Move to MMA Forum if you want. Basically, the premise is; how would the bare knuckle fighters of the past perform against modern MMA fighters? Here are some examples of Broughton Era fighters and their weights: Jack Broughton (200) Jack Slack (202) Jem Belcher (168) Daniel Mendoza (160) Tom Cribb (189-199) Tom Molineaux (185) Dutch Sam (135) Bare knuckle boxing, especially under the Broughton rules, featured grappling and kicking. Here are some great videos that touch on the techniques these fighters used, both from contemporary sources and from the fighters themselves in their books: This content is protected This content is protected London Prize Ring Rules Era boxers were more limited than their Broughton Era counterparts, but they still included grappling. Here are some fighters from that era: Jem Mace (160) Tom Sayers (150) Bendigo Thompson (165) Jake Kilrain (180) John L. Sullivan (215 in the Kilrain bout) How would they perform against the best MMA has to offer around their weights? Do you think any of them can win titles?
They'd do awful. Modern MMA is not just bare knuckle boxing with some grappling thrown in. It's become pretty refined over the last 20 years or so. Also to become competent at kicking you need quite a fair bit of training, many of the top guys go train Muay Thai in Thailand to become proficient. These turn of the century guys probably never heard of Karate yet let alone trained in checking kicks. If these guys were to train for a few years before engaging in MMA, perhaps if some of them were great natural athletes they could do ok at a lower level.
This is like saying punching is allowed in a bar brawl so bar brawlers can beat pro boxers. A child can kick, what training did they do to perfect their kicks? Did they know how to check a kick? I personally train Muay Thai and effective kicking doesn't come naturally unless you drill and practice it. Outside of the french funny enough with Savate, most western martial arts are limited in the focus they place on kicking, whether allowed or not. I've never seen anything about turn of the century bare knuckles boxers training and refining kicks.
Broughton era fighters absolutely focused on kicking, do you think they just ignored the fact that kicking was legal and boxed? Kicking was very relevant in classical pugilism This content is protected
Absolutely no way to know. My guess is the MMA guys win because they're decent enough strikers, better trained athletes, and likely significantly better grapplers. They are also much bigger. The bareknuckle guys might have a better striking system for their rules, but I don't think it's enough better to overcome everything else.
I do appreciate you sharing that video, I find stuff like this about older or lost forms of martial arts very interesting. Still doesn't change my opinion on how they'd do against present MMA fighters. What the guy in the video describes reminds me very much of the early days of UFC/MMA, true no holds barred fights. Likewise those old school MMA fighters would not beat todays guys. The training, fitness regimens, size of modern MMA athletes would be too much.
Training and fitness are fair advantages to give to the MMA athletes, however size wise it's a different story. Some of these guys were big fellas, or small fellas who were infamous for beating on bigger men
Everything like this can only be pure speculation, but I'd hate to be an MMA guy transported back in time and see John L.Sullivan across the ring with no gloves on.
Look, I think its fair to assume that the modern MMA guys would tear a hole through them. The early NHB contests were often decided by whoever had the most all-round training. It's become a kind of a science now where the top guys can do it all at a high level. And there's a difference between allowing kicks and facing a muay thai specialist. Low kicks, for example, are destructive unless you know how to deal with them. Here's a legendary kickboxer (Rick Roufus) against a muay thai expert: This content is protected
