So basically we have the same sort of sources for these assertions that we have to assert that ancient Egyptians walked with their arms out in front of and behind them like snakes?



Yes,
It is pretty much trying to recreate boxing using the rocky movies.
Now with the texts and the pictures and may be existing tradition like dambe (YouTube - [CNN] Traditional Nigerian 'Dambe' Boxing 2008.07.14 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWF_ARr91bs)), pre WWII pugilistic material especially with wrapped fist, modern wrestling and striking, You can possibly extrapolate something descent.

Personally I think it is already very difficult to come up with something descent when you do have explicit and verbose text (and may be with pics) from a dedicated manual.
But can they really do more damage that the existing plethora of pseudo- multiple style-8belt-4tags a belt-fast track black belt program.

well actually how you fight depends on what you are doing

a modern boxer would get destroyed in ancient Greek boxing, the technicality of modern boxing is based upon modern safety equipment like wraps and gloves. As many are finding in MMA evern with hand wraps and gloves, when you hit skull you break bones.
if you look at english pugilism which preceded modern boxing they fought differently too.
What greek boxers and english pugilists do is oprotect thier hands and use the arms for defense rather than head mnovement.

this interpetations of boxing are very good.

If you want sources for ancient boxing technique
http://historical-pankration.com my website.

i beleive that some of these older bioxing concepts would show up more in modern MMA if we didnt use wraps or gloves to protect the hand.

well actually how you fight depends on what you are doing

a modern boxer would get destroyed in ancient Greek boxing, the technicality of modern boxing is based upon modern safety equipment like wraps and gloves. As many are finding in MMA evern with hand wraps and gloves, when you hit skull you break bones.
if you look at english pugilism which preceded modern boxing they fought differently too.
What greek boxers and english pugilists do is oprotect thier hands and use the arms for defense rather than head mnovement.

this interpetations of boxing are very good.

If you want sources for ancient boxing technique
http://historical-pankration.com my website.

i beleive that some of these older bioxing concepts would show up more in modern MMA if we didnt use wraps or gloves to protect the hand.

Oh please, this is basically a variation of the sports vs. street debate. Not again.

And the argumentation is a bit wierd. Sorry if that comes about rather harsh, but truth is truth. Modern boxers use head movement for protection, and not their arms? Thats supposed to be a joke, right?

You even counter your own argument. Because this thread happens to be about ancient greek boxing and how those ancient greek boxers used "cestae". A protective hand wrapping. Made of frigging oxen-skin.

Care to explain the major differences between wearing a handwrap and gloves to wearing a (padded) wrap and a wound-around length of thick leather? Except that maybe the raw leather may be rougher on the opponents skin, thus leading to more cuts?

What are the exact differences in the rulesets between modern boxing and ancient greek boxing? And how do you know? From which sources exactly? How exactly do those ruleset differences change run-of-the-mill strikes like the jab, cross, hook or underhook or make them unappliccable?

When you said that a modern boxer would be "destroyed" in a match of ancient greek boxing, where you referring to a match against todays "revivalists", or to a hypothetical match against actual ancient greek boxers? If the first option applies, where and when did any one of them fight against a trained modern boxer?

Edit: BTW: If you take a look on youtube, you will find out that there are videos of quite recent bareknuckle matches. Yes such things still happen. In Ireland for example. At least they did until recently. And guess what? While those bareknuckle boxers fight their fights without gloves or other protection, they train just the exact same way as every other boxer on this planet.

Oh please, this is basically a variation of the sports vs. street debate. Not again.

And the argumentation is a bit wierd. Sorry if that comes about rather harsh, but truth is truth. Modern boxers use head movement for protection, and not their arms? Thats supposed to be a joke, right?

now now don't get all uppity on me, i study modern boxing too and appreciate it, but ancient boxing was another beast entirely. Yes modern boxers do not use their arms for defense as much as many ancient styles did. Although head movement is mentioned in literary sources. The main reason for less of the stick and move stuff is it was looked upon unfavorably, ladders were even used to limit the footwork space between overly defensive combatants.


You even counter your own argument. Because this thread happens to be about ancient greek boxing and how those ancient greek boxers used "cestae". A protective hand wrapping. Made of frigging oxen-skin.

