Andy Brice wrote:
> Mathematical?
>
> The difference is that all Bruce Lee's stuff was choreographed, and that
> makes a hell of a difference when it comes to looking good.
>
> Another problem with boxing is the restricted range of techniques, no
> throws, locks, chokes, kicks etc.
>
> IMHO few boxers look really good in the ring. Ali in his prime was an
> exception.
>
> Andy Brice
Yes, by mathematical I mean the elegance that we speak of when we say that a
proof is elegant, or an equation is elegant. Simple, direct, logical and
effective.
As far as choreography goes, that certainly helps, but I have a feeling
Bruce probably looked great in real fights, too. But real fights move
quickly and are not usually as flowery, unless they're a very uneven match
and someone wants to show off!
I love the physical restrictions in boxing. Don't get me wrong, it's not my
favorite fighting sport (don't know if I have one, they all have fascinating
aspects), but it seems like a fighter has to be all the more focused to only
fight above the belt. It does make you rely more on your opponent
cooperating with the rules like a gentleman, though (since boxers aren't
trained to be able to avoid or block blows to the lower body...).
I think few athletes of any kind look really good when they're going _all
out_... and in a fight, there's usually no choice but to go all out. I
think Ali looked really great because few fighters were a serious challenge
to his incredible skill, grace and athleticism. (Which is why Bruce Lee
came to mind!)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:14 MDT