# Is boxing the best martial art?



## Freestyler777

I used to think wrestling and judo was best, judging by the way grapplers dominated every other kind of martial artist in the early MMA.  But with time I have matured and heard many peoples' opinions that boxing is best.  What you see on TV is not real, I'm glad i learned that _without_  ever getting into a real altercation.  

Bruce Lee based JKD largely on boxing, and Tao of Jeet Kune Do is 80% boxing.  

Most of the MMA guys are training in boxing-style techniques, even though their background (wrestling and BJJ) would indicate they favor grappling.  MMA is not reality to begin with.

Kickboxing owed much of its beginnings to Western Boxing, and how it was adapted to be used with the kicking of Oriental Martial Arts.

Basically, everywhere I go in the MA world, boxing has taken prominence.  So I conclude that boxing, and similar martial arts, such as kickboxing and muay thai are the best martial arts.  Say what you will.


----------



## Tez3

Actually Nike-do is the best style ever for getting out of trouble.

As has been said before and will be said again time and time again, the best style is the style that suits you and works for you. Yhat could be capoiera for some, karate for others, aikiso, judo etc basically whatever works for you is the best style is the one that works.

Freestyler you seem very dismissive of MMA and was it to MMA you were referring when you said it wasn't real?


----------



## Freestyler777

What I meant was, forming self-defense opinions based on what you've seen on TV is not smart.  Even the early MMA fights were not 'real fights', although they were pretty darn close.  

And by the way, I hold a black belt in nike-do.  I also have a black belt in grocery shopping and philosophy.:soapbox:

I have decided to train in boxing. jiu-jitsu is not for me, no matter how hard I try.

And all I see in JKD/kickboxing/MMA is punching techniques that resemble boxing.

And every 'experienced' opinion I get seems to tell me that punching most realistic, although in theory, anything could work (kicking, throwing, biting, gouging, weapons, makeshift weapons, etc...)

Basically, I want to fight without fighting.  I don't want to experience a streetfight, but I want to do a sport that doubles as an effective self-defense method, and i think I have finally realized that boxing is for me.  I guess it doesn't matter if there is or is not an objective 'best martial art'.  But it seems like kickboxing and MMA are largely influenced by pugilism.


----------



## terryl965

You can never go wrong with boxing but as a martial art I do not believe so it is a great fighting tool and probaly the best one known to mankind.


----------



## bdparsons

So much in self defense is situation specific. The reality is, if you are a better boxer than I am a "street fighter" or "karateka" then chances are your going to win.

The first step is not to suffer from "paralysis by analysis". Get into some art and start training. Your experience there will tell you whether or not it's for you. Look for practicality. Ask yourself, "Does this make sense?" If it does, stay and train harder. If it doesn't, you've just gained the experience of finding something that doesn't work for you. Be sure not to judge too quickly. Above all, if the instructor can't give a valid reason for doing things a certain way, hit the door.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## bushidomartialarts

There is no such thing as a 'best' martial art.  There is a best combination of your body type, attitude and talents with a type of training.  And there is certainly a level of instruction that is superior.

But my advice would be to worry about style less and about what works more.  In the end, it's all the same.


----------



## searcher

I am a firm believer that there is no "best" martial art.   I will say that boxing is the simplest art to learn.   It has very few techniques and they are pretty straight forward.   You can spend your time mastering the few techniques instead of learning many other techniques that you may never use.   JMO.


----------



## Freestyler777

That is very insightful, i didn't think of it that way, but yes, the body of knowledge in boxing is very small compared to most other martial arts.  And it is the simplest art.


----------



## morph4me

bushidomartialarts said:


> There is no such thing as a 'best' martial art. There is a best combination of your body type, attitude and talents with a type of training. And there is certainly a level of instruction that is superior.
> 
> But my advice would be to worry about style less and about what works more. In the end, it's all the same.