Well i am talking about ancient greek boxing and pankration not the roman Pancratium which used the Cestea, ancient greeks did not use the cestae they did however invent the MMA glove and tie the hands with leather cords.


Care to explain the major differences between wearing a handwrap and gloves to wearing a (padded) wrap and a wound-around length of thick leather? Except that maybe the raw leather may be rougher on the opponents skin, thus leading to more cuts?

well modern hand wrapping is much more effective at protecting the hand, but the ancient greeks to be sure used hand wraps but it didnt help anywhere near as much as modern boxing or even MMA


When you said that a modern boxer would be "destroyed" in a match of ancient greek boxing, where you referring to a match against todays "revivalists", or to a hypothetical match against actual ancient greek boxers? If the first option applies, where and when did any one of them fight against a trained modern boxer?

Well let me clarify that, but first understand that an ancient boxer would also get destroyed in a modern boxing battle.
Ancient boxing was different than events today, Pankration too, often heavy athletics were done in the noon day sun, no rounds or weight limits and the match went on unilt one fell. Sometimes in boxing matches they would do the Klimax where they took free hits on each other to determine a winner. Thumbing the eyes was common as was many other fouls, fouling being punishabler by a smack with a stick rather than points taken off or disqualification. A very different environment for a modern boxer no?



BTW: If you take a look on youtube, you will find out that there are videos of quite recent bareknuckle matches. Yes such things still happen. In Ireland for example. At least they did until recently. And guess what? While those bareknuckle boxers fight their fights without gloves or other protection, they train just the exact same way as every other boxer on this planet.


well its an establ,ished fact that the modern boxing we have today is very different even from the old english pugilism it evolved from, primarily because of the gloves , striking changed when more hand protection was given. Its not a knock on modern boxing just a understanding of how a sport changes the art attached thats all. All of the boxing arts are combat sports so there is not sport vs reality argument here, i do not beleive in that nonsense.


What are the exact differences in the rulesets between modern boxing and ancient greek boxing? And how do you know? From which sources exactly? How exactly do those ruleset differences change run-of-the-mill strikes like the jab, cross, hook or underhook or make them unappliccable?

there is alot of rules that are different, rounds , weight limits, fouls,. The defensive elements changed too based on how you get attacked, that bow stance is to protect against the heavy hammer fist from above which was one of the big power strikes in boxing/pankration.
Boxing, wrestling and pankration rules are on my website.

also heavy athletics was a preparation for war and the attrributes developed tended to mimic the battlefield stuff from pammachon using the same kinds of power movements.

make no mistake heavy athletics were not a joke compared to modern boxing, wrestling and MMA. They competed across the meditteranean for over a thousand years with these arts. I dont know why you owuld expect ancient boxing to be exactly like modern boxing considering the evolution of boxing.

Even though we are in the WMA department, which is to my experience much more tolerant then other parts of this website, this is still bullshido.

So, if you wish to keep your way of argumentation up, prepare for some rough rides.

Basically you said nothing of substance. Defensive boxers where restricted by ladders? When and where? What is your source? Watch out for the source part, this ist the most important.

Again, what is the source for all your statements? Where do you draw your knowledge of the ancient greeks boxing rules from? How (from which SOURCES) do you know when, where and under which circumstances they fought, or how long the matches went?

You are of course entitled to your own believes. But if you make big (and gross) statements like "modern boxers could not fight under ancient greek rules and vice versa" on this forum, then you are supposed to provide more then just your opinion. Or clearly state that its just your unproven personal opinion.

You also totally avoided part of my questions. Too inconvinient? Let me reword them for you: Please provide proof of a match between a "revivalist" ancient greek boxer and a modern boxer, following the ancient greek rules.

Oh and please, "sport vs. street" is bad enough. Especially as each and every of your arguments was already proven to be wrong in other threads (some even about totally different martial arts) a thousand times. Did you train in _ing _un by any means? Use the search function please, if you do not believe me. Don't give me "t3h d34dly" as an addon. So keep the fantasy-land "I put my thumb into the opponents eye during a match and would thus dominate any boxer" out of here.

Someone mentioned recent bare knuckle boxing and I found this:

YouTube - Irish Bareknuckle Boxing Part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g06TEtVQVMU)

Very interesting fight. Hope this helps someone. If for nothing else it's a fun watch. Those guys can take a bit of punishment. Brutally awesome.

