Why did Western martial arts eliminate leg moves (esp kicks) as they became sportified (esp boxing)?

7BallZ

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
So far there is a notion in pop culture that until East Asian martial arts were brought over Post WWII and the Bruce Lee craze, Western martial arts never never used any leg techniques such as the triangle choke and in particular kicks.

Anyone who began studying martial arts in depth will eventually come across HEMA and other local regional styles in Europe such as Viking Wrestling, Savate, and Pankration that emphasizes using leg techniques like sweeps and kicks to the point such techniques are essential to using such local European styles.

However these styles never became big in the West as popular fighting sports. In fact its starting in the 1700s many popular western fighting sports like boxing and collegiate wrestling style began to develop into their modern forms; prior the older variations were almost like earlier incarnations of MMA with bare knuckle boxing allowing open hand strikes, grappling, and even kicks and stomping and old school wrestling pretty much being No Holds Barred minus striking.

As they became their popular sports form, eventually associations develop rules to focus entirely on arm-based techniques and eliminate legs other than for footwork and movement to launch throws and punches.

It'd take a over a century for the concept of "kicks", leg chokes and take downs, stomping and other leg techniques to begin to be as acceptable in mainstream fighing sports with East TMAs and Bruce Lee inspiring new sports like kick boxing and MMA in the West.

Its precisely because of the transition of boxing and college wrestling into banning kicks, stomps, sweeps, and other leg based techniques that came the notion that kicking is a uniquely Asian thing and Westerners prefer fighting with their hands only.

Anyone who studies Asian martial arts in depth would realize a lot of styles like Karate and TKD were actually dumbed down even in their home country to eliminate dangerous moves and thus forms are more like sports emphasizing flashiness

Despite the huge dumbing down and sportification fo Asian martial arts, in Asia using leg techniques like triangle choke, sweeps, and especially chokes were never eliminated from mainstream martial arts and fighting sports and indeed in many Asian countries like Thailand and Mongolia its kickboxing and No Holds Barred Wrestling styles that are among the MOST popular sports.

Even in countries where "traditional Western fighting sports" like boxing became huge in such as Japan and Korea, the popularity pales in comparison to traditional martial arts sports emphasizing kicks and leg based takedowns and grappling. I mean for how big boxin is in Korea, the amount of TKD dojos outnumber them by a huge margin.

However in the West, its the opposite where martial arts sports utilizing kicks and sweeps like Zipota, Sambo, Savate and Pankration and many no holds barred local wrestling styles are practically obscure and waaayy out of the mainstream's radar. Even in European countries that pride themselves in keeping their local martial arts and wrestling styles alive like Russia and North Europe, boxing and collegiate wrestling and other arm-based sports remain DOMINANT as far as as popularity goes.

I am curious why is there such a huge contrast in the transitioning of martial arts into their sportified forms between Asia and the West? Why do kickboxing and No Holds wrestling styles like Icelandic wrestling and Savate that were developed indigenous to Europe were left as UNDERGROUND things and never got the mass appeal the way TKD, Judo, and Karate got in Asian countries?

Bonus question: In the west why did fighting sports restricting techniques to arm usage quickly outpaced local styles utilizing bodies such as Pankration in popularity (especially boxing)?

I mean even older schools of boxing once utilized leg movements to pin an enemy from escaping as you pummel him in the ring while both you and your enemy are standing up. There was even a point when pugilism had sweeps and kicks. Go a few centuries earlier and British boxing resemble a far more brutal incarnation of MMA in which everything goes from choking an enemy to stomping them on the ground to gouging their eyes and the only thing preventign it from being real street violence was the lack of weapons and the existence of a referee to decide the winner and help the loser get up so he could go to the nearest hospital.
 

MartialMasters

Yellow Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
37
Reaction score
18
It is no doubt a combination of many factors, not just one single thing!

From knights on the lists, to tournaments, to private duels, hundreds of years of change in Europe through the late middle ages into the renaissance meant all kinds of shifts in historical martial arts, influenced by so many economic, moral, political...and often simply pragmatic reasons. Take the practice of ransom with Knights (and heavier armour) which meant that ground fighting and that whole avenue of leg-based fighting simply did not grow the way it did in Japan.

