While some speculate it began in Ireland, the precise beginnings of catch-as-catch-can wrestling are not known. The first recorded matches contested under its rules (i.e., submission or pin wins the match, best two of three falls, no points, and win, lose, or draw format) began appearing in a small county in England known as Lancashire.
The men were tough and often wrestled each other for fun and side-bets on the gravel after a long day spent in the coal mines. Eventually some of these men earned enough money from these side bets to make a living from just wrestling and the modern professional wrestler was born.
The game of catch-as-catch-can was growing in popularity and it followed immigrants from England and Western Europe to the United States of America. A true workman’s sport that required little if no expensive equipment, catch-as-catch-can wrestling spread like wildfire among bored soldiers between the battles of the American Civil War.
By the end of the 19th century, Americans were enamored enough of catch-as-catch-can that contests attracted paying crowds and championships were held, and with championships and paying crowds came the first wrestling celebrities.
The first big celebrity in America was Evan “The Strangler” Lewis (not to be confused with later champion Ed “Strangler” Lewis). He was notorious for attempting to use illegal choke holds to win his matches. The popularity of catch-as-catch-can grew and grew, drawing millions of dollars and sadly, with the money came corruption.
Greed led the promoters and competitors of the day to fix fights. This ultimately lead to a crisis of confidence and professional wrestling stopped being a professional sport and became performance art.
However, there were those who kept the sport of catch-as-catch-can alive. In the United States, carnivals were a popular form of entertainment and Carnivals often employed wrestlers that would take all comers. Since the carnival wrestlers didn’t know who they would be facing day to day, they needed to know how to wrestle and protect themselves legitimately. Fortunately for us, the carnival wrestlers, like Richard Cardinal and Billy Wicks, kept the techniques alive to teach to our generation of wrestlers.
Carnival wrestlers were not the only ones that had an interest in keeping catch wrestling alive though. There were professional wrestlers from the “post-competitive”, performance art era, outstanding athletes like Karl Gotch and Billy Robinson that used their time in professional wrestling to study the methods of the competitive catch-as-catch-can wrestlers from generations before.
Billy and Karl are probably the most influential of the catch-as-catch-can men from their era.
Karl Gotch, a Belgian Freestyle/Greco-Roman champion and Olympian, soaked up grappling knowledge like a sponge. He picked the brains of Ed “Strangler” Lewis, Frank Wolf, Ben Sherman, and Joe Robinson amongst others, and began experimenting with the ideas and techniques of American and Lancashire catch-as-catch-can. Karl was later invited to perform in Japan by Bill Miller, and his career as a capable submission master followed. Karl influenced generations of Japanese grapplers, first as a wrestler then later as a coach and teacher. Men like Yoshiaki Fujiwara, Masakatsu Funaki, and Minoru Suzuki all learned the methods and techniques of catch-as-catch-can from Karl Gotch. These men influenced the styles of modern American MMA champions Ken and Frank Shamrock.
Billy Robinson has taken the youngest UFC heavyweight champion in history and the current King of Pancrase Josh Barnett under his wing.
Barnett has sought out the Wigan-trained Robinson and has been winning his MMA fights with submissions, like the Toe-Hold, that have traditionally been associated with legitimate catch-as-catch-can matches from the early 20th century. Sakuraba also credits Billy Robinson for being the trainers that most influenced his incredible submission grappling skills.
For generations, catch-as-catch-can competitors have passed the fire of catch wrestling on and fortunately it seems to be burning brighter than ever today. The good news is that the “greatest catch-as-catch-can wrestler that ever lived” may not have been born yet.
At present, catch-as-catch-can wrestling is surprisingly controversial in the United States. While there are proven American competitors that can trace their arsenal of techniques to catch-as-catch-can wrestling, men like Josh Barnett and Frank Shamrock, that are teaching the art, there have been some con-men selling DVDs and promoting themselves as authentic when there is scant proof to back their claims. The lesson here is “caveat emptor” or “buyer beware”.
Despite the con artists, most in the American martial arts community respect catch-as-catch-can wrestling still. The are a few clubs around the United States that have a catch-as-catch-can wrestling flavor, for those that are interested in learning. Here are a few:
- Frank Shamrock’s school in San Jose, California. Frank still credits Funaki and Suzuki as his biggest influences in grappling. I am a Level 2 instructor in his Shamrock Submission Fighting system and highly recommend it.