"Where are the sources" He gave you a link to his website, there are pages and pages of sources there. Although I can't speak for the people featured in the video, many in the Historical European Martial Arts community have long experience in Eastern styles in addition to their now current dedication to Occidental martial arts (many of my friends and colleagues in the RMA/HEMA community also have experience in MMA, US Army Combatives, Boxing, Sambo, Kung fu, Tae Kwan Do, full range of others) and are very much familiar with them. We often get tired of arguing with people from Eastern styles who have no respect for, or knowledge of European martial heritage.

Thanks Zwerchau for the common sense (great name BTW)
Yes my website is a list of around 150 sources so if you think i made anything up go look it up Kwan dao, the sources are there jackass
I am not here to argue, in fact i could give a rats ass whether you beleive me or not, you are obviously argumentative and a little full of your bullshido stuff. You have had a shitty attitude from the beginning of this thread, these guys in these videos are actually hitting each other and testing their theories instead of bullshitting on a forum, keep that in mind mr "bullshido investigator"



You also totally avoided part of my questions. Too inconvinient? Let me reword them for you: Please provide proof of a match between a "revivalist" ancient greek boxer and a modern boxer, following the ancient greek rules.

How exactly could this match happen assclown? They are separated by thousands of years and noone today uses these old rules of boxing. try thinking out your pissy responses a bit more. Why do i need to provide a match? I don't give a **** if you beleive me or not, you are just a jackass with an axe to grind.

Hey now gentlemen, if you can't debate like two guys wearing monocles, tophats and handlebar moustaches, it probably doesn't belong in the WMA forum. All insults should be delivered in colloquial fashion.

methods of fighting progress for a reason, just because its 'anci3nt' doesn't mean its better.. unless it contains some kind of magical spinning donkey flying eagle backfist

Hey now gentlemen, if you can't debate like two guys wearing monocles, tophats and handlebar moustaches, it probably doesn't belong in the WMA forum. All insults should be delivered in colloquial fashion.

Maybe that should be a rule ...

... or not.

I don't understand kwan-dao's problem with this video clip and I took it as being obvious that when Bludhall said "a modern boxer would be destroyed in one of the ancient-style matches" and vice-versa, he was expressing a personal opinion rather than saying "this has happened".

Bludhall is also right in that the rules of ancient Greek boxing evidently did engender some different techniques; for example, they seem to have used hammerfist punches, which are illegal in the modern sport and which will inevitably impact fighting stances, guard positions and the general "look" of the bout. As he pointed out, the fighters in the OP clip are evidently sparring "live" and testing their theories realistically (and, IMO, skilfully).

As was pointed out earlier, any reconstruction of a truly ancient combat sport, for which records are scarce, is automatically speculative. That's simply taken for granted as an obvious fact. As long as the revivalists are upfront about that, are working seriously from the sources that are available and pressure-testing their research, more power to them.

Thanks for making all this "kwan_dao's problem" DdlR. You really do not see the problem with all the weird claims, personal attacks and non-answering of simple questions?

I only have a problem with the original video in so much, as it imho shows very poor application of ineffective techniques. As long as we stay within the limits you defined (revival beeing work in progress and no one claiming to actually know the "real ultimate and only" ancient greek boxing) thats more or less ok for me.

The problem at hand is not so much about the original video. Its about bludhall making ridiculous (and insulting to modern boxers) claims, which he refused to back up.

Time for some quotes:



a modern boxer would get destroyed in ancient Greek boxing, the technicality of modern boxing is based upon modern safety equipment like wraps and gloves. As many are finding in MMA evern with hand wraps and gloves, when you hit skull you break bones.



Yes modern boxers do not use their arms for defense as much as many ancient styles did. Although head movement is mentioned in literary sources. The main reason for less of the stick and move stuff is it was looked upon unfavorably, ladders were even used to limit the footwork space between overly defensive combatants.


Well i am talking about ancient greek boxing and pankration not the roman Pancratium which used the Cestea, ancient greeks did not use the cestae they did however invent the MMA glove and tie the hands with leather cords.


