# Boxing in self defence?



## Curlykarateka

How effective is boxing in self defence? I know little about the style.  Obviously a boxer has the edge over some average Joe in the opening stages, what happens if the fight goes to the ground. I can't help but wonder if the lack of grappling makes it less effective a self defense style. My style, Goju has a solid mix of wrestling and striking, which I believe makes it very effective in a street fight. How does boxing stand up? Please be patient with me.


----------



## grumpywolfman

[video=youtube_share;GJxbKjtB5uE]http://youtu.be/GJxbKjtB5uE[/video]

The only problem when using boxing for self defense, is the damage it can do to your own fists.


----------



## K-man

A competent fighter of any style should be capable of using it for self defence.  That is what makes comparison of style for SD relatively meaningless. 

 :asian:


----------



## Drasken

Boxing in my opinion is one of the most effective styles trained today for self defense. Now before anyone jumps me verbally for this statement let  explain it.

1. Any style is effective if trained properly. I don't care if we're talking boxing, aikido, TKD... All are effective, if trained to be used in the way you would need to use it for self defense. If you don't train for self defense you won't be able to use it as effectively.

2. I am not claiming boxing is better than any art from a technical standpoint. Far from it. It has its definate drawbacks the same as any other style. One of the most obvious drawbacks is they generally don't train to grapple or stop someone from taking them to the ground like other styles do.

So what did I mean by my statement? It's very simple. Boxers train to hit quickly and effectively while guarding from similar attacks. Most fights I have seen or been in against thugs on the street, the thugs don't kick too much. And the ones that do generally aren't too effective and likely just watch UFC and think they can fight like a trained MMA fighter.
This means a trained boxer can deal with this threat effectively. Now of course there are exceptions to this, which is why I said most and not all.
Now keep in mind that a boxer trains to actually hit and stop from getting hit in the ring. It is a full contact sport. So it translates well to actually using it to defend themselves.

Boxing has been used as the base for a few systems such as Krav Maga. It is common for boxers to cross train as well, especially now with MMA being so popular. So it's easy to train something like BJJ to become effective in grappling and defense.

So yes, boxing can be very effective for self defense. But once again, ANY style is effective if you are skilled and train it for self defense.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf

Curlykarateka said:


> How effective is boxing in self defence? I know little about the style.  Obviously a boxer has the edge over some average Joe in the opening stages, what happens if the fight goes to the ground. I can't help but wonder if the lack of grappling makes it less effective a self defense style. My style, Goju has a solid mix of wrestling and striking, which I believe makes it very effective in a street fight. How does boxing stand up? Please be patient with me.


Didnt watch the youtube video, since i never trust YT to prove a point about a martial arts...but I also believe any martial art can be effective. If youre a boxer, as long as you can use it too your advantage, youre fine. If youre a grappler, or mixed same thing. if you have a weapon, once again, same thing. In self defense, the important thing is knowing how and when to use your tools, not what tools they may be.


----------



## Cyriacus

If the fight goes to the ground, hell fight on the ground.
Your system of choice is neither the peak nor nadir of what you are capable of.


----------



## Kframe

kempodisciple said:


> Didnt watch the youtube video, since i never trust YT to prove a point about a martial arts...but I also believe any martial art can be effective. If youre a boxer, as long as you can use it too your advantage, youre fine. If youre a grappler, or mixed same thing. if you have a weapon, once again, same thing. In self defense, the important thing is knowing how and when to use your tools, not what tools they may be.



Honestly kempodisciple you should watch it just to marvel at the mans skill. It was a thing of beauty to behold.   Ya it does not prove anything about a martial art. I could post up James Toney getting owned in 10 seconds by Randy Couture in the UFC.


----------



## Janina

Cyriacus said:


> If the fight goes to the ground, hell fight on the ground.
> Your system of choice is neither the peak nor nadir of what you are capable of.




In that case, I think, the most useful technique is to be capable to adapt your style to changing situations. Boxing as close distance is definitely a great self defence method, but on the ground Judo or Wrestling skills may be more useful. As my opinion to the original question I think that Boxing is a great way to practice ones self defence skills, but I personally believe in flexibility as fighter so I would not value one system over others when talking about martial arts and self defence.