- Billy Wicks and Johnny Husky’s Gym in Asheville, North Carolina. Wicks learned from a student of the legendary Farmer Burns named Henry Kohln and became a carnival wrestler and later a professional wrestler. Johnny Husky wrestled with Pancrase and has dedicated himself to learn from Billy Wicks.
- Erik Paulson has a school called OC Shootwrestling in Anaheim, California. As a Shooto champion, Paulson learned from Nakamura and Sayama.
- And last but not least, my company, Scientific Wrestling, has just begun a program called ‘The Certified Scientific Wrestler’. I was able to coordinate material from the original style of catch-as-catch-can wrestling into a course that has been approved by legitimate catch-as-catch-can wrestlers and an accompanying test that is proctored by legitimate catch-as-catch-can wrestlers. We are thrilled to have Billy Robinson on-board to oversee the implementation and training!
As you can see, the present state of catch-as-catch-can looks bright, we hope to keep it that way for a long time to come!
Jake Shannon
www.scientificwrestling.com
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
A good read! Catch definitely doesn’t get the “limelight” it deserves.
I agree.
I’ve been interested in Catch for a while but have never had the chance to take it up, primarily because I can’t find anyone who does it locally, or anyone who just wants to train in it.
I’ve got a few DVDs and they’re excellent.
Rezbi,
I’m not trying to mug off Lancashire here but this is a regional myth. The phrase catch-as-catch can wrestling was being used North America before it was used England. It was used to differentiate between loose wrestling and collar-and-elbow, and was later changed to freestyle when we explained to the septic that catch-as-catch can was a bit of a mouthful. There is no evidence that catch-as-catch can was derived from Lancashire wrestling.
Lets be honest during the 19th Century the wrestling style most associated with Lancashire was Cumberland and Westmorland wrestling, some people even say Cumberland and Westmorland wrestling is Lancashire wrestling. I’m not going to get in that one but you got to ask why Lancashire wrestlers were regarded as so shit until the 20th Century.
Probably because back then they were. I not knocking Riley or the Snake Pit as a pro wrestling gym but lets face it, it was “show wrestling”, not submission. And Riley wasn’t even a big name, like Georg Hackenschmidt, Mick Matthews, Jackie Gutteridge or Peter Thornley. Japanese shoot wrestling is fake too. The real Daddy of Japanese shoot wrestling is Akira Maeda (kwik kik lee) and his background is Karate and British pro wrestling in the 70s with the Crabtree brothers. If you want authentic catch-as-catch can wrestling, try freestyle wrestling!
Rob
Not sure where you get your info from . I have extensively researched Lancashire ‘catch’ and assure you the term is as least 200 years old and probably older.. it was originally called ‘Catch Hold’..
Pliny wrote that the Roman wrestlers in AD45 wouldnt wrestle the .men of the county Palatine … (which was the old name for Lancashire and parts of Cumbria.). because the Lancashire men were too rough
The ‘Book of Leinster’ 1150AD mentions the ferocoity of the old style ‘Crayling’ which came from Lancashire and became Catch Hold….
I attended Rileys for a very short while, and trained with several wrestlers from the 50′s and 60′s and can assure you the style certainly wasnt ‘so shit’ as you quote
the great Karl Gotch and Billy Robinson came from Lancashire wrestling, both products of Billy Riley’s
Hackenshmidt in his books mention that Lancashire Catch is the roughest style he knows.. I met Hack in 1968 abut a year before he died, and he told me that the Lancashire boys were the toughest on a level with the Iowa boys…
The ‘Carnie’ Wrestlers from the 19th century in the USA people like George Tragos etc were all immigrants.. a hell of a lot of ‘melting pot’ trainiing went into American Wrestling which is why it produced so many great wrestlers… many Lancashire wrrestlers went out to the ‘New World’ in the early and late 19th century such as Tom Cannon etc.. they helped with the melting pot
I have studied various forms of wrestling, grappling and martial arts since 1961 and am currently an 8th Dan after 48 years involved.. I rate old style Lancashire Catch up there with the best
Rob,
I’m not too hot on the history side but I can assure you, catch wrestling is not shit.
I’ve seen the difference between catch, freestyle, olympic, etc, and I can tell you nothing else comes close to catch.
I showed just one move to a student yesterday – a face bar unique to catch – and he told me it felt like I was ripping his head off.
And I wasn’t even trying.
I would suggest, if you can find anyone who does authentic catch, to give it a go.
I think you’ll soon realise the difference.
Ditto on the face bar,that and the Grovit are the only two holds that have ever made me want to run home and hide behind my mum!