Then there was the technology. Gunpowder and all the rest. Leading into the past few hundred years, the prevailing moral and religious mindsets in the West also still promoted a bit of an unspoken attitude against what was seen as more unrestrained and bestial forms of fighting (but as you mentioned, some early forms of boxing were still pretty nasty).

For a small example (also from Britain), some of the considerably less honourable brawlers around the Victorian era made themselves early versions of steel-toed shoes (actually!), and in many scuffles, this led to very short-lived and unpleasant fights. Not very sportsmanlike, and it was greatly frowned upon as being a most unfitting practice (unworthy of a true gentleman). In many circles this contributed to an increasing attitude of disallowing any kicking altogether.

Also, off-record...Europeans are often a very pragmatic lot, I dare say often to a fault...and that did mean high-flying kicks never really caught on! But look at the old fight manuals and get out of the sporting ring...and you'll definitely see some leg-work!

To summarize, I'd say there's no easy answer...it's lots of things, really the whole story of the growth of Western and Eastern Civilizations!
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
20,984
Reaction score
5,843
I was having a look at the history of boxing. And part of its dominance in popular culture could have been because you could bet on it.

I mean if fighters spectators and promoters are all getting money from a rule set. That is going to become pretty popular.

History of Boxing
 
OP
7

7BallZ

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
It is no doubt a combination of many factors, not just one single thing!

From knights on the lists, to tournaments, to private duels, hundreds of years of change in Europe through the late middle ages into the renaissance meant all kinds of shifts in historical martial arts, influenced by so many economic, moral, political...and often simply pragmatic reasons. Take the practice of ransom with Knights (and heavier armour) which meant that ground fighting and that whole avenue of leg-based fighting simply did not grow the way it did in Japan.

Then there was the technology. Gunpowder and all the rest. Leading into the past few hundred years, the prevailing moral and religious mindsets in the West also still promoted a bit of an unspoken attitude against what was seen as more unrestrained and bestial forms of fighting (but as you mentioned, some early forms of boxing were still pretty nasty).

For a small example (also from Britain), some of the considerably less honourable brawlers around the Victorian era made themselves early versions of steel-toed shoes (actually!), and in many scuffles, this led to very short-lived and unpleasant fights. Not very sportsmanlike, and it was greatly frowned upon as being a most unfitting practice (unworthy of a true gentleman). In many circles this contributed to an increasing attitude of disallowing any kicking altogether.

Also, off-record...Europeans are often a very pragmatic lot, I dare say often to a fault...and that did mean high-flying kicks never really caught on! But look at the old fight manuals and get out of the sporting ring...and you'll definitely see some leg-work!

To summarize, I'd say there's no easy answer...it's lots of things, really the whole story of the growth of Western and Eastern Civilizations!


There's a lot of problems with your post.

Despite the popular notion that the development of gunpowder brought Western martial arts to extinction remember GUNPOWDER WEAPONS were first developed in China. Hell it wasn't even Asians who brought it to Europe but the Turks (and despite the heavy development of gunpowder warfare in their civilization during the Ottoman period, even modern Turkish wrestling styles still have sweeps and other leg-based movements and techniques).

I mean it was even in the late Medieval Ages when Europeans began to import their more effective rifles back into Asia during the same period of the Warring clans in Japan and the Ming dynasty of China. And the Chinese armies and Samurais were QUICK to adopt European rifles in large numbers (with several sources stating Japan even having far more rifles than most European nations at the time minus the superpowers such as France, England, Portugal, and Spain- and Japan's numbers of rifles used in warfare were scarily on the same scale as the European superpowers when compared individually).

Even romanticized wars that are often portrayed as conflicts in which traditional martial arts were used to fight back modernization influenced by European culture such as the Boxer Rebellion and the Meiji Restoration actually had gunpowder projectiles used as the primary weapon by the Asian conservatives trying to to maintain the status quo and wipe out Europeans from entering China and Japan. Far more Chinese rebels attempted to fight via Napoleonic Warfare than attempt to close in and hack European soldiers and the Shogunate was frequently using European artillery in their battles against the revolutionaries.

