if I did it the better way I would break my hand. Put some protection on and I would use this way. Well then you are proving the argument that take away all conserns then it is better to do it this way. So if you pitted a guy with no gloves vs. the guy with gloves then the guy with gloves would have a better stance and style vs. the guy with no gloves. Put gloves on that bare knuckle guy and still have him fight the same way would be pointless as he nolonger would fear injury to his hands.
So your statements just reinforced to me my opinion.
