Do you consider boxing to be a noble aristocratic sport?

epic pic Ali is the goat and tbe

 

Aristocracy became associated with the privileged land-holding noble class in the middle ages, which is why I mention feudalism. It's out of a post-feudal society that boxing emerged. I don't really see aristocratic values as anything beyond a romanticized chivalric code. I think these boxers fight for their livelihood and are as sportsmanlike as any other athletes. The only time it goes beyond is when someone is criticized for running.

I agree with you here.

 

Boxing could be more popular if the promoters were not so damned crooked. We have crooked judges, esp. in Vegas, crooked referees, crooked boxing commissions. When will boxing fans rebel? PPV is getting absurd, soon there will be nothing but PPV. Look at USTV boycotting some of the best fights on the planet, so far they are boycotting Klitschko Vs. Joshua........................will not show replay unless Joshua wins. Then we have Wilder who is a total fraud, fighting 5 voluntary title fights in a row, next he will fight inactive, fat, old, over the hill bum Stiverne, WBC making Stiverne mandatory for no reason, well, except to protect Wilder, this crap has got to go. Parker's fight will also be boycotted by USTV.................

 

Aristocratic sports are equestrian, Polo and boat racing.

Boxing is a working mans sport.

 

Beating people up for money is noble? Since when?

 

and "The best Ever" will soon fight a bum in a circus sham

 

It's always been disgraceful for an aristocrat to earn money. That's why professional athletes were looked down upon by them. Even going back to the 1920's society looked down on pro athletes. A gentleman was always strictly an amateur.

I know aristocrats trained in weapons and led the armies. That was their domain before the French Revolution. But competing as a professional athlete was entirely beneath them. That was why the Olympics, when it was recreated by a French baron in 1894, was open only to amateurs. Greek athletes competed for laurels, not money.

 

The sport that historically prevented massive amounts of underpriviledged youngsters from a life of crime, poverty and/or medriocricy, while often still failing if they actually made it, can we put that in the bowl of "aristrocratic sports"?
mmm... though question...

 

The "Sport of Kings" is horse-racing. That said, I had an old set of encyclopedias that described boxing as "the noble art of pugilism" and recommended it as a character building exercise for young men.

The old public schools etc always liked the idea of suffering being good for character. The primary reason for the split between rugby and soccer was not due to handling, it was that the public schools wanted "hacking" (shin-kicking) to remain a legal part of the game. They felt that making the game less violent would remove the element of bravery and character - and make it easier to win for foreigners and the working class (who were physcially small and not as well fed and had to preserve themselves to work for a living).

Incidently, there's a good boxing match in Homer's Iliad, at the funeral games arranged by Achilles to mark Hector's death (written around 3500 years ago):

When the two contestants were ready, they stepped to the centre of the arena, and raising their mighty arms, set to. Each landed heavy blows with their fists, and they ground their teeth, as the sweat poured over their limbs. Euryalus sought an opening, but noble Epeius swung and struck his jaw, and he went straight down, his legs collapsing under him. Like a fish that leaps in the weed-strewn shallows, under a ripple stirred by the North Wind, then falls back into the dark wave, so Euryalus leapt when he was struck, but the big-hearted Epeius, lifted him and set him on his feet, and all his friends crowded round, and supported him from the ring his feet trailing, his head lolling, as he spat out clots of blood. He was still confused when they sat him down in his corner, and had to fetch the cup, his prize, themselves.