----------



## Cyriacus

Janina said:


> In that case, I think, the most useful technique is to be capable to adapt your style to changing situations. Boxing as close distance is definitely a great self defence method, but on the ground Judo or Wrestling skills may be more useful. As my opinion to the original question I think that Boxing is a great way to practice ones self defence skills, but I personally believe in flexibility as fighter so I would not value one system over others when talking about martial arts and self defence.


Of course - The important thing is that you dont need to do Judo or Wrestle to be able to do that


----------



## Janina

Cyriacus said:


> Of course - The important thing is that you dont need to do Judo or Wrestle to be able to do that



Definitely not! Judo and wrestling were only examples!


----------



## jthomas1600

I read a Bruce Lee quote that was something like this "all other things being equal (similar tools, athleticism, size, etc.) the fighter who can control the timing, tempo, and distance will win". Because of the relative simplicity of boxing (no kicks, throws, etc.) I think boxers end up having a real good grasp on these three concepts. I saw a similar video as the one posted above where a boxer fended off a number of attackers by punching and pivoting--always taking on the lead attacker and using his footwork so as not to get surrounded. I think boxing is an excellent foundation to build on. I think high school wrestling is also an excellent foundation for pretty much the same reasons.


----------



## KingDiesel

boxing is great as a stand alone stand up system or a compliment to another style so either way you look at it you cant go wrong

boxing has proven itself for centuries


----------



## VT_Vectis

Curlykarateka said:


> How effective is boxing in self defence? I know little about the style.  Obviously a boxer has the edge over some average Joe in the opening stages, what happens if the fight goes to the ground. I can't help but wonder if the lack of grappling makes it less effective a self defense style. My style, Goju has a solid mix of wrestling and striking, which I believe makes it very effective in a street fight. How does boxing stand up? Please be patient with me.



Mate, there's a reason organised crime bosses from London, U.K to New York would use boxers as there enforcers, heavies and bodyguards... They can throw it down whether in the ring or on the street.


----------



## billc

I had the opportunity two years ago to get some boxing training from the nephew of Fred Degerberg's first boxing instructor at the Degerberg Academy.  I have to say the method of teaching the art that he had passed down to him was amazing.  It made the art come alive as an actual art...as someone more interested in the Asian arts, and if I ever have the opportunity I would put boxing at the top of my list for future self-defense training.


----------



## drop bear

Yeah boxing is really complicated when you get into it. There are very good reasons good boxers beat bad ones.


----------



## wingchun100

Curlykarateka said:


> How effective is boxing in self defence? I know little about the style.  Obviously a boxer has the edge over some average Joe in the opening stages, what happens if the fight goes to the ground. I can't help but wonder if the lack of grappling makes it less effective a self defense style. My style, Goju has a solid mix of wrestling and striking, which I believe makes it very effective in a street fight. How does boxing stand up? Please be patient with me.



Here's the thing: a grappler will try to close the gap so a boxer's style is "useless," but a boxer will train to MAINTAIN that distance so he can stay in the fight. The same thing goes for someone who studies a kicking style. You will train to stay in a place where your range is effective. Just because you face a grappler doesn't mean you already lost.


----------



## Transk53

wingchun100 said:


> Here's the thing: a grappler will try to close the gap so a boxer's style is "useless," but a boxer will train to MAINTAIN that distance so he can stay in the fight. The same thing goes for someone who studies a kicking style. You will train to stay in a place where your range is effective. Just because you face a grappler doesn't mean you already lost.



Precisely what a boxer would do. Of course most street altercations result in the "handbags at dawn" situation. Even so, street fights are organic. Yeah okay through experience you watch the body line and shaping etc, but you don't have gentleman agreements with I am going to respect styles sort of thing. For me SD is all well and good, but the major factor comes down to if you can fight and have a fighting mentality. A street fighter will see the whole body as a target and will not refrain from being nasty. One thing for sure that irl, it will hurt no matter what SD is deployed imho.


----------



## twins-mt

Transk53 said:


> A street fighter will see the whole body as a target and will not refrain from being nasty. One thing for sure that irl, it will hurt no matter what SD is deployed imho.



Good point...