 
I agree, the best martial art for me is Aikido, the best martial art for Terry is TKD, and the best martial art for Tez is MMA. These are the ones we embraced and fit our personalities, and these are the ones we've spent considerable time studying and training in. These are the arts we have made part of ourselves and what we will fall back on when the **** hits the fan.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Freestyler777 said:


> I used to think wrestling and judo was best, judging by the way grapplers dominated every other kind of martial artist in the early MMA. But with time I have matured and heard many peoples' opinions that boxing is best. What you see on TV is not real, I'm glad i learned that _without_ ever getting into a real altercation.
> 
> Bruce Lee based JKD largely on boxing, and Tao of Jeet Kune Do is 80% boxing.
> 
> Most of the MMA guys are training in boxing-style techniques, even though their background (wrestling and BJJ) would indicate they favor grappling. MMA is not reality to begin with.
> 
> Kickboxing owed much of its beginnings to Western Boxing, and how it was adapted to be used with the kicking of Oriental Martial Arts.
> 
> Basically, everywhere I go in the MA world, boxing has taken prominence. So I conclude that boxing, and similar martial arts, such as kickboxing and muay thai are the best martial arts. Say what you will.


NO, no, no! Boxing is limited to upper body thrusting... only. Its only effective against people limmiting themselves to that type of combat. For your information there are other ranges and methods of execution to at least consider.
sean


----------



## Drac

bushidomartialarts said:


> There is no such thing as a 'best' martial art. There is a best combination of your body type, attitude and talents with a type of training. And there is certainly a level of instruction that is superior.
> 
> But my advice would be to worry about style less and about what works more. In the end, it's all the same.


 
What he said...


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist

Boxing is a great art I trained in it.
I do not think it or any art can be consider best certain fads may use that but fads come and go. I think boxing should be looked at in 2 ways the old ways when they boxed wrestled and what not and modern with just striking. When we just look at boxing there are some pro's and con's
which of course we find in every style and how much pro and con shows
depends on the individual. The limitation in just Boxing is no kicks no throws no knees well pretty much nothing but using your fists and maybe some clinching. So when you are put into a setting in which there are no rules and your opponent may use a weapon Boxing alone may not be the best choice compared to styles that deal with multi scenerios or someone who trained in boxing but covered areas not in Boxing such as some form of grappling or whatever. The point is you will never find the best elite system only what works best for you and makes you the best you can be.


----------



## Jonathan

Touch Of Death said:


> NO, no, no! Boxing is limited to upper body thrusting... only. Its only effective against people limmiting themselves to that type of combat. For your information there are other ranges and methods of execution to at least consider.
> sean


 
Ennhhhh... not *entirely* accurate, IMO.  Granted, it's probably more effective against someone who's also boxing... but to say it's entirely ineffective against, say, a kickboxer isn't outright accurate.

But I do agree that he should consider alternatives, what his strengths, weaknesses, and interests are, and what exactly he wants to accomplish.


----------



## Bumblebee

Even though it sounds way cliche now, I'm one of those people that claim that there are no superior martial arts.  Just superior martial artist.


----------



## Odin

Freestyler777 said:


> That is very insightful, i didn't think of it that way, but yes, the body of knowledge in boxing is very small compared to most other martial arts. And it is the simplest art.


 
I would disagree here, boxing has very few moves compared to other arts true but that doesnt mean its not any less complexed.

The true art in boxing is learning how to land your punches, how to defend punches, how to move, how to roll, how to stand, how to disguise punches, how to take punches.......etc........

All those things is what becomes the art of boxing, and all of them things take no less time to learn then it would someone learning another art.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Jonathan said:


> Ennhhhh... not *entirely* accurate, IMO. Granted, it's probably more effective against someone who's also boxing... but to say it's entirely ineffective against, say, a kickboxer isn't outright accurate.
> 
> But I do agree that he should consider alternatives, what his strengths, weaknesses, and interests are, and what exactly he wants to accomplish.


I didn't mean to imply the moves weren't effective. limmiting is a better term.
Sean


----------



## MingTheMerciless

Boxing are great for buffing up your punching and TKD are good for buffing up your kicking skill in Kickboxing


----------



## TheArtofDave

*I've got a little experience as it relates to boxing. If you combine them in the old ways before boxing & wrestling were separate then it could be largely effective especially with other styles.*

*If you mean Boxing like sport-boxing where you're just limiting to throwing punches then here is what I would suggest.*

*Foot work is proper.. you can dodge.. side step well and when you back up to duck a punch and counter foot work is all a part of proper balance.*

*You also don't want to give yourself away with your eyes. Besides movement of the body if you effectively know your punches, know which you can land and the varying power behind them.*