Ancient boxing was different than events today, Pankration too, often heavy athletics were done in the noon day sun, no rounds or weight limits and the match went on unilt one fell. Sometimes in boxing matches they would do the Klimax where they took free hits on each other to determine a winner. Thumbing the eyes was common as was many other fouls, fouling being punishabler by a smack with a stick rather than points taken off or disqualification. A very different environment for a modern boxer no?


Yes my website is a list of around 150 sources so if you think i made anything up go look it up Kwan dao, the sources are there jackass

Hm... funny how I should be the only one to see something wrong with this. I can not see where bludhall would even try to stay within your defined limits DdlR.

The real problem however is, I repeatedly asked him for details and/or sources specifically on his claims above. He gave me a link to his homepage. Which would be totally all right for me, if he had said something like: "Look at my homepage into document XYZ, on paragraph zyx you will find a reference by abc who describes how to opponents in an ancient greek match are restricted in their movement with a ladder, because they where to defensive." Just as an example.

Since when exactly is it ok on bullshido, to make such claims as the ones quoted above, and when someone asks you for details you basically tell him: "Go to my library of 150 books, read through each and every one of them and then you will come to the same conclusions as I did"?

"Where are the sources" He gave you a link to his website, there are pages and pages of sources there. Although I can't speak for the people featured in the video, many in the Historical European Martial Arts community have long experience in Eastern styles in addition to their now current dedication to Occidental martial arts (many of my friends and colleagues in the RMA/HEMA community also have experience in MMA, US Army Combatives, Boxing, Sambo, Kung fu, Tae Kwan Do, full range of others) and are very much familiar with them. We often get tired of arguing with people from Eastern styles who have no respect for, or knowledge of European martial heritage.

well kwan_dao is German and studies a wrestling manual from early 1500 (Fabian von Auserwald). so really the hat does not fit here.

His point is up to a certain degree valid.
I study only ringeck, so I have a manual with relatively long descriptions, several other manuals on the same original common sources, some with pictures and still I can not be sure that what I do is what uncle Sigmund did.Now as far as rules are concerned it is quite clear that any goes.
All I can say is that what I do is supported by interpretations of the text and that I believe it works.

In the case of pugilism, greek lutte or pancration, as a few other posters, myself included have written, we do not know the rules, we have very sketchy source. So it will be even harder to come up with something descent. that being said, If people are upfront about it and pressures test what they do. It is probably as good as it is going to be. unless we find the tablets of the pancration for dummies by publuis caius Crato the elder.

How modern boxer would fare against a Greek or roman pugilist?
If they are using Greek or Roman rules, the modern boxer is very likely to get pawned or disqualified. And the same applies to the pugilist with modern boxing rules.
Really it is like asking how Marcel Cerdan or Sugar Ray would fare now.
phil

i'm sorry i thought jackass and assclown was colloquial

Thanks for making all this "kwan_dao's problem" DdlR. You really do not see the problem with all the weird claims, personal attacks and non-answering of simple questions?

I said that I didn't understand your problem with the "ancient Greek boxing" video clip; your disagreement with Bludhall is a different issue.


I only have a problem with the original video in so much, as it imho shows very poor application of ineffective techniques. As long as we stay within the limits you defined (revival beeing work in progress and no one claiming to actually know the "real ultimate and only" ancient greek boxing) thats more or less ok for me.

I disagree on the "application" issue, but otherwise it sounds like we're on the same page there.


The problem at hand is not so much about the original video. Its about bludhall making ridiculous (and insulting to modern boxers) claims, which he refused to back up.

(SNIP)

Since when exactly is it ok on bullshido, to make such claims as the ones quoted above, and when someone asks you for details you basically tell him: "Go to my library of 150 books, read through each and every one of them and then you will come to the same conclusions as I did"?

That's an exaggeration for effect; you asked for his sources and he directed you to his homepage, which lists those sources and numerous quotes from them, arranged by subject. You're not being asked to wade through 150 books, just click on a couple of links.

My interest in this subject is pretty casual, but I went to Bludhall's page, quickly found the relevant info. and learned something. I also entered "ancient Greek boxing" on GoogleBooks, and even a quick skim read of the (numerous) references there were enough to suggest that, IMO, the fighters in the OP video clip are fairly representing what is known of this style. I would have thought that, since you seem to be taking a strong skeptical interest, you would be moved to do the same.