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey

Curlykarateka said:


> How effective is boxing in self defence? I know little about the style.  Obviously a boxer has the edge over some average Joe in the opening stages, what happens if the fight goes to the ground. I can't help but wonder if the lack of grappling makes it less effective a self defense style. My style, Goju has a solid mix of wrestling and striking, which I believe makes it very effective in a street fight. How does boxing stand up? Please be patient with me.



IMHO boxing is excellent for self defence.

In my albeit limited experience most real fights are over in seconds and a boxer's training to recognise and evade an incoming punch and hit back very hard are all you need in most real life situations, as it's not often a mugger or bar room bully is also a karate instructor or MMA champion.

Like the guy in the clip you can also take on multiple attackers better than a style that looks to take people to the ground and beat them with locks, holds, submissions etc.

That's just my 2p.


----------



## drop bear

Good striking is kind of a super weapon in self defence.


----------



## Buka

I think all styles of fighting arts can be good for self defense. I figure if they weren't they probably wouldn't be around too long.

I think boxing and BJJ have something in common. They both have a heavy tactile component to them, using the feel of the opponent during training that offers a very quick feedback concerning what you are doing and what he is doing.

There is that danger of injuring the bare hand in punching, though. (in boxing) Most boxers never train barehanded. And nearly all boxing trainers teach a left hook (or right) hitting with the baby two knuckles.


----------



## drop bear

Buka said:


> I think all styles of fighting arts can be good for self defense. I figure if they weren't they probably wouldn't be around too long.
> 
> I think boxing and BJJ have something in common. They both have a heavy tactile component to them, using the feel of the opponent during training that offers a very quick feedback concerning what you are doing and what he is doing.
> 
> There is that danger of injuring the bare hand in punching, though. (in boxing) Most boxers never train barehanded. And nearly all boxing trainers teach a left hook (or right) hitting with the baby two knuckles.




I have never met a boxing trainer who has. You can break your hands through the glove as well.

The thing with boxing (and bjj) is you can stop a guy with it. Even in training with the rules through the gloves with the other guy knowing what you are going to do and doing his best to prevent it. You can take a human being from functional to non functional. So as a self defence without those limitations it becomes very effective.


----------



## wingchun100

Boxers train to hit, and hit hard, and they GET hit hard. Unlike the average martial arts class, they learn what kind of punishment they can take. Yes they train with rules in mind, and yes they usually train against only other boxers, but then again every style has its drawbacks.


----------



## drop bear

wingchun100 said:


> Boxers train to hit, and hit hard, and they GET hit hard. Unlike the average martial arts class, they learn what kind of punishment they can take. Yes they train with rules in mind, and yes they usually train against only other boxers, but then again every style has its drawbacks.




You do get a bit of variation though within the concept of boxing.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=28z0RyCY29c


----------



## donnaTKD

i train muay thai and can honestly say that for teaching hit dodge hit it's outstanding.  in that first vid the guy was actually using the attackers stance against him making him fall making him miss ok so he laid one out cold but he just rolling with what was coming at him.

in kickboxing you learn to take kicks to the ribs and abdominals that's why you train those muscles to take the impact.  there is one rule that i've always gone by --- if you can't take it, don't give it.

boxing training if done right is more than adaptable to any situation.  you prepare to take a hit, learn where you're most likely to get hit so that you can counter it.  

boxing as a form of SD - it's prolly the most widely used cos it's far easier even for a novice to throw a punch than a kick and i'd say stay off the floor cos his friends will just attack you bigtime.


----------



## Buka

drop bear said:


> I have never met a boxing trainer who has. You can break your hands through the glove as well.



That's good to hear. I haven't taken a boxing lesson in years,  but I haven't met any who keyed on throwing a left hook with the first  two knuckles.

I think it's the nature of the punch itself.  Close to your own head (not a wide punch) palm down, fist in line with  your elbow, and particularly - transference of the weight to the rear  foot. Whether it's intended to or not, It aligns things so the smaller  two knuckles end up as the striking surface, especially in the heat of  battle. You get away with it most times because of the gloves, but some  times not. Which was the birth of the term "boxer's fracture".

I  love boxing, but one of the many things that I like better about  Martial Arts is the detail paid to the striking surface of the hand. I sure hope every dojo still does it. I mean they must, right? Kinda punching 101.