SO I don't buy the notion of advances in technology being responsible for elimination of Western arts and for dumbing down the ones that still exist by removing movements other than arm techniques (and even restricting what arm techniques can be used- no open hand palm strikes in boxing for example).

I mean Asia was often advancing just as much alongside Europe up until the period when the "AMerican colonies" were developed. Yet it was able to maintain rich martial traditions in which the entire body used headbuts, stomps, and triangle chokes. ANd even when Asia was lagging back, the gap wasn't as great as say central Africa (as Asians developed organized systems of administration that amazed even racist European explorers and soldiers).

The knights fighting in heavy armour and medieval warfare is also baloney because not only do medieval manuals show Judo-style throws and leglocks....... But Asian armies have been pretty much fighting in a similar manner with formations, utilizing combined arms of infantry and cavalry and more units.

You just have to watch a documentary of a battle between Chinese lords to see just how much the Samurai fought akin to the Roman Legion with disciplined solid formations using shield walls.

Not to mention European armor isn't really that heavy and varied throughout the Medieval period. an 8th century knight would have been wearing leather with chainmail on topwhile a 16th century knight would have been fighting quite similar to what we often call as Napoleonic Warfare (which armor becoming less and less used).

Even at their peak when they resemble the stereotypical plates that we see in film, knight's armor was never that heavy. Modern military equipment and uniforms are actually far heavier than a typical complete suite of plate armor.

Knight's armor would have been similar in weight to a Samurai's armor (and the Samurai even used a plate armor of sort at some points in their history-not exactly plate but definitely utilizing metals forged ina similar manner and built to cover the body in the same exact way as the knight's uniform).

So no a lot of your assertions are false and would be called BS by any practitioner of HEMA or even anyone who has knowledge of Medieval Warfare.

The Victorian Era and boxing honor is also nonsense considering just before the invention of London Prize, stomps were allowed on enemies.

So the notion of Europeans being far more pragmatic in violence is a slap in the face against historical evidence considering how in actual warfare both EAst and WEst for the most part fought int he same way utilizing formations and adopting the latest equipment..

Which is why its quite bizarre the most popular fighting sports (that still maintain a lot of fans and are even more popular than fighitng sports with more available techniques like kicks) are boxing and wrestling in contrast to the rest of the world (minus Mexico).

I mean to use a non-Asian example, African regions use wrestling styles that are No-Holds-Barred as one of the popular sport. Did I mention modern Turkish style still maintaining their medeival techniques? Even South America where boxing is popular, grappling styles resembling MMA without strikes are far more popular (especially in Brazil).

I mean at a time Savate was even comparable to boxing in popularity in Europe as a whole yet boxing overtook it even in its home country France! Same can be said with folk rwestling styles (which eventually got overshadowed by collegiate wrestling and Queensberry Rules boxing).
 
OP
7

7BallZ

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
It also doesn't explain why boxing and collegiate wrestling removed kicks and leg techniques despite the fact that modern MMA exploding in popularity precisely because its considered more exciting to watch due to the variety f different techniques that can be used rather than just simply punching each other for 15 rounds or trying to pin your enemy using your strong arms (but not being allowed to throw them on the ground or pull their leg and caused them to trip with your hands).

You'd think with the MMA craze that those who codified boxing and college wrestling into their modern forms would have left sweeps and kicks because they're more exciting to watch than just limited arsenals the current sports employ.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,358
Reaction score
4,653
Location
England
ROFLMAO wrestling didn't 'remove' kicks, it didn't have them to start with because ...you know...it's wrestling! We have several styles of wrestling here, all of them as old as the hills, they don't have kicks in because the people that do them enjoy wrestling as do many others, wrestling isn't dead, never has been. It's not ;underground' either.
Who decided that gunpowder made European martial arts extinct?
Ah, the dumbification of martial arts idea, always a good laugh that one.
While I think it may be a compliment that you think we are too genteel to use kicks I can assure you that no one actually thinks the way you seem to think we do. Kicking is a s good as anything and no one worries about whether it's sportsmanlike or not.
Turkish wrestling...now that looks like fun, they cover themselves in oil and reach into each others underpants, yes really, look it up, I'm not making it up.
 