*Remember not all fights go the same, not everybody is going to pick up a weapon. Most people will swing wildly or rush you in which case you can back up and then send a punch to either leave you alone, put them on their ***, or knock them out. Of course if boxing, with american influence doesn't interest you then check into Thai boxing to learn other techniques instead of the ones you, and others may be familiar with. Encorporating other styles with boxing just makes you more effective any way.*

*Boxing its limited in a way but if somebody who isn't versed well in boxing gets around you, and you have to use it then they're not going want to keep trying you only to learn the hard way they're the only one who'll be meet with the floor or whatever surface the fight is taking place.*

*Best of luck to you*


----------



## IcemanSK

I boxed for a number of years & really liked it. After being a kicker for many years before that, it was a great challenge to me to only use my hands. It's a great form  of self-defense, but it certainly has it's limitations as well. (All martial arts do). One thing is for sure, boxing is one way to test yourself to see if you can really take a punch. In boxing there's little chance that you will fool yourself into thinking that you can handle it. If you get into the ring, you get that chance to find out.


----------



## Doc_Jude

Touch Of Death said:


> NO, no, no! Boxing is limited to upper body thrusting... only. Its only effective against people limmiting themselves to that type of combat. For your information there are other ranges and methods of execution to at least consider.
> sean



What he said.


----------



## Zero

No doubt about it, boxing is an awesome sport and aside from its limitations/ restrictions (as with any competitive sport with rules) is also a discipline that equips you with the basics needed for defence situations and street fights.

I have trained in various martial arts and with a strong judo, TKD and karate background love kicking - both leg attacks and high kicks - in competition and when competing in freestyle events often resort to submission holds and takedowns as well. That said, for the last few years I have trained with and sparred with boxers in recognition of their great hand skills. The speed and versatility of combos and in close hand defence skills I have picked up (and which before was relatively woefull!) is down to being trained by these 'masters of the gloves'.

I have fought a couple of boxers in mma and been able to win due to leg attacks and head locks - which they of course are not used to - but again, this is down in part I belive to the level and calibre of the fighter you are up against. I am lucky enough to have the opportunity to now be training with an ex national heavyweight and as my training overall is for mma we at times mix it up in the ring aside from just boxing.  I have hurt many non-kickers and kickers alike with leg attacks but this guy is very hard to connect with as he is very well versed in reading body movement and hip movement.  And once you throw your move he is in very quick and it can be quite overwhelming the speed and power that his punches come in.  At times I can combat this with grappling and take downs but again I have to time my take downs almost perfectly as if you leave one of his arms you are exposed to a punishing upper cut etc.

But of course boxing on its own, as with any ma - and as said numerous times in this link - is not 'greatest of all'. It's always good to be able to deliver quick, powerfull and accurate in close blows but when you find yourself on the ground in a grapple or taking withering knee attacks it is essential to be well rounded in combating and nutralising other arts.

As an aside, as Odin said, it is not at all one of the simpler arts. Although the focus is on the fists, the art is indeed a sweet science due to the incredible amount of time focused on every aspect of delivering and evading a blow and of course ring movement and strategy.

Anyway, before this turns into a novel, I gotta say boxing is fantastic, in part it does equip you to handle situations quickly on the street or in a brawl but unless yo're purely training for the ring sport it does need supplementing if you are serious on street defence or mma.


----------



## Bodhisattva

Freestyler777 said:


> I used to think wrestling and judo was best, judging by the way grapplers dominated every other kind of martial artist in the early MMA. But with time I have matured and heard many peoples' opinions that boxing is best. What you see on TV is not real, I'm glad i learned that _without_ ever getting into a real altercation.
> 
> Bruce Lee based JKD largely on boxing, and Tao of Jeet Kune Do is 80% boxing.
> 
> Most of the MMA guys are training in boxing-style techniques, even though their background (wrestling and BJJ) would indicate they favor grappling. MMA is not reality to begin with.
> 
> Kickboxing owed much of its beginnings to Western Boxing, and how it was adapted to be used with the kicking of Oriental Martial Arts.
> 
> Basically, everywhere I go in the MA world, boxing has taken prominence. So I conclude that boxing, and similar martial arts, such as kickboxing and muay thai are the best martial arts. Say what you will.


 

I think Western Boxing is probably the best striking art/sport.