----------



## drop bear

Buka said:


> That's good to hear. I haven't taken a boxing lesson in years,  but I haven't met any who keyed on throwing a left hook with the first  two knuckles.
> 
> I think it's the nature of the punch itself.  Close to your own head (not a wide punch) palm down, fist in line with  your elbow, and particularly - transference of the weight to the rear  foot. Whether it's intended to or not, It aligns things so the smaller  two knuckles end up as the striking surface, especially in the heat of  battle. You get away with it most times because of the gloves, but some  times not. Which was the birth of the term "boxer's fracture".
> 
> I  love boxing, but one of the many things that I like better about  Martial Arts is the detail paid to the striking surface of the hand. I sure hope every dojo still does it. I mean they must, right? Kinda punching 101.



Yeah it can happen. I used to spar a guy who would forehead peoples punches. Used to mess up a few hands that way.

Otherwise broken hands is a very personal thing. Some people get them some don't everybody has their own reason why.


----------



## Warrior1256

To answer the original question, ABSOLUTELY!!!! When you are trained to swing those closed fists in a fast, furious and accurate manner you will be very well equiped to defend yourself.


----------



## MattofSilat

I guess almost all street fighters will use fists primarily.

Boxers train solely to be able to hit effectively while not getting hit. When I say effectively, I mean taking out people in a single strike which they can't even see coming. This is where boxing excels. Since it takes out people so quickly with single strikes and not getting hit, it is also (IMO) the best MA for multiple opponents.


----------



## Frankerz

aye, i guess the boxing is a perfect way for self defense, someone say about boxing it is a sport and not a Martial Arts, aye in some a way is true, but boxing is old like human, the human started to fight to closed punches from the born, i love the principles of it , speed-footwork-dodge and etc. i use the boxing principles in my own style, the fact of enter and go out of the enemy's guard is so Amazing, so i guess yes boxing is good for Self Defence!


----------



## Transk53

MattofSilat said:


> I guess almost all street fighters will use fists primarily.



Nope, some will use means that are designed to put the opponent down without thrills.


----------



## drop bear

Transk53 said:


> Nope, some will use means that are designed to put the opponent down without thrills.



But you should still be able to box though. Regardless of what strikes you are actually using. The method should still hold up.


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


> But you should still be able to box though. Regardless of what strikes you are actually using. The method should still hold up.



Yeah yeah, of course, in complete agreement drop bear  I think sometimes when people use the term "Street Fighter", they have watched too much Hollywood stuff. I had a conversation with my mate about this. I gave him a scenario where you have one big strapping fella built like a kiln, then there is a little whippet of a fella holding a baseball bat, yeah he incorrectly made the natural assumption that the bat was there due to the strapping fella's size.


----------



## Bill Mattocks

Boxing is a good art and can be used effectively for self-defense.  The same is true of most other arts.

With regard to the original post, yes, many fights go to the ground.  Not all of them do, however.  And while a grappler is going to try to take a fight to the ground and is generally well-versed in that type of fight, a stand-up fighter is going to try to keep the fight from going to the ground and is generally good at fighting standup style.

One serious drawback to ANY ground-fighting in a self-defense scenarios is that it does not comprehend fighting multiple opponents.  One guy grapples you, you take him to the ground and submit him, and his buddy kicks your testicles and/or brains in from above.

I mean no disrespect to grapplers.  The good ones are truly dangerous and I would not want to tangle with them.  I merely point out that grappling is done with a set of rules in mind; even in MMA, there are only two opponents.  Introduce a third opponent, and I think I can promise you that very few fighters would intentionally try to go to the ground.

So from my point of view, stand-up fighting is superior to ground fighting for SD on the premise that it may not be one-on-one without outside interference.  Not because one style is better than another, but because the circumstances favor not going to the ground.

Of course, if one finds oneself on the ground, it's a good thing if they know what to do while there.


----------



## Steve

Calling grapplers "ground fighters" is like calling strikers "blockers."   It ignores the range of techniques learned and focuses only on the one facet that feeds your bias and props up your own personal defense philosophy.  

While ground fighting is only one part of training as a grappler, the techniques learned help you regain your feet if taken to the ground, help you improve your position if surprised and if you're the one with friends, it could help you control the bad guy.