OP
7

7BallZ

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
ROFLMAO wrestling didn't 'remove' kicks, it didn't have them to start with because ...you know...it's wrestling! We have several styles of wrestling here, all of them as old as the hills, they don't have kicks in because the people that do them enjoy wrestling as do many others, wrestling isn't dead, never has been. It's not ;underground' either.
Who decided that gunpowder made European martial arts extinct?
Ah, the dumbification of martial arts idea, always a good laugh that one.
While I think it may be a compliment that you think we are too genteel to use kicks I can assure you that no one actually thinks the way you seem to think we do. Kicking is a s good as anything and no one worries about whether it's sportsmanlike or not.
Turkish wrestling...now that looks like fun, they cover themselves in oil and reach into each others underpants, yes really, look it up, I'm not making it up.

Some older styles "dubbed" as wrestling had kicks such as Pankration (which if you ever see history texts, its always described as "Greek wrestling" even though its far more accurate to describe it as MMA with even far less rules and much higher fatalities).

And I mention "leg based techniques" which is more than just kicks but includes sweeps, leg locks, knees strikes, and other techniques focusing on using the leg to cripple an opponent or strike them to earn points.

Older styles of wrestling such as local folk styles across Europe (whcih still has practitioners even to this day) have extensive use of sweeps, triangle chokes, arm bar, and other techniques associated with Asian martial arts.

Its a common assertion among many westerners who are theorizing why medieval and western fighting systems became extinct was the advancements in military technology namely gunpowder. Even the HEMA guys are claiming technological advancements led to Eurpean martial arts becoming extinct.

For over a century boxing and collegiate wrestling has dominated the West so much that the notion of kicking an opponent has been ingrained as cowardly and many basic kicks (roundhouse, sidekicks etc) other than the soccer kick have been lost . Boxing and wrestling remains in arsenal for your average brawl at school or in a bar.

Its only in the Asian studies (and any subculture heavily involved with stuff made in Asia such as Hong Kung Fu cinema, anime/manga, etc) , military, (to a lesser degree) street police, and hardcore criminal and prison circles where kicks were frequently taught and used before the coming of the martial arts craze Bruce Lee inspired back in the 70s. Outside of those specific circles, the "fighting techniques" being taught were wrestling and boxing and any brawl that didn't use weapons was pretty much purely punch to punch or attempts to outwrestle each other.

SO your average brawl between college boys would not involve kicking or even stomping on someone because westerners have been so conditioned to punch in the manner of a boxer. Hell even open handstrikes were considered weird by your average Joe engaging in a riot or amateur hoodlums duking it out in the streets of California.

(though I must point out among hardcore criminals particularly in prison and those affiliated in gangs, kicks and handstrikes other than punching remained common).
 

MartialMasters

Yellow Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
37
Reaction score
18
There's a lot of problems with your post.

Despite the popular notion that the development of gunpowder brought Western martial arts to extinction remember GUNPOWDER WEAPONS were first developed in China. Hell it wasn't even Asians who brought it to Europe but the Turks (and despite the heavy development of gunpowder warfare in their civilization during the Ottoman period, even modern Turkish wrestling styles still have sweeps and other leg-based movements and techniques).

I mean it was even in the late Medieval Ages when Europeans began to import their more effective rifles back into Asia during the same period of the Warring clans in Japan and the Ming dynasty of China. And the Chinese armies and Samurais were QUICK to adopt European rifles in large numbers (with several sources stating Japan even having far more rifles than most European nations at the time minus the superpowers such as France, England, Portugal, and Spain- and Japan's numbers of rifles used in warfare were scarily on the same scale as the European superpowers when compared individually).

Even romanticized wars that are often portrayed as conflicts in which traditional martial arts were used to fight back modernization influenced by European culture such as the Boxer Rebellion and the Meiji Restoration actually had gunpowder projectiles used as the primary weapon by the Asian conservatives trying to to maintain the status quo and wipe out Europeans from entering China and Japan. Far more Chinese rebels attempted to fight via Napoleonic Warfare than attempt to close in and hack European soldiers and the Shogunate was frequently using European artillery in their battles against the revolutionaries.