@ Ade
“Ditto on the face bar,that and the Grovit are the only two holds that have ever made me want to run home and hide behind my mum!”
Lol!
That’s a good way of putting it.
@ Dave
Thanks for the reply and no offence meant. I wasn’t trying to mug off Riley or Lancashire wrestling in the 20th Century. I did actually say that. I only said Lancashire wrestling was regarded as shit in the 19th Century. What I meant is that they had a reputation for being cheats and not much cop but you already know that.
I know a lot of Lancashire wrestlers say they were good at their own style but it weren’t popular outside Lancashire and still ain’t, and Lancashire wasn’t notable for it’s wrestling champions in the 19th Century.
I’ve won a few wrestling titles myself and I met Alexander Karelin in Atlanta, I’ve trained in Italy, France and Turkey, no one was ever starry eyed about Lancashire wrestling and with respect to Hack, comparing Lancashire Pro wrestling to the Iowa Hawkeyes in the Danny Gable era is apples and oranges: competitive wrestlers (Danny was an Olympic champion) vrs worked wrestling.
You said Lancashire Catch hold wrestling is mentioned and I don’t dispute that but was catch-as-catch can? Because I’ve as far as I know there was no evidence of it being in use before it was being used in America. If it was, it would be in print. And what we do know is that American wrestling was heavily influenced by collar and elbow and prize fighting, but I’ve seen no written evidence that proves Lancashire wrestling was pivotal to the development of American Catch-as-catch can as a style?
No one would say Lancashire wrestling contributed to the development of Iranian or Turkish Freestyle wrestling because the Iranian were doing Kushti for thousands of years and the Turks have been doing Yagli Gures for a fair old while.I do S’Istrumpa, I could claim that the Romans must have bought it over and taught it to the Romano-Britons, who passed it on to the Anglo Saxons, who passed it on to the Vikings and that’s were Cumberland and Westmorland and Gaelic wrestling come from. Personally, I don’t think there is any connection between S’Istrumpa and C&W. The Mesopotamians were doing it a few thousands years ago and belt wrestling is the same kinda thing as well. So what I’m saying is that I don’t see any proof that American catch-as-catch can is Lancashire Catch hold wrestling.
I’m not saying that Lancashire Catch is bollocks or doesn’t have self-defence applications but it’s just not in the same league as Olympic wrestling where it’s: gold, silver, bronze or wanker. Freestyle wrestling is catch-as-catch can wrestling, it just changed it’s name to something a little bit more sensible and the only reason the style is in the Olympics is because the septics weren’t any good at Greco-Roman.
Rob,
Thanks for reading the article although I am somewhat puzzled by your lengthy replies. It seems like you are sincerely a great fan of freestyle. I agree, it’s a great style. Some of my good friends, like Olympic Gold Medalist Mark Schultz, have really made names for themselves in doing freestyle.
However, I am a tad bit curious where you get your information regarding catch-as-catch-can from? You seem well informed in some areas then you just conveniently drop historical documents and contexts that don’t support your bias.
It’s one thing to say “There is no evidence that catch-as-catch can was derived from Lancashire wrestling” or “Lancashire wrestling was regarded as shit” and it’s another to actually back that claim up.
There are a variety of holes with your comment as presented. First, there is are scores of historical documents that run counter to your clearly biased opinion. I am curious how you come by your opinion given that you clearly weren’t alive in the 19th century and the people that were documented CACC rules and outcomes rather well. That’s one gaping hole.
Do you have access to an Oxford English Dictionary? It traces the origins of words (a discipline known as etymology). It isn’t free but it is a great resources. Here’s a free etymological resource that places the origin of the word well before the establishment of colonies in the United States (scroll to the bottom):
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=catch
That is another big hole in your argument.
Dave also mentioned a score of other resources seem to shoot a Grand Canyon sized hole in your assertion…
What do you know about Tom Connors?
Where does the article say American CACC is Lancashire?
Let’s run a simple thought experiment. In your world where authentic catch-as-catch-can is equal to freestyle, where is the toe-hold, groffit, or double wristlock allowed in freestyle?
Either freestyle isn’t Catch-As-Catch-Can or those holds don’t exist in Catch-As-Catch-Can. Clearly the latter isn’t true, as photographic evidence from the period can verify. Despite all the other contraditions, that contradiction alone should concern you.
