It’s been said that few things focus the mind like being shot at. The same could be said for dodging a punch to the face. The majority of sailors today are too young to remember ‘smokers’; the informal Navy-wide boxing system which dissolved in the mid-1990s. Boxing used to be deeply ingrained in Navy culture, especially for officers, with both USNA and AOCS requiring all midshipmen to step into the ring at least once. For reasons both semi-valid and comprehensively spurious, Navy wide boxing went the way of the grog ration. This decision to annihilate the Navy’s boxing culture was myopic and it has deprived the fleet of an important readiness tool.

Opponents of mandatory boxing in the Navy state the obvious—that sailors can be injured and that being beaten in the ring is an extremely unpleasant experience. Hidden amongst their objections are the tacit admissions of the value of boxing within an organization whose most basic, existential capability is the infliction of violence. The Navy is obviously not a charity or a business but an organization based around both the ability and more significantly, the willingness to maim or kill while risking retaliation of equivalent severity. The sport of boxing has a similar goal, although taken to far less extreme conclusions. As such it is clear why for the majority of its history the Navy either encouraged or mandated boxing for sailors.

Consider for a moment: how many officers or enlisted sailors have been in a true knock-down, drag-out brawl? Likely less than half. How many have been in such an altercation while completely sober? The number shrinks even further. In a real sense, we are entrusting our national security to a cohort that has, by and large, never been in a fight. Does this seem wise? Compounding this is the fact that we recruit from a safer, less belligerent society than in years past, with the result that the natural psychological barriers to inflicting and sustaining violence are higher than in the past. If officers and sailors have never had to face and overcome their primal aversion to hurting others and being hurt in return, is it unreasonable to assume that overcoming this aversion for the first time in the press of battle may result in a fatal hesitation or miscalculation? Certainly not. To reduce the issue to its barest and most relevant dimension, would you rather sail into battle alongside someone who had faced their fears and aversions in the ring, or a person who had not?

The physical dangers of boxing cited as a reason for prohibiting the practice are well known and potentially exaggerated. With a foam helmet and proper gloves the chance of a severe injury is remote. It is safe enough to be sanctioned as a collegiate sport by the NCAA. Cannot our sailors, whom the nation sends into harm’s way, be exposed to at least the same level of risk, given the potential gain? Boxing builds mental toughness, sharpens focus, and inculcates an aggressive mental footing which is ideal for combat. Routine boxing through a smokers style system gives sailors an excellent motivator to stay in shape on a long cruise. Additionally, boxing is by no means an irrelevant skill for the fighting man, as an airman and national guardsmen demonstrated on a train in France recently.

The coolness under pressure and tolerance for acute stress that boxing develops are the characteristic traits of a Naval Officer. Few things are as integral to the iconic image of a Naval Officer in the public imagination as a healthy sangfroid and similarly, few things are as effective at developing such qualities as boxing. As such, boxing for officers should not merely be tolerated, or even only encouraged, but made mandatory throughout initial ascension training, and later on throughout the career path. Perception is the cornerstone of reality and it is impossible that the reputation and effectiveness of the Navy could not be burnished by toughening up our sailors with a vigorous boxing program.