SO I don't buy the notion of advances in technology being responsible for elimination of Western arts and for dumbing down the ones that still exist by removing movements other than arm techniques (and even restricting what arm techniques can be used- no open hand palm strikes in boxing for example).

I mean Asia was often advancing just as much alongside Europe up until the period when the "AMerican colonies" were developed. Yet it was able to maintain rich martial traditions in which the entire body used headbuts, stomps, and triangle chokes. ANd even when Asia was lagging back, the gap wasn't as great as say central Africa (as Asians developed organized systems of administration that amazed even racist European explorers and soldiers).

The knights fighting in heavy armour and medieval warfare is also baloney because not only do medieval manuals show Judo-style throws and leglocks....... But Asian armies have been pretty much fighting in a similar manner with formations, utilizing combined arms of infantry and cavalry and more units.

You just have to watch a documentary of a battle between Chinese lords to see just how much the Samurai fought akin to the Roman Legion with disciplined solid formations using shield walls.

Not to mention European armor isn't really that heavy and varied throughout the Medieval period. an 8th century knight would have been wearing leather with chainmail on topwhile a 16th century knight would have been fighting quite similar to what we often call as Napoleonic Warfare (which armor becoming less and less used).

Even at their peak when they resemble the stereotypical plates that we see in film, knight's armor was never that heavy. Modern military equipment and uniforms are actually far heavier than a typical complete suite of plate armor.

Knight's armor would have been similar in weight to a Samurai's armor (and the Samurai even used a plate armor of sort at some points in their history-not exactly plate but definitely utilizing metals forged ina similar manner and built to cover the body in the same exact way as the knight's uniform).

So no a lot of your assertions are false and would be called BS by any practitioner of HEMA or even anyone who has knowledge of Medieval Warfare.

The Victorian Era and boxing honor is also nonsense considering just before the invention of London Prize, stomps were allowed on enemies.

So the notion of Europeans being far more pragmatic in violence is a slap in the face against historical evidence considering how in actual warfare both EAst and WEst for the most part fought int he same way utilizing formations and adopting the latest equipment..

Which is why its quite bizarre the most popular fighting sports (that still maintain a lot of fans and are even more popular than fighitng sports with more available techniques like kicks) are boxing and wrestling in contrast to the rest of the world (minus Mexico).

I mean to use a non-Asian example, African regions use wrestling styles that are No-Holds-Barred as one of the popular sport. Did I mention modern Turkish style still maintaining their medeival techniques? Even South America where boxing is popular, grappling styles resembling MMA without strikes are far more popular (especially in Brazil).

I mean at a time Savate was even comparable to boxing in popularity in Europe as a whole yet boxing overtook it even in its home country France! Same can be said with folk rwestling styles (which eventually got overshadowed by collegiate wrestling and Queensberry Rules boxing).

Guess I needed to be a bit clearer! I am absolutely not claiming that gunpowder "killed" Western Arts. But it certainly did make an impact (in the West and East). Just to let you know, I've practiced HEMA for over five years, and am a senior student at one of the biggest schools for Western Swordplay in the world. And I trained under a legit Samurai in Kyoto (not a bullshido guy, but 33rd generation grandmaster from an unbroken line originating in the Warring States period), so I'm not a "keyboard warrior" who just wathces Anime and jackie chan movies and thinks himself an authority! The West and East systems and histories are not unfamiliar to me! Not just from book reading, but first-hand learning, too! Not that I'm a walking encyclopedia, either...

But I can say, the European medieval manuals show Judo-style throws, yes...but basically only in unarmoured wrestling (like good old master Ott and the rest!). Much of the pole-axe and sword work for full armour, you'd try to simply imbalance your opponent and let the weight of the armour do the rest (look at the Burgundian 'jeu de la hache', or good old Fiore)! At some international symposiums for swordplay, instructors in this area expressed the same idea, too...I promise I'm not making this up! But yes, I definitely mentioned the late middle ages for that element, because I know that the 8th century was quite different from the 14th. Heck, the "cnicht" was barely a twinkle in anyone's eye shortly after the fall of Rome. You just had footmen in light armour known mainly as "milites". But Knights in the sense we usually think came about later. Stirrups, plate armour, lances for shock combat and lists...that all happened after 1000AD!

