Opinion: Boxing needs a colored belt system, like other martial arts

Boxing has lasted centuries without a colored belt system, but that’s not a reason to avoid one now. Tradition shouldn’t be an obstacle to progress. A formal progression system (like martial arts have) would strengthen boxing for teachers, students and the sport’s future.

I say this not from the cheap seats but from inside the ring. I’m 51 years old, a writer and professor by day. For the past four years, I’ve trained and sparred at Valverde Boxing Club in Azusa four days almost every week. I know I’m better than when I started,  I just don’t know how much better. There’s no real marker, no explicit or formal acknowledgment of progress.

Meanwhile, my cousin Chino recently earned his Black Belt in Gracie Jiu-Jitsu. It’s a serious accomplishment, one made sweeter because it wasn’t vague. His advancement was measured, tested, recognized. It struck me: why doesn’t boxing offer the same kind of structured system?

It should.

Teachers would benefit first.

A belt system would require coaches to have a clear curriculum. Instead of vague advice and endless yelling, they could guide fighters through structured levels: footwork, combinations, defense, strategy. It would also standardize advancement. Skill would be the benchmark, not just grit, athleticism or how many left hooks to the moneymaker someone can take. 

Better coaching, better culture.

Students would benefit next.

Belts would provide visible milestones. Right now, boxing measures progress by survival. You know you’re improving when you’re slightly less hurt than last week. That’s not enough. Formal recognition of skill keeps motivation high, especially for the everyday dad who’s not aiming for a title fight.

Retention would improve, too. Boxing gyms lose too many students early. Only one of the five students I started with are still training today. Structured progression (e.g., small wins, clear goals) keeps people engaged long enough to appreciate the sweet science.

Society benefits, too.

Boxing teaches discipline and patience, but it’s rarely formalized. A belt system would reinforce those values. It would also raise boxing’s public image from a blood sport to a lifelong craft with levels of mastery, just like Jiu-Jitsu or Kung Fu.

The critics are predictable.

“It’s too hard to implement.” It’s not. Every coach already knows who’s a beginner, intermediate or advanced boxer. A belt system would just make that judgment more consistent and visible.

“It’s too subjective.” So is scoring a boxing match. Clear, skill-based criteria  (e.g., training hours, combinations thrown, defensive techniques executed, rounds sparred) can make advancement both fair and demanding.

Boxing wouldn’t lose its toughness. It would amplify it.

A belt system wouldn’t hand out trophies for showing up. It would set higher, clearer standards and help boxing grow stronger as both a martial art and an exercise option for people of all backgrounds.

There’s no good reason boxing gyms can’t adopt a belt system. The sport is growing beyond the ring, into fitness classes, martial arts academies, even college programs like at Occidental. If boxing wants to thrive, it needs to show students, not just fighters, where they stand and where they can go.

Boxing has always been about progress. It’s time to make that progress visible.