Aesthetics are the aspects of beauty that make a sport appealing to spectators. Basketball has had rule changes throughout its history to not only allow players to score 3-point shots (1980) but also to leave the match with shirts on their backs and without fingernails gashes all over their bodies. No one today would recognize the original game of Basket Ball. Ice hockey has also made some rule changes to increase the scoring chances and eliminate draws. As much as we like to think of kickboxing as fights, it is first and foremost a game designed to entertain the spectators.

In the 1970s, when Full Contact Karate (FC, FCR, Full Contact and American Kickboxing) was born, a hybrid style that brought karate and boxing elements together was designed to raise interest. The reason this form of kickboxing only allowed kick above the waist was the audience. They had seen boxing, and they had seen point karate. Full Contact Karate, as it was called then, aimed to create a rule set that would appeal to fans of both: long pants like karate, padding on hand (and feet) like boxing, etc. Whether deliberate or accidental, these aesthetic decisions scored. A new sport was born and it was an instant success.

Aesthetic decisions in the rules are usually the result of players of the sport developing to the point where stalemates occur. In hockey, defensive teams scored few goals and stopped offensive teams from scoring. Any team without star forwards turned into an obstruction machine. It hurt the game and inspired changes in the rules to make hockey more appealing to fans. An example closer to kickboxing, promoters have to judge whether fans will see the clinch as action or as inaction when introducing Muay Thai to new markets. Believing that “They’ll learn.” is not the best marketing strategy.

Kickboxing has also had some aesthetic decisions. The most notable come from the giant promotional company, K-1. They have made decisions in the rules and later modified them to match the taste of the paying customers.

No elbows.

Core fans of Muay Thai saw no reason to modify the rules. Elbows, they say, are effective weapons. Kazuyoshi Ishii, however, felt that too many cuts would repel fighters (especially karateka) and disgust fans. A large fraction of the fanbase in Japan is female. The lack of elbow attacks also gave fighters the opportunity to throw punches to the body without having counter attacks rip open cuts. It is a common misconception of Muay Thai that it has everything. It allows more techniques, but adding one technique comes at the expense of another. In other words, Ishii had a choice between seeing more elbows or seeing more body blows since they do not co-exist well. He chose body blows.

10 count.

Since the K-1 had spun off karate, they originally had a 5 count in the quarter final and semi final rounds of tournaments. This was a relic of karate that didn’t fit in kickboxing. Because it was only in tournaments, it resulted in confusion. Many saw the fighter rise to their feet but were waved off by the referee.

Limited Clinch.

Kazuyoshi Ishii felt the long clinch had less global appeal. Long time Muay Thai fans can detect the subtle moves and strategy of the clinch but boxing fans are lost and see it as stalling. Naturally, stalling is one of the greatest motivations for aesthetic decisions. In this case the clinch was only permitted if attacks were thrown.

Pure tournament.

This experiment in 2000 and 2001 looked good on paper. The theory was to create the excitement of the Grand Prix and milk it all year long. In 2000, two of the three qualifier winners (Lebanner and Bernardo) had injuries and couldn’t participate in the tournament. In 2001, Ray Sefo defeated the soon-to-be Grand Prix Champion but couldn’t continue in the qualifier. In both years, Peter Aerts failed to qualify but was selected by Ishii despite losing. This system was a mess and a new experience in stress for the K-1 company. Fighters who had proven themselves by drawing fans to the arena and pulling solid ratings were in danger of being replaced by less marketable newcomers.

Mini matches.

Three-round mini matches were in effect in tournaments from the beginning. In 2002, they began to use minis at the eliminations and have continued using them since in regular matchups. Minis were inspired by a few events:

-          Fights ending in draws. The overtime rounds are designed to force fighters to pick up the pace and the judges to decide on a winner.

-          Mike Bernardo and Francisco Filho. These two fighters each made it to the final round of the K-1 Grand Prix, Bernardo in 1996 and Filho in 2001. The K-1 was expecting 2 alpha-male studs to give the fans an exciting main event. Unfortunately, they were timid and neither would attack. It was a long 5 rounds. The sudden death overtime rule may have been enough to spark some life into one of these fighters.

-          Jan Nortje vs. Evengy Orlov. The K-1 had decided to satisfy what every size queen prayed for the most, 300kg of huffing and puffing fat guys. It was painful to watch but rather than change the matchmaking to ensure fit athletes were on display, the K-1 gave us mini 3-round matches. Choi and Sapp still huffed and puffed.

The weakness of mini matches is most evident when we look at 2 fights involving K-1 Grand Prix Champion Remy Bonjasky. Against both Francisco Filho and Mo Siliga, he took a knockdown late in a fight that he was winning (late=3^rd round). In terms of pure aesthetics, the fight would have been more exciting if there were 2 more rounds to see if he could turn the tide like Sam Greco did versus Mike Bernardo. Instead, the fight was cut short just when it began to get exciting. What a terrible tease!

Limited Knees.

The rule limiting the number of attacks while holding the leg was already in effect. In short, a fighter could catch an opponent’s kicking leg and launch one attack while holding the leg. The K-1 later felt it was necessary to limit the knees in the already limited clinch. This decision can be attributed to the stalemate between Peter Aerts and Alexei Ignashov or the mauling tactics of Sem Schilt versus Michael McDonald. To date, this rule is pretty much a mess. Fighters don’t count their strikes. Some miss with the first one and think they can follow up with a better one. They can’t. Alexei Ignashov, a knee specialist, has been seen loading his second knee attack before realizing he must release his opponent. Referees are confused. They warn fighters for double knees even if they are legal (one hand holding the neck). Few fighters dare take advantage of the legal double knees. So far, this rule has confused fighters, referees and fans. It has also created more fouls since many fighters accidentally commit the foul and realize after the fact. A better solution to the limited knees is to have the referees break up the fighters faster. If two knees are thrown, so be it as long as it isn’t after the break.

No Holding.

This is the new rule for 2006. The details have yet to be announced. The kickboxing community (both participants and fans) will need to know how the K-1 will define holding and how they will enforce the rule. Aesthetics will play a large role in answering some simple questions. Will the referees DQ fighters for holding? Will the referees deduct points for holding? Will the fans accept a decision that is primarily based on yellow cards (point deduction)?

In brief, kickboxing is a game and decisions are made in order to make it appealing to viewers. FCR believes that kicks are beautiful and obligatory for every round. Savate and karate both have aesthetics and history to consider. Boxing rules allow fighters to throw more jabs yet restricts holding to the point where heads crack each other from time to time. Good decisions have been made. Poor decisions have been made. Let's hope that those who execute the decisions have the wisdom to keep the right decisions and discard the wrong ones. 

See you ringside!