That thing about the steel-toed shoes I got recently from a Bartitsu instructor who had just reviewed a book written from the Victorian era about the subject. I know one flower doesn't make spring, and one book isn't everything...but I'm not making that up, either! And it certainly is true that the Victorians were pretty obsessed with being gentleman, although not all were, and it often got expressed in funny ways! Still...I mentioned that only as one of the many tiny little things that did add to the mix. And it wasn't a problem of stomping with steel-toes (you stomp with your heel), but of shin kicking (and groin shots too...now that's a cringe-worthy thought!)!

I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers, I'm certainly not claiming that Asia is stupid and Europe is amazing...just wanted to express that it is a composite cause behind the change, and that since both cultures and civilizations are different, the way they developed differed!
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,358
Reaction score
4,653
Location
England
Older styles of wrestling such as local folk styles across Europe (whcih still has practitioners even to this day) have extensive use of sweeps, triangle chokes, arm bar, and other techniques associated with Asian martial arts.

Wow, imagine that eh, 'folk styles' still being practiced! yes I'm being sarcastic because yes of course we still do what you quaintly call 'folk' styles. They are very popular right across Europe.

Its a common assertion among many westerners who are theorizing why medieval and western fighting systems became extinct was the advancements in military technology namely gunpowder. Even the HEMA guys are claiming technological advancements led to Eurpean martial arts becoming extinct.

I think you'll find we prefer to say that western fighting systems just moved with the times. However I wouldn't say Western fighting systems are extinct, certain things have never changed, the Archery club close to me has been going since the Middle Ages.

For over a century boxing and collegiate wrestling has dominated the West so much that the notion of kicking an opponent has been ingrained as cowardly and many basic kicks (roundhouse, sidekicks etc) other than the soccer kick have been lost . Boxing and wrestling remains in arsenal for your average brawl at school or in a bar.



SO your average brawl between college boys would not involve kicking or even stomping on someone because westerners have been so conditioned to punch in the manner of a boxer. Hell even open handstrikes were considered weird by your average Joe engaging in a riot or amateur hoodlums duking it out in the streets of California.

You are being very North American-centric, you will find that in Europe we don't 'do' collegiate wrestling, it's not a common sport you will find in colleges and universities here. We have the Olympic styles and the local styles. I don't think we have your equivalent of 'college boys' either, college here is for 16-18 years olds to take their A levels or who go into a trade. They don't tend to fight much. We have universities for 18+, if they fight and brawl which doesn't actually happen a lot then they will do it the same way as any other young person, they don't think kicking is cowardly at all, far from it, it's not 'ingrained' here as I keep telling you, I really wish you wouldn't project your thoughts of how you think things are, on us Europeans. Whatever you think we do we don't besides we have Rugby. Enough said.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,358
Reaction score
4,653
Location
England
And it wasn't a problem of stomping with steel-toes (you stomp with your heel), but of shin kicking (and groin shots too...now that's a cringe-worthy thought!)!

We still have shin kicking competitions. :D
 

MartialMasters

Yellow Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
37
Reaction score
18
Some older styles "dubbed" as wrestling had kicks such as Pankration (which if you ever see history texts, its always described as "Greek wrestling" even though its far more accurate to describe it as MMA with even far less rules and much higher fatalities).

And I mention "leg based techniques" which is more than just kicks but includes sweeps, leg locks, knees strikes, and other techniques focusing on using the leg to cripple an opponent or strike them to earn points.

Older styles of wrestling such as local folk styles across Europe (whcih still has practitioners even to this day) have extensive use of sweeps, triangle chokes, arm bar, and other techniques associated with Asian martial arts.

Its a common assertion among many westerners who are theorizing why medieval and western fighting systems became extinct was the advancements in military technology namely gunpowder. Even the HEMA guys are claiming technological advancements led to Eurpean martial arts becoming extinct.

