Boxing, in the words of the great American sports broadcaster Howard Cosell, is ''drama on the grandest scale''.
There is no doubt the sport has traded on its image as an unparalleled mix of athleticism and lyricism.
It is there in the vocabulary used by some of the prominent sportswriters of the 20th century. They talk of the ''sweet science''. The men, and now women, getting into the ring are ''warriors'', ''fighters'' and ''combatants'' - never plain old boxers. Themes like ''spirituality'' and ''nobility'' pervade some of the dazzling literature dedicated to boxing.
But boxing's chequered history and its increasingly troubled present make it problematic to trot out the usual lines about the sport's exalted status.
For every inspirational story of a wayward youth set on the path of discipline and self-confidence by a beloved trainer, there is a tragic tale of a punch-drunk old fighter left lonely and penniless.
For every person enthralled by the dazzling hands of Manny Pacquiao or in awe of the cultural impact of the immortal Muhammad Ali, there is someone sickened by the corruption in boxing at the highest level and the clownish antics of some of its most prominent stars.
Now, there are renewed calls for charity (or corporate) boxing, a relatively new development in the sport, to be banned following the death of Kain Parsons, a 37-year-old project manager, after he took part in Fight for Christchurch.
It should not require the death of a father of two seeking to challenge himself physically and help raise money for charity to prompt a sporting community to realise it must review its safety procedures.
Still, it is timely to consider what more can be done to prevent another tragedy in the ring.
Alarmingly, the intense focus on charity boxing in the aftermath of the tragedy has revealed a glaring issue that needs to be addressed. Namely, the lack of consistent regulation applied to such events.
Auckland Boxing Association president Paul McSharry, who called a meeting of the pugilistic community earlier this year to push for a cleaning up of the rules at corporate and charity boxing events, claimed more than 50 organisations had approval to run fight nights. All could have different rules regarding protective gear, training and medical requirements. Clearly, that is an unacceptable state of affairs, and it is no wonder Boxing New Zealand has ceased all involvement with corporate boxing events.
Organisers of the upcoming Pride of the South Charity Fight Night in Dunedin moved quickly to emphasise they placed safety first. Unlike the Christchurch event, protective headgear was compulsory. And, perhaps most crucially, boxers were closely matched for skill level and weight.
Contact sport can be an acquired taste. Certainly, not everyone enjoys the sight of Jim or Jane Average pretending to be a fighter for a night.
But there is no doubt charity boxing has become increasingly popular, seen as both an opportunity for people to challenge themselves and a chance for worthy charities to boost their coffers.
As an example, the second Portside Punch in Oamaru earlier this year was a roaring success. The fighters, well trained and well matched, reported no injuries and a deep sense of satisfaction at completing a personal challenge; 500 local fans enjoyed what some considered the social occasion of the year; and three cancer charities each received a large cheque.
Calls, therefore, for this particular element of arguably one of the longest-established sports to be banned seem premature.
But prompt agreement on standard safety regulations is essential.
