Nigerian "Danbe" competitions: a window into very early boxing

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by cross_trainer, Oct 14, 2013.


  1. cross_trainer

    cross_trainer Liston was good, but no "Tire Iron" Jones Full Member

    14,386
    8,420
    Jun 30, 2005
    Danbe is a rather strange traditional style of boxing from Nigeria, where the lead hand is only permitted to block punches. Fighters can kick each other, but they generally use their left hand as a shield and measuring stick to hit the other guy with the right. Usually after a lot of feinting.

    Before you assume that it's underdeveloped or "primitive", remember that the same Nigerian provinces that practice Danbe also produce champions in regular boxing. Danbe only looks weird because the rules reward a weird-looking approach to fighting.

    I say that Danbe is a window into early boxing because its approach mirrors a British champion from the late 1700s: Richard Humphries. Humphries, like the Danbe guys, used his left exclusively as a shield while punching with his right.


    Picture of Richard Humphries:
    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3469/3875869141_2fbcd58953.jpg


    Notice Humphries's ridiculously deep stance and shield-position left arm. This was before the jab developed. It took a boxing genius, Daniel Mendoza, to really develop the left from Humphries's shield into a weapon we would recognize as a prototype jab.

    I'd always wondered why Humphries had the ridiculously deep stance, though. It seemed unnecessary and tiring. I thought that maybe the portrait painters had exaggerated his stance for effect. And then, I saw the Danbe guys.

    [yt]LrXXKlgInSg[/yt]


    [yt]1RWowaDfsN8[/yt]

    Huh. What do you know?

    Richard Humphries's stance and arm position again. High arm, body tilted back, really deep crouch. And the only major change that provoked this style was to eliminate the left hand as a weapon, just like Humphries did. (Though Humphries did it through ignorance of the left hand's potential, not because of the rules.)

    Just goes to show that people can invent the same approach in different places and at different times, as long as you give them similar problems to solve.
     
    cross_trainer, Oct 14, 2013
    cross_trainer, Oct 14, 2013
    #1
  2. Ted Spoon

    Ted Spoon Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,297
    1,115
    Sep 10, 2005
    Nice observation.

    Of course using your lead arm to punch makes a big difference, but there are some decent analogies here.

    It must be remembered that although Mendoza is generally credited with redesigning the way men boxed he was far from the first man to inject some practical style into the ring.

    The Wikipedia page of Daniel Mendoza claims that before him boxers "generally stood still and merely swapped punches" which is both untrue and does previous champions a great disservice.

    Jack Broughton was written to have been something of an ambidextrous fighter who switched stances as he moved forward, shooting straight punches to the belly while Tom Johnson (who revived boxing after a Broughton's unpopular exit) fought economically, very much on his hunches and with his abdomen removed. This style would later be imitated by John Jackson who gave Mendoza a hiding.

    Others styles were implemented, and successfully so.

    For arguments sake, many contemporaries were unimpressed with Mendoza's power. Humphries allegedly had a great right hand.
     
    Ted Spoon, Oct 16, 2013
    Ted Spoon, Oct 16, 2013
    #2
  3. cross_trainer

    cross_trainer Liston was good, but no "Tire Iron" Jones Full Member

    14,386
    8,420
    Jun 30, 2005
    That doesn't surprise me. Assuming that Humphries fought somewhat like these guys, you can generate a ton of leverage with that right. Mendoza, by contrast, crouched pretty far forward. Not much room for leverage on a right hand there, though you could probably get decent power on the jab.

    Mendoza is also very unusual as a combination puncher. I think a lot of modern commentators rate him so highly because his style looked closer to modern boxing than the (likely superior) fencing style that came afterward.

    The intermediate stance that Cribb's generation adopted actually looked a lot like modern boxing. They tried to take the best bits of Mendoza's guard / combinations and Humphries's superior right hand.

    As you say, Humphries' very limited use of the right might be his own stylistic quirk. Broughton seems to have had a good left. Figg may or may not have. I tend to think that Figg's approach looked a lot like Petter's Worstel-Konst in the Netherlands, or the Ring-Buch's approach in Germany.
     
    cross_trainer, Oct 16, 2013
    cross_trainer, Oct 16, 2013
    #3
  4. Ted Spoon

    Ted Spoon Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,297
    1,115
    Sep 10, 2005
    The problem with judging Figg is that he was a product of his times when there were virtually no rules. In all probability he was a hand full with his dukes up but it's easier to start with Broughton as his rules give us a mutual foundation - eye gouging and shoe raking was out.

    Another reason for Mendoza's lighter blows was down to weaker hands. Dutch Sam was said to have fists like blocks of iron and so could afford to step into his punches.

    It's the strange paradox that although you'll read up on some of the most desperate struggles in history, many witnesses swore by the timing, reflexes and defensive manoeuvres they saw. I get the sense bare-knuckle fights could greatly vary from brutal wrestling matches, chock-full of roundhouse swings to very neat exhibitions with both men favourably adhering to the rules.
     
    Ted Spoon, Oct 16, 2013
    Ted Spoon, Oct 16, 2013
    #4
  5. Ted Spoon

    Ted Spoon Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,297
    1,115
    Sep 10, 2005
    A potential problem we have now is many will read into the prevalent gypsy bare-knuckle brawls that go on as a historical reference, but of course their styles are influenced by modern day boxing; hunched over, bobbing, flicking the jab and turning the punches over.

    The differences are big and numerous.
     
    Ted Spoon, Oct 16, 2013
    Ted Spoon, Oct 16, 2013
    #5
  6. cross_trainer

    cross_trainer Liston was good, but no "Tire Iron" Jones Full Member

    14,386
    8,420
    Jun 30, 2005
    Yep. If people really want to see 19th century style boxing, they'll need to set up competitions with MMA gloves where only traditional punches are scored. Kinda like modern amateur boxing's scoring system, only less of an abomination.
     
    cross_trainer, Oct 16, 2013
    cross_trainer, Oct 16, 2013
    #6