For over a century boxing and collegiate wrestling has dominated the West so much that the notion of kicking an opponent has been ingrained as cowardly and many basic kicks (roundhouse, sidekicks etc) other than the soccer kick have been lost . Boxing and wrestling remains in arsenal for your average brawl at school or in a bar.

Its only in the Asian studies (and any subculture heavily involved with stuff made in Asia such as Hong Kung Fu cinema, anime/manga, etc) , military, (to a lesser degree) street police, and hardcore criminal and prison circles where kicks were frequently taught and used before the coming of the martial arts craze Bruce Lee inspired back in the 70s. Outside of those specific circles, the "fighting techniques" being taught were wrestling and boxing and any brawl that didn't use weapons was pretty much purely punch to punch or attempts to outwrestle each other.

SO your average brawl between college boys would not involve kicking or even stomping on someone because westerners have been so conditioned to punch in the manner of a boxer. Hell even open handstrikes were considered weird by your average Joe engaging in a riot or amateur hoodlums duking it out in the streets of California.

(though I must point out among hardcore criminals particularly in prison and those affiliated in gangs, kicks and handstrikes other than punching remained common).

I hate to be a wet blanket, because I love digging out truths as much as the next guy...but stepping back, it looks like you've asked a question of a group of instructors and long-time practitioners, and then as soon as they take time out of their busy days to offer a word or two, you seem to ream into them and tell them why they are wrong and why you are right. If you already have all the answers, know all the facts, and know better than us...why ask in the first place? Maybe that wasn't your intent, but speaking from the other side of the coin...it just seems a bit like that. Admittedly, some responses may have been a bit unclear (mine included)...but this is just an online forum, we're not peer-reviewing articles for national publications here!

Again, don't want to ruffle feathers, the last thing anyone needs is a big mud-slinging battle online. It just seems a bit odd the way this thread has progressed! Interesting topic, though!
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,358
Reaction score
4,653
Location
England
Some older styles "dubbed" as wrestling had kicks such as Pankration (which if you ever see history texts, its always described as "Greek wrestling" even though its far more accurate to describe it as MMA with even far less rules and much higher fatalities).

I've never seen or heard of it described as 'Greek wrestling' but always what it was. I wouldn't describe it as MMA though because it isn't mixed martial arts which is what it says it is, a mixture of many different arts from different cultures used by a fighter to win competitions. Pankration was a Greek martial art in itself.
What you call 'folk' styles of wrestling often have no leg techniques whatsoever, some don't even go to the ground. Some are just leg techniques funnily enough.
I think there are great many experienced posters who have yet to put their tuppenceworth in, I'm making popcorn so I can enjoy the exchanges.
 

Andrew Green

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
8,628
Reaction score
448
Location
Winnipeg MB
Some older styles "dubbed" as wrestling had kicks such as Pankration (which if you ever see history texts, its always described as "Greek wrestling" even though its far more accurate to describe it as MMA with even far less rules and much higher fatalities).

Ancient Greece had wrestling, boxing and pankration. Boxing was generally considered the most dangerous of the 3. But pankration and wrestling where separate events in the ancient Olympics.

[/QUOTE]
For over a century boxing and collegiate wrestling has dominated the West so much that the notion of kicking an opponent has been ingrained as cowardly and many basic kicks (roundhouse, sidekicks etc) other than the soccer kick have been lost . Boxing and wrestling remains in arsenal for your average brawl at school or in a bar.
[/QUOTE]

Not really, collegiate wrestling doesn't exist outside of the US. Most wrestling is Freestyle and Greco-Roman. But wrestling never had kicking... it's wrestling. Boxing in the west never had kicks weather, they weren't lost, they just where not part of that sport. Some trips and throws where if you go back far enough, but not kicks.
 