----------



## Em MacIntosh

The "manly science of self-defense" puts a lot of emphasis on your fitness.  A trained *fighter *is a trained fighter.  If you study a full contact martial art with the purpose of fighting professionally, they won't let unless you know what you're doing.  Most of us learn martial arts in a class, I assume, but those who get one-on-one coaching, especially (almost exclusively) those who do it with competition in mind have dedicated the time, finances and effort to it.  Boxing's concepts contain transferrable skills, notably footwork and rolling with the punches.  Distance can be taught well in this method and the similarities of fencing and boxing often overlap when considering JKD (as Bruce described it).  You're safe with boxing as long as you learn the dirty moves and know how to keep your fists from being broken in a bareknuckles scuffle.  You also learn how to punch ******* out!


----------



## swiftpete

I have no evidence or material to back this up, it's purely speculation really but I think a decent boxer with a strong knock out punch would certainly have a very good chance in the average street altercation. I don't think mike tyson would get mugged by that many people out there even though he may have no grappling skills etc.
So good luck in your quest to become a boxer! I've always thought it looked great although I chose to study other things. You never know after training for a while in boxing you may decide to take up some jiujitsu or similar grappling art to supplement it. 
Or maybe you won't. Good luck anyway!


----------



## still learning

Hello,  A boxer against a untrain fighter? ...most likely the boxer will win?

Boxing teaches great skills for punching/strikeing plus .. you learn to duck/weave and take hits. 

Combine boxing with any martial arts? ....will help you get better as a fighter!

It is the best? ....Yes if you want to fight only with your fist!   Most of us have legs...to kick/knee so one will need more than just boxing?  against train martial artist...

Sometimes...all you need is one good "punch"!

Have you tried the " Hawaiian Punch?" ....good tasting juice!

Aloha, like most of you who said? ...it is the person who makes any fighting skills  to work.   ...anyone can take boxing...just a few will excel at it!


----------



## dungeonworks

I am of the mind that there is something anyone can get from any given system be it sports oriented fighting (MMA, kickboxing, BOXING), ecclectic non-sport self defense ala Krav Maga/Kenpo/JKD, a weapon based system such as Kali or Arnis, or an old sytem steeped in tradition such as the Kung Fu's, Karate's, jitsus...ect.  They are just different means to an end.

Boxing will give you immediate results that one could use sooner due to the large amount of time sparring and the focus on conditioning.  In other words, you get in shape faster and the core techniques are quickly absorbed and applied in a non-static way....same could be said of wrestling.  Aikido, Karate, Kung Fu, and many other traditional styles take much longer to perfect but may be no less effective once mastered.  It is something one sees as years go by.  For example, the wristlocks I seen/learned/fogotten/ignored early on in my TKD and Koei-Kan training, I have a new respect for after seeing them done in my Modern Arnis class.


----------



## Bodhisattva

They are not all different means to the same end.

Physics is unforgiving and insists we move with efficiency.

Many of those arts you named are not at all efficient, nor are they effective.


----------



## Tez3

Bodhisattva said:


> They are not all different means to the same end.
> 
> Physics is unforgiving and insists we move with efficiency.
> 
> *Many of those arts you named are not at all efficient, nor are they effective*.


 
I think you need to expand on your opinion and tell us which ones you don't think are effective and why. I think you should probably explain the physics comment too as I have no idea what it means


----------



## Doc_Jude

Boxing by itself isn't well-rounded enough to compete when compared to other arts, even kickboxing arts such as Muay Thai & other SE Asian Kickboxing, American Full Contact Karate, and Savate. However, the skill sets learned in western boxing can be very, very useful for any martial artist.


----------



## Doc_Jude

Bodhisattva said:


> They are not all different means to the same end.
> 
> Physics is unforgiving and insists we move with efficiency.
> 
> Many of those arts you named are not at all efficient, nor are they effective.



In you're opinion, which arts are even worth our time?


----------



## Xue Sheng

Tez3 said:


> I think you need to expand on your opinion and tell us which ones you don't think are effective and why. I think you should probably explain the physics comment too as I have no idea what it means


 
What Tez said



Doc_Jude said:


> In you're opinion, which arts are even worth our time?