I’ve known some of these men personally in the case of Karl (RIP) and Billy. These are two men that are extremely talented and have been excruciatingly honest with me with regard to the strengths and weaknesses of catch-as-catch-can, and with regards to their lives in general. Given your word choices like “shit” and “cheats” I wasn’t going to dignify your comments with a response but as a favor to Dave and because it does seem the source of your bias is lack of information I am taking this time to write all this.
Karl Istaz (Gotch) went to the Olympics before trying Catch-As-Catch-Can at Wigan. He converted immediately and devoted the remainder of his life studying catch-as-catch-can. In fact, he considered himself a proponent of the American catch-as-catch-can style after training extensively with American catch-as-catch-can wrestlers Benny Sherman and Frank Wolfe. Wigan was just his first stop along the path of his studies. American Catch-As-Catch-Can wrestler Dick Cardinal can place Benny and Karl together as training partners.
With regards to Billy Robinson, the Wigan style has plenty of credibility in the eyes of competitive athletes like Kazushi Sakuraba (who credits Robinson with teaching him his submission style while at the UWFi) and top heavyweight Josh Barnett. They’ve applied Robinson’s coaching rather effectively.
As is two of the greatest MMA fighters with strong records of submission wins weren’t enough, another man that sought out Billy Robinson’s coaching is Takanori Kuno. He just placed third in his division (92 kg/202.5 lbs) at the World Grappling Games in Switzerland just a month ago…!
I am sure you are a nice guy, and I am fairly sure you are a just huge fan of freestyle wrestling. I am just not sure why you have to engage in sophistry when it comes to catch-as-catch-can. Can’t both CACC and freestyle be great? Why do you have to build one up at the expense of the other?
In my mind, they have two different rule sets and comparing the two is like comparing tennis and golf. Sure catch-as-catch-can promoters fell prey to greed and deceit (not unlike boxing) and phony show wrestling became the norm in the post-shooting era. But lumping in the men that really plied the real catch-as-catch-can trade, often in obscurity (except to history nerd like me), lumping them in with “shit” and “cheats” is really not fair and uninformed, as I’ve shown.
@ jake
I’m asking for some primary source to support your claim “The game of catch-as-catch-can was growing in popularity and it followed immigrants from England and Western Europe to the United States of America.”
Do you have evidence that the phrase catch-as-catch-can wrestling was used in a published article in a Lancashire newspaper in reference to the local style sometime before 1865: Yes or no?
If not what evidence do you have that a style called catch-as-catch can was been practised Britain or Ireland?
I’ll happily acknowledge my ignorance of any.
Also, do you have evidence from any published article sometime before 1880 in an American newspaper of the Lancashire origin of catch -as-catch can wrestling; yes or no?
If the answer to both those two questions is no, then we have a serious problem in arguing that traditional Lancashire wrestling had anything to do with “catch-as-catch can”.
I accept I’m ignorant of evidence that supports you claims, but I’m happy to be proved wrong? That’s how history works Jake.
The term “cheats” is how they were perceived by other wrestlers that’s documented and I don’t think Dave would disagree with that. But as it goes, Britain has had three Olympic gold medal winners, all in the 1908 London Olympics:: two were from London and one from Cork, but before I’m accused of bias the historical record does show London to be more influential in British wrestling during the 20th century than Lancashire… that’s if we’re going on results, and what the fuck else is there?
I said that Freestyle is catch-as-catch can wrestling and you pulled me up on not supporting that claim. The first time Freestyle wrestling was a sport in the Olympics, were the 1904 St. Louis Games, every participant was American. because Freestyle wrestling was the international version of American catch-as-catch can, and Europeans did Greco-Roman, which was in the first Olympics but not the second.
Lets do a little thought experiment: how many moves and rules changes have their been in freestyle wrestling since 1904?
The double wrist lock (key lock) can be used in freestyle but not to break the joint but your mate Mark nearly got away with it in the first round of the 1984 Olympics, and he used toe holds and leg laces to magnificent effect after his double leg + trip. David was a fantastic wrestler too, as I recall he got penalised as well for rule breaking.
You think I have a bias against Pancrase, UWFi, and RINGS? Yeah, I do: it’s worked! I’m not saying Catch is shit, modern catch as catch can (freestyle wrestling) is great. Although I was a Greco-Roman wrestler. I’m not saying that Lancashire wrestling is shit either, to be honest I think Olympic wrestling is better. But what I’m dismissing is this :
What’s a legitimate catch-as-catch can wrestling coach, when the style isn’t done competitively any more, or not so that anyone would notice?
