Posted on Oct 6, 2015
Is Boxing too dangerous for Service Academies? What say you?
3.45K
13
9
1
1
0
The New York Times published a investigative report this week about West Point’s longstanding requirement that cadets take boxing as a class for academic credit, a requirement shared by the Naval Academy and Air Force Academy. Military officials believe there’s no better way to toughen up cadets and midshipmen and give them the grit required for combat.
Unfortunately, data obtained by the Times clouds the equation. Boxing accounts for 20% of the concussions at West Point, almost 25% at the Air Force Academy and the Naval Academy (where it accounts for twice as many concussions as football).
If a cadet is too concussed to pass the class, he or she is required to repeat until they pass. In an era where we’re far more knowledgable about the damage caused by traumatic brain injury, there’s a question as to whether any benefits are worth the damage done to men and women who are training to lead our military.
Blame Teddy Roosevelt for the tradition. It was the president’s love of boxing that led West Point to add the requirement in 1905.
Should the service academies look for other ways to toughen up their students? Or is boxing a valuable way to build character? Sound off!
Unfortunately, data obtained by the Times clouds the equation. Boxing accounts for 20% of the concussions at West Point, almost 25% at the Air Force Academy and the Naval Academy (where it accounts for twice as many concussions as football).
If a cadet is too concussed to pass the class, he or she is required to repeat until they pass. In an era where we’re far more knowledgable about the damage caused by traumatic brain injury, there’s a question as to whether any benefits are worth the damage done to men and women who are training to lead our military.
Blame Teddy Roosevelt for the tradition. It was the president’s love of boxing that led West Point to add the requirement in 1905.
Should the service academies look for other ways to toughen up their students? Or is boxing a valuable way to build character? Sound off!
Posted in these groups: 
Boxing
Boxing
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 5
2
2
0
Perhaps if you are not skilled enough/tough enough to protect yourself in the boxing ring you may not be the right material for the US Military. Perhaps a GS position is a better fit for you. It is as controlled an environment to fight in as you can get. My guess is they use headgear too. I am also pretty sure they do this according to standard weight classes and the like to keep it "fair".
Combative's are a nice add on to the training agenda too. We have to stop trying to reduce everything we do to the lowest common denominator. "Protecting" everyone from any sort of adversity is not doing them justice for the jobs many are training to do, namely leading troops into combat. The more you sweat in peace the less you bleed in war. Perhaps that is just 20th century thinking and passé now.
Combative's are a nice add on to the training agenda too. We have to stop trying to reduce everything we do to the lowest common denominator. "Protecting" everyone from any sort of adversity is not doing them justice for the jobs many are training to do, namely leading troops into combat. The more you sweat in peace the less you bleed in war. Perhaps that is just 20th century thinking and passé now.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Getting hit in the head is dangerous. Getting hit in the head while your brain is still developing, especially so (18-25).
We must weigh the benefits of teaching boxing, and of the sport of boxing vs. the disadvantages of injury and find out "if the juice is worth the squeeze."
We need a basic understanding of combatives as Service Members, but Boxing may not be the correct baseline anymore, as LTC (Join to see) said. We have other programs like the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program and the Army Equivalent.
We must weigh the benefits of teaching boxing, and of the sport of boxing vs. the disadvantages of injury and find out "if the juice is worth the squeeze."
We need a basic understanding of combatives as Service Members, but Boxing may not be the correct baseline anymore, as LTC (Join to see) said. We have other programs like the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program and the Army Equivalent.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
I can't speak for the SOP of the Marines, but the Army requiring a Medic to eval combatants before training and immediately afterwards.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
That's a pretty spot-on point. I think we need to look closely at the process, purpose and result.
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
LTC (Join to see) That's exactly it. I don't think we should get rid of it just to get rid of it. I think Combatives are essential. We're a fighting force. I don't know that Boxing is essential though. We need to evolve. If boxing is the best fit for the training regiment, let's use boxing. If it's something else, let's use that. I don't care what we use, but I don't want our future leaders' brains over leader addled before we get them.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I think developing warrior spirit is important but I wonder if combatives is boxing for the next generation.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google