OP
7

7BallZ

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
41
Reaction score
1
Ancient Greece had wrestling, boxing and pankration. Boxing was generally considered the most dangerous of the 3. But pankration and wrestling where separate events in the ancient Olympics.
For over a century boxing and collegiate wrestling has dominated the West so much that the notion of kicking an opponent has been ingrained as cowardly and many basic kicks (roundhouse, sidekicks etc) other than the soccer kick have been lost . Boxing and wrestling remains in arsenal for your average brawl at school or in a bar.
[/QUOTE]

Not really, collegiate wrestling doesn't exist outside of the US. Most wrestling is Freestyle and Greco-Roman. But wrestling never had kicking... it's wrestling. Boxing in the west never had kicks weather, they weren't lost, they just where not part of that sport. Some trips and throws where if you go back far enough, but not kicks.[/QUOTE]

Some of the earlier incarnations of "pugilism" as seen in the 14th-16th century had kicks and stomps as a common technique. Even as late as London Prize Rules, there were boxers who attempted to "cheat" by stomping on the enemy's feet to prevent them from escaping via footwork. And before London Prize, stomping on someone in the ring was quite common in the less formal and organized bouts.

While most Wrestling styles didn't use kicks, older styles from as far as Medieval Europe utilized sweeps and other leg-based movements and techniques

However some styles dubbed as a "local wrestling" variation was more accurately MMA in that strikes were used in addition to submission and grappling. Pankration (which many books on Ancient Greece tended to describe as a Greek style of wrestling or "wrestling combined with boxing") is one such example.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
20,984
Reaction score
5,843
I hate to be a wet blanket, because I love digging out truths as much as the next guy...but stepping back, it looks like you've asked a question of a group of instructors and long-time practitioners, and then as soon as they take time out of their busy days to offer a word or two, you seem to ream into them and tell them why they are wrong and why you are right. If you already have all the answers, know all the facts, and know better than us...why ask in the first place? Maybe that wasn't your intent, but speaking from the other side of the coin...it just seems a bit like that. Admittedly, some responses may have been a bit unclear (mine included)...but this is just an online forum, we're not peer-reviewing articles for national publications here!

Again, don't want to ruffle feathers, the last thing anyone needs is a big mud-slinging battle online. It just seems a bit odd the way this thread has progressed! Interesting topic, though!

We could be wrong. I don't think anybody here is a boxing historian. So I will counter this and suggest that he takes nothing we say at face value. Regardless of how experienced we are.

If he thinks we are wrong it means he needs to think about and support why we are wrong. If we think we are right then we need to think about and support that as well.
 

Andrew Green

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
8,628
Reaction score
448
Location
Winnipeg MB
However some styles dubbed as a "local wrestling" variation was more accurately MMA in that strikes were used in addition to submission and grappling. Pankration (which many books on Ancient Greece tended to describe as a Greek style of wrestling or "wrestling combined with boxing") is one such example.

You do realize that the term MMA is a pretty knew one, which was certainly not in common usage when most things written on Pankration where published? "MMA" is a term created in the UFC, describing it as a "Mixed Martial Arts" event in that it had a mixture of martial arts styles represented. It evolved to mean the style itself that comes about from the rules used. But people still occasionally describe it as a mix of boxing and wrestling.
 

MartialMasters

Yellow Belt
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
37
Reaction score
18
We could be wrong. I don't think anybody here is a boxing historian. So I will counter this and suggest that he takes nothing we say at face value. Regardless of how experienced we are.

If he thinks we are wrong it means he needs to think about and support why we are wrong. If we think we are right then we need to think about and support that as well.

Fair enough!
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
20,984
Reaction score
5,843
That thing about the steel-toed shoes I got recently from a Bartitsu instructor who had just reviewed a book written from the Victorian era about the subject. I know one flower doesn't make spring, and one book isn't everything...but I'm not making that up, either! And it certainly is true that the Victorians were pretty obsessed with being gentleman, although not all were, and it often got expressed in funny ways! Still...I mentioned that only as one of the many tiny little things that did add to the mix. And it wasn't a problem of stomping with steel-toes (you stomp with your heel), but of shin kicking (and groin shots too...now that's a cringe-worthy thought!)!

I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers, I'm certainly not claiming that Asia is stupid and Europe is amazing...just wanted to express that it is a composite cause behind the change, and that since both cultures and civilizations are different, the way they developed differed!

The concern modern day is someone steel toe kicking. Down guy in the face.

Most pubs here ban them.
 
Top