Outsiders usually see boxing as a sport that involves two people beating the crap out of each other, but to fans, we know that it is much more than that. It requires the fighters to analyze their opponent, to watch for sure “tells” that show when their opponent is making a move. The fighters use the “sweet science” of boxing to take them down and ultimately win.
But why is boxing called the sweet science? It is called the sweet science because it requires the fighters to be fierce, tactical, and have a certain amount of anticipation for their opponents’ next move. It takes logic and science to be able to create an environment where it’s all possible.
The name “Sweet Science” has been around for decades and is used frequently by both boxing analysts and the media. The idea is taken seriously for the most part, especially by fighters who work hard to hone their skills. Others think it a running joke as they believe that boxing relies less on science and more on a fighter’s instincts and fight or flight response.
Where This Term Came From?
The term “Sweet Science” was coined by British sportswriter Pierce Egan in 1813 who used it to describe how the fighters are required to be scientific in their approach. They have to strategize how to take down their opponent before they can defeat their opponent. Boxing has even been compared to chess in this way by the heavyweight world champion Lennox Lewis who was also an avid chess player.
The Tactical Pugilist
While the term may have been coined in 1813, the idea that boxing had a scientific or methodological approach was introduced in the late 1700s by Daniel Mendoza.
He created a style that leaned heavily on sid-stepping and ducking, taking the defensive approach rather than an offensive. He managed to take so many fighters and even worked his way to winning the British Heavyweight championship as a 160lb, 5’7” fighter.This was nothing compared to his overall boxing record, which is listed as 37-3 with 34 wins by knockout.
His victory proved that a scientific approach to boxing could bring a fighter to victory. Mendoza generated the method boxers would later use that would lead to the sport being referred to as the sweet science.
The Best Fighters
There are plenty of disbelievers who think that the idea of boxing as science is ridiculous, but the results speak for themselves. The best fighters use a form of tactical planning, analyzing their opponent and training their bodies to respond.
To be a top fighter, they have to learn the sweet science of boxing, which is a very skillful art. It requires them to have exceptional:
- Balance
- Reflexes
- Movement
- Coordination
- Etc.
The ultimate skill that a boxer must learn is the art of balance — that “sweet” spot between how fard and where the perfect place to hit the opponent is. If a fighter cannot balance themselves and their skills, they will not succeed in their matches.
Sweet Skills
The Sweet Science was not established in a day; it took over twenty years to come up with a term for it. It took even longer to establish a good theory on what is required for the boxer to complete.
The goal is that a top boxer can combine their training in a way to become a fighter that can hit, but remain untouched. To do this, it takes time and patience in addition to basic research to determine what works for each fighter.
As time passed on, the difficulty of the skill increased along with what was included with it. From basic countering to predicting a move before the opponent even makes it, these skills take time to learn and curate, making the sweet science that much more integral to the sport of boxing.
Methods Of The Sweet Science
The different adaptations of the sweet science that have been developed are embraced by the fighters of the era and build upon one another. Each attempt at its mastery has created additional skills to be added into the mix that is then recorded by fighters, enthusiasts, and analysts. It is then analyzed and implemented into the fighting style of future boxers. They follow great minds, such as:
- John Godfrey
- Pierce Egan
- Daniel Mendoza
- Henry Downes Miles
Mendoza
Before Mendoza entered the ring, boxing was a much rougher and cruder sport to partake in. Instead of timing their punches and using maneuvers to dodge their opponent’s hits, they relied on their personal toughness and throwing the hardest punches.
Mendoza added in defensive movement as well as calculated approaches rather than the original rough match. His technique not only became the basis of the sweet science but also changed boxing altogether.
He even opened his own boxing school in 1789 and wrote a book called The Art of Boxing that teaches his scientific method of boxing. It is the best insight available on his 18th-century boxing technique.
Henry Downes Miles
Another scientific mind that represented and encouraged the “science of pugilism” (the sweet science) was Henry Downes Miles. He argued that the fists were not only scientific but the most ethical means of physical retaliation.
His book was published in 1906 and was called Pugilistica: The History of British Boxing and made the claim that boxing was not violent at its core but was instead an art form that was performed for sport and involved a “true British boxer.”
This “science of pugilism” labeled by Miles would, in his words, “gain the most applause by the degree to which he [the boxer] displays in defending his own person” and that the fighter would work to improve as an individual, for his self and his country.
Scientific Method
The science behind the methods has long been debated, and science has been used to describe many types of boxing. That is not to claim that boxing is or is not a typical version of science, but is to say that the application in some of the situations is not accurate.
The scientific implications are interesting and force an analyst into debating what aspects are versions of scientific methods and what are fistfights.
What is the deciding variable is the results that the methods create. A scientific method would produce similar results whenever used; a basic fighting style would create erratic results. This is how the idea of boxing as science started and is the evidence that continues to support it.
Some Claim That the Term is a “Joke”
The main argument against the sweet science is its belief to be a joke based on the idea that boxing is indeed just a sport where two people hit each other without any consideration of planning besides a basic set-up. They believe that boxing is referred to as “the sweet science” as a joke to cover up that it is not scientific at all.
Instinct
The basis of boxing (supposedly) is two guys trying to know the other guys unconscious to win a match. If the boxer is good at it, then it is because they have good instincts and not because of a plan.
If the boxer has learned how to read their opponent to avoid getting hit or to make a maneuver to blind-side them, there is nothing scientific about it. It is simply the triggering of their fight part of their fight or flight instincts.
The claim is that the fighters do not require training to counter their opponents and aim their blows, but that it is the reliability of the fight or flight instinct within the fighter that determines their success.
As with all ideas and theories, one should never be confused with the other. The same goes for the idea of boxing as a science or the use of instinct. One is accurate (or maybe they both are), but they should never be confused for each other.
Science 101
There are thousands of sports out there in the world, some even similar to boxing in the fact that they have two people fighting in a designated place:
- Karate
- Kickboxing
- Jiu-jitsu
- Tae Kwon Do
- Wrestling
- Fencing
Sadly, while these sports may be considered art forms, they are rarely ever referred to as types of science. How are these not considered scientific activities, but boxing is?
One claims that a sport is more than instinct, but is that true? Or would it be like boxing is science when baseball is considered quantum physics? – An idea that is seemingly far-fetched and unheard of.