Sorry for the analogy but it’d the first one that came to mind, it’s like a brass giving legitimate fake orgasm instruction.
Rob,
I am not a professional historian, but I do my very best to present what I’ve learned faithfully. Most of my information comes directly from the men that were there (Karl, Billy, Dick Cardinal, et al).
While I am familiar with the historical method, are you familiar with the concept of falsifiability? If so, then you’ll understand why, until you produce a document from those time periods that run counter to my information I’ll stick with my sources, since they were closer to the issue at hand than you seem to be. When you produce that “black swan” I’ll gladly review it, and if it is from a reputable source (not an arbitrary sports journalist from the time) then I’ll gladly update my article.
Now to your comment again, you again seem to make my point for me, doing the double wrist lock in the 84 Olympics nearly cost Mark because it was against the rules. Against the rules of freestyle wrestling, not catch-as-catch-can.
There are some semantic issues here that are somewhat transparent upon closer review. Sure freestyle and CACC where often called the same thing at the turn of the 20th century, to differentiate it from Greco-Roman and the backhold styles. However, the amateur style began to diverge from the professional style (done for promotions, carnivals, and side-bets). By your reasoning, judo and jiu-jitsu are the same thing (note: they are not).
Let’s be clear on terms here, when I refer to catch-as-catch-can wrestlers I am talking about those men that called themselves catch-as-catch-can wrestlers that practiced submission wrestling (with pins) when submissions were not popular: men that were at Wigan, men that worked carnivals, the amateurs that opened up their minds to learning, and post-shoot era wrestling entertainers.
Their legitimacy is supported by the success of their athletes (Sakuraba, Tamura, Barnett, Kuno, et al), testimony, and historical documents. To avoid confusion those are the men that are commonly referred to as catch-as-catch-can men. Hope this helps (otherwise I will have start calling golf tennis and vice versa).
Menawhile, I still await satisfactory redress to the biases and holes that I already mentioned in your comments (those issues were again conveniently excluded from your analysis. I am noticing a pattern here.), until then I won’t continue giving you the same courtesy of answering your criticisms.
Oh yeah, there was never any counterpoints to Dave’s remarks either:
“Not sure where you get your info from . I have extensively researched Lancashire ‘catch’ and assure you the term is as least 200 years old and probably older.. it was originally called ‘Catch Hold’..
Pliny wrote that the Roman wrestlers in AD45 wouldnt wrestle the .men of the county Palatine … (which was the old name for Lancashire and parts of Cumbria.). because the Lancashire men were too rough
The ‘Book of Leinster’ 1150AD mentions the ferocoity of the old style ‘Crayling’ which came from Lancashire and became Catch Hold….
I attended Rileys for a very short while, and trained with several wrestlers from the 50’s and 60’s and can assure you the style certainly wasnt ’so shit’ as you quote
the great Karl Gotch and Billy Robinson came from Lancashire wrestling, both products of Billy Riley’s
Hackenshmidt in his books mention that Lancashire Catch is the roughest style he knows.. I met Hack in 1968 abut a year before he died, and he told me that the Lancashire boys were the toughest on a level with the Iowa boys…
The ‘Carnie’ Wrestlers from the 19th century in the USA people like George Tragos etc were all immigrants.. a hell of a lot of ‘melting pot’ trainiing went into American Wrestling which is why it produced so many great wrestlers… many Lancashire wrrestlers went out to the ‘New World’ in the early and late 19th century such as Tom Cannon etc.. they helped with the melting pot
I have studied various forms of wrestling, grappling and martial arts since 1961 and am currently an 8th Dan after 48 years involved.. I rate old style Lancashire Catch up there with the best”
*shrugs
I am look at the above posts and get the impression that some of this is argument for arguments sake???
I have it ON DVD Dan Gable saying he believes Catch came from the UK as does MIke Chapman, both rated authorities
Several old wrestlers (well into their 80′s and 90′s) over here claim that the Wigan styles was always known as Catch
I have to argue that Lancashire Catch was ‘show’ when nearly every one I personally spoke to was adamant that the Wigan boys gave nothing away ever
Maybe Roy Wood of the Aspull wrestling club, who is Billy Rileys ‘successor’ can give you more info
or Trevor Roberts who was a champion in Catch, Freestyle, Sambo, Judo etc and is highly knowledgable in Catch
I am not really that bothered per se about who had the term FIRST, … its like the old Judo and Ju-jutsu books in the late 1800′s to the 1920′s all used both terms as one style.
even Kano Ju-Jitsu (Hancock) is combat judo ..
why SHRUGS at the end of my comments???
