boxing

boxing Forget the euphemistic ‘noble art of self-defence’; boxing is a human bloodsport in which the intention is to hurt one's opponents by delivering blows to their body and ultimately knocking them unconscious. It sanctions injury in the name of sport.

That said, modern boxing appears almost genteel alongside its prizefighting predecessor in which bareknuckled pugilists fought to exhaustion, with fights often lasting several hours. A round ended only when one combatant was floored; he then had half a minute's respite before placing his toe on a line scratched across the centre of the ring and resuming battle. Not until one fighter failed ‘to come up to scratch’ was a result declared: no wins on points in those days, just the objective test of an inability to continue. Early rounds were often hard slogging contests but the real physical damage came in the later stages when tiredness slowed defensive reflexes. Imagine too the state of even the winner's hands, protected only by having been soaked in brine.

With their combination of boxing and wrestling moves, early contests were literally ‘no holds barred’; grappling, punching, tripping, and throwing all being used to floor an opponent. The widely-adopted Broughton's Rules of 1743 eradicated some of the barbarism by outlawing the hitting of a man when he was down, and the seizing of hair or the body below the waist, but they still permitted butting. Yet it was not the brutality of the prize-ring which brought its demise, but the corruption with which it became associated.

The revival of the sport as boxing in late Victorian Britain saw several changes designed to render it more civilized. Although some of the old practices continued for a while — even the famous Queensbury Rules initially allowed endurance contests — by the turn of the century the general picture was one of boxing in gloves, limited-time rounds, points decisions after a fixed number of rounds had elapsed, and weight divisions, though the latter have accentuated problems of dehydration as fighters struggle to ‘make the weight’.

For much of the twentieth century the history of boxing has been one of crumbling resistance to changes intended to protect further the brains and bodies of participants. Between 1984 and 1993 eight boxers had died soon after fights in the UK; bantamweight Bradley Stone was added to the list in 1994. Following a report from a medical working party, which included neurosurgeons, the British Boxing Board of Control subsequently introduced mandatory annual magnetic resonance imaging scans for all boxers to replace the less sophisticated computerized tomography which had been compulsory only for those fighting eight rounds or more. Additionally, any boxer knocked out must wait 45 days (previously 28) before he again enters the ring competitively, and he must also have a hospital check. Ringside doctors may advise referees on a fighter's condition between rounds and may recommend that the contest be stopped. Doctors also examine each boxer at the conclusion of fights and paramedic teams must be on hand at all boxing bills.

The medical profession in several countries has increasingly adopted an anti-boxing stance, citing irreversible brain damage as its major objection to the sport. This is a key point for, in absolute terms of deaths and serious injuries, other sports such as horseracing, mountaineering, rugby, and even cricket appear more dangerous, but in none of them is deliberate and repeated striking of an opponent part of the rules of the game. In contrast a boxer has a licence for physical assault. The evidence is clear that repeated pummelling to the head can cause cumulative damage to the brain: here time is no great healer. Occasionally, acute brain injury can occur during a fight. The greatest danger comes towards the end when a tired man with a loose neck has his head flipped back rapidly by a punch. This can tear a vein outside or inside the brain, which then leaks blood, causing pressure on the brain and eventually leading to a coma. Only if the clot is removed rapidly can the fighter survive. Fighters now train harder; their bod-ies are fitter — but their brains are no more resilient than in the past. Some nations, notably Sweden, have already banned boxing on medical grounds.

So far the British government has been reluctant to follow the Swedish lead and since 1981 five private members' anti-boxing Bills proposed in parliament have failed to reach the statute books. Most schools, both state and public, however, have dropped boxing from their physical education curriculum. Yet it should be noted that amateur boxing is exceptionally well regulated: not more than four rounds are fought, headguards are worn, and the referee is allowed to stop a fight to prevent serious injury. However, headguards, whilst absorbing energy from punches, present an even larger target to be hit and thus the number of blows striking home may well increase. Indeed, studies have shown that non-boxing sportsmen outperform even amateur fighters in neurological tests and, notwithstanding the safety precautions, three amateur fighters have suffered serious brain injury in British rings since 1988.

For centuries boxing has been the epitome of overt masculinity, a demonstration of manliness and its embodying characteristics of courage, toleration of pain, and self-discipline. Women were merely ornaments displaying the round cards. This continues, but women have successfully demanded equal rights in the ring. In Britain, girls from the age of 10 are now allowed to spar in amateur boxing gyms, and recently professionalism, too, has been recognized for women — significantly later than its acceptance in the US where fights for women have appeared on the undercard of world championship events.

The moral dilemma of boxing is that it provides an honest opportunity to escape poverty, but it also means for some a legal beating and for all the threat of permanent damage. Hitting below the belt is outlawed to protect the genitals, but surely the brain deserves even more protection, by reducing the concussive power of the boxing glove, developing safer headgear, excluding the head as a target — or by banning the sport altogether. The issue is not how hazardous boxing is but whether the hazards are acceptable.

Wray Vamplew

Bibliography

BMA (1993). The boxing debate. British Medical Association, London.