 
Good question but I think I know the answer already, but I am willing to admit I could be wrong



Doc_Jude said:


> Boxing by itself isn't well-rounded enough to compete when compared to other arts, even kickboxing arts such as Muay Thai & other SE Asian Kickboxing, American Full Contact Karate, and Savate. However, the skill sets learned in western boxing can be very, very useful for any martial artist.


 

Agreed

Nothing against boxing those guys hit mighty hard but I would bet on a well trained Muay Thai or Sanshou guy agaist boxing.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

I love to box and it is brutally effective but limited.  That is it's true weakness.  Still take a boxer and give them a knife and watch out!


----------



## cstanley

I don't get into arguments about "best," because all MA have value and much depends on the spirit of the individual. But, if you are talking about professionally trained boxers or top flight amateurs, they are amazingly quick and powerful...and they train harder than most other pro athletes. They have endurance, they are used to pain, and they train to "get off first," and counter punch. In the street, I would think they would have the advantage over any unarmed thug or punk, and even well-trained karate guys may end up having to take the guy to the ground. Do NOT let them hit you first.

In the ring against a MMA guy...I don't know. Again, if the boxer lands some solid blows early, ok. But, if he gets taken down, it is over.


----------



## MMAfighter

meh, it's based off of the person's opinions...i love boxing, but to say it's the best is a lil...ehh...persaonlly i don't think that there is a "best" style of fighting. But what it does is st a very good base for stand up fighting. Before moving onto the kicks, knees, elbows, ect. i feel that you have to leanr to use your ahdns and use em well, i don't mean become a master but get to know it. I do BJJ, boxing/kickboxing, and wrestling, both BJJ and boxing/kickboxing ar ein one class but me personally my style is 70% punching 20% kicks 15% knees and 5% elbows...that's my stand up and how i liek to use it...offensivley anyways. But yeah, i understand where you're coming from, boxing add so much to the game, punches set up everything for me, kicks,takedowns, clinch, throws, ect. LOVE IT


----------



## still learning

Hello, The average person on the streets ( will have little chance of winning against a boxer)

Most martial artist will also have a hard time against a boxer, since most fights start standing up.

Boxer also learn to take hits and take alot of them,  their condition is very superior to most people, their endurance is longer than most people including martial artist.

Plus to learn to fight? ..one must learn fighting skills....ducking, weaving,and movements skills every boxer learns from the beginning.

Is this the best art? ....most agree NOT one art has it all.....but boxing comes pretty close to being a very effective art on the streets!

Martial artist with boxing backgrounds? ....are lot better than those without it!  ....

Aloha ( boxing? ...how did it gets it's name? ...from the shape of the ring? ...or did they started by fighting inside a box?  UM?)


----------



## SageGhost83

There is no best martial art. Every style has weaknesses and every style can be defeated just as easily by someone who knows how to exploit those weaknesses. Boxing is an awesome tournament style, and I agree that the average boxer can hold his own against anybody, but the same can be said for anybody who practices a style seriously and acquires great skill. It all comes down to the individual. I am a boxing fanatic and watch Friday Night Fights every week that it airs. I have seen some boxers that I would not want to go into training camp with , let alone fight against. I have also seen some boxers who I would have no problem pwning. I am a traditional martial artist, but I have many friends who throw hands very nicely in the amatuers and aspire to move up to the professional ranks. I have sparred them and kicks work really well against their general game. Of course, I have ate my fair share of canvas against them because they are not half bad :lol2:. The question should be "Is boxing the best martial art *for me*". Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## SageGhost83

Btw, did anybody see that Miranda v. Banks KO? That was friggin awesome! That is almost up there with the Wilson v. Nwodo (sp?) KO!....*ahem* sorry, for the mini hijack. Carry on.


----------



## no_kata

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I love to box and it is brutally effective but limited.  That is it's true weakness.  Still take a boxer and give them a knife and watch out!



So you take away one weapon that the boxer knows best (his hands) and replace it with a knife that he's had very limited, if any, training on. How exactly would that make him more dangerous? By the way, if you put a weapon in a person's hands do you think they're going to throw combinations and then use the knife or do you think they're going to be more focused on using the weapon in their hands?

Also, what happens when the boxer breaks his hands on the street because his hands aren't wrapped? What weapons does he have then? Every other martial artist still has their feet, elbows and knees to use.


----------