----------



## Bill Mattocks

Steve said:


> Calling grapplers "ground fighters" is like calling strikers "blockers."   It ignores the range of techniques learned and focuses only on the one facet that feeds your bias and props up your own personal defense philosophy.
> 
> While ground fighting is only one part of training as a grappler, the techniques learned help you regain your feet if taken to the ground, help you improve your position if surprised and if you're the one with friends, it could help you control the bad guy.



Fair enough.  I stand corrected.


----------



## Transk53

Steve said:


> Calling grapplers "ground fighters" is like calling strikers "blockers."   It ignores the range of techniques learned and focuses only on the one facet that feeds your bias and props up your own personal defense philosophy.
> 
> While ground fighting is only one part of training as a grappler, the techniques learned help you regain your feet if taken to the ground, help you improve your position if surprised and if you're the one with friends, it could help you control the bad guy.



Yeah, that I agree with Steve and nicely put


----------



## MuayThai1987

On the street boxing is really effective. if you have good legs and move a lot and stay on distance that´s good. If your opponent is a wrestler, than you can got in trouble... generally, boxing is on my opinion more effective then for example wrestling if you have more then one opponent. one on one is wrestling better


----------



## Transk53

MuayThai1987 said:


> On the street boxing is really effective. if you have good legs and move a lot and stay on distance that´s good. If your opponent is a wrestler, than you can got in trouble... generally, boxing is on my opinion more effective then for example wrestling if you have more then one opponent. one on one is wrestling better



One on one and stays one on one, not likely in the first place generally.


----------



## KPM

Before Eastern Martial Arts were really heard of in the West, they had "old school boxing" that was frequently referred to as the "Gentlemanly Art of Self Defense."  A modern boxer who is used to hitting and getting hit would most certainly hold his own on the streets in a self defense situation!   Now, if you have a boxing background and are interested into turning it into more of a martial art and increasing its effectiveness for self defense, check out Panantukan.  This is often called "Filipino Dirty Boxing."  It is essentially western boxing to which all kinds of nasty things from Filipino Martial Arts has been added.  Things like low-line kicks, limb destructions, joint locks, body manipulations, grappling, etc.  But still at its core are the defenses and punching combinations of western boxing.


----------



## drop bear

Bit of trivia for you. Longest boxing match was in Australia.


----------



## Transk53

drop bear said:


> Bit of trivia for you. Longest boxing match was in Australia.



No way, really. That I did not know!


----------



## drop bear

Transk53 said:


> No way, really. That I did not know!



Bare-knuckle boxing - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

longest bare knuckle.


----------



## Transk53

Cool.


----------



## punisher73

Here is a youtube channel dedicated to "bareknuckle boxing" and it's application to self-defense.
BareFisted - YouTube

There is also a book out "Championship Streetfighting" (nod to Jack Dempsey's book) by Ned Beaumont that addresses using boxing for self-defense and the differences etc.

One difference was that the jab used to be thrown with a vertical fist to the face due to the angle of the bones etc. to land better.  The cross/straight was still throw with a horizontal because of the curved angle to land properly.

It wasn't that there weren't "hook punches" in the old days, they were more opened up than they are now because to get that close to your opponent would lead to the other techniques in the arsenal like throws etc. or elbow strikes using that motion.  But, the fine tuning of a lead hook is more unique to the modern gloves and anti-grappling rules.  Just like the high guard with hands resting on the cheekbones that we see.


----------



## Transk53

punisher73 said:


> Here is a youtube channel dedicated to "bareknuckle boxing" and it's application to self-defense.
> BareFisted - YouTube
> 
> There is also a book out "Championship Streetfighting" (nod to Jack Dempsey's book) by Ned Beaumont that addresses using boxing for self-defense and the differences etc.
> 
> One difference was that the jab used to be thrown with a vertical fist to the face due to the angle of the bones etc. to land better.  The cross/straight was still throw with a horizontal because of the curved angle to land properly.
> 
> It wasn't that there weren't "hook punches" in the old days, they were more opened up than they are now because to get that close to your opponent would lead to the other techniques in the arsenal like throws etc. or elbow strikes using that motion.  But, the fine tuning of a lead hook is more unique to the modern gloves and anti-grappling rules.  Just like the high guard with hands resting on the cheekbones that we see.



I will check it out, thanks for posting


----------