I am doing my best to enter a discussion about something I have some (albeit limited) understanding, experience and knowledge of.. so why SHRUGS???
Thats an insult to me and my 48 years of hard training and study, it implies that nothing I say or comment on has any vailidity ….
I did meet Hack and Bert Assirati, as well as many of the Pro’s and Amateur Wrestlers of the 50′s and 60′s.. sadly not Billy Robinson or Karl Gotch…. but plenty of top long term guys who highly rate Lancashire Catch
Some called it Catch as Catch Can, some Lancashire Catch, some ‘the Lancashire Style’… but they ALL called it great
Hi Dave,
I think there’s a little misunderstanding with the ‘shrugs’ part.
I think what Jake is saying is that what you’ve said is more than enough to counter Rob’s argument.
And that’s why he shrugged, at Rob, to say the information is there for him to see.
I’d like to see what Rob has as counter to that.
@ Rob
I think you need some backup here, mate.
You’ve got two very knowledgeable guys countering everything you’re saying.
Rezbi is spot on. I agree with everything Dave said and was simply reiterating it since it was never addressed. Anyway fellas, best of luck in your wrestling and research and thank you for the lively discussion!
Kind regards,
Jake
Jake my apologies mate .. I misread it and I thank you for your input on here…
Rezbi is correct.. I was just a bit quick off the mark in posting a comment
debates and discussions are brilliant but anything TOO Personal is not.. I will continue to study research and practice, then make daft posts Ha Ha
@ Jake
It’s based on Waismann’s early version of the Verification Principle: “anyone uttering a sentence must know under what conditions he calls it true and under what conditions he calls it false”. Antony Flew uses it in “Theology and Falsification”, he argued that a statement incapable of falsification is logically meaningless. He uses to try and refute the statement God exists. So yes I know what it means, and now you do, but It’s easily refuted by the statement “All men are mortal”, which is capable of being true but incapable of falsification, so don’t worry about.
Next point, whether you like it or not, you’re making claims in your corporate history that you can’t produce documentary evidence to support. Don’t ask me to disprove those claims because that’s asking me to prove a negative, which is a logical fallacy, and doesn’t change the fact you can’t prove your claims.
You also make some really dubious claims, like this one:
But you also said “the precise beginnings of catch-as-catch-can wrestling are not known”.
And the Snake Pit was a pro wrestling gym that opened in the 50s, long after catch-as-catch can wrestling stopped being a competitive style. Karl (Istaz) Gotch, trained there during the 50s before becoming a show wrestler who fought fixed matches. There was no legitimate British, European or World catch-as-catch can wrestling championships matches held in the 20th Century, and the style of pro wrestling being fought in the UK from the 1950s was ALL-IN wrestling not catch-as-catch can. First ALL-IN wrestling matches were fought in 1930. So Karl Istaz was a legitimate catch-as-catch-can wrestler was he? He was a performing artist!
.
Rob,
Here is a note from a friend of mine, C.N. Hatton who is currently pursuing a PhD in history with an emphasis in wrestling history:
“Many early notable catch-as-catch-can wrestlers such as Tom Cannon and Joe Acton came from Lancashire, and when they arrived in North America, competed in “catch-as-catch-can” wrestling bouts. In The Badminton Library of Boxing, Fencing and Wrestling (1889), published in London, there are some descriptions of these same men’s matches under the section on Lancashire wrestling. Here is the significant point: in illustrating the nature of Lancashire wrestling, the book describes contests that DID NOT occur in Lancashire. A New York bout between Joe Acton and Edwin Bibby staged “a few years ago” is recounted in the same book to describe Lancashire wrestling. Additionally, a “recent” bout in Melbourne, Australia between Tom Cannon and Miller (probably William… he was wrestling in Melbourne as early as 1883) is likewise used to illustrate the nature of Lancashire wrestling. Now, if you go to contemporary newspaper accounts, they describe bouts featuring these men not as “Lancashire wrestling” but as “catch-as-catch-can.” The conclusion can be made that 1) they were essentially one and the same and 2)this style of wrestling was being practiced throughout the English-speaking world by the 1880s. Newspaper accounts from the 1880s likewise concur that “Lancashire wrestling,” and “catch-as-catch-can” were essentially the same thing. The Decatur [Illinois] Daily Republican, on July 15, 1884 ran an lengthy article on wrestling in England, stating that there are three dominant styles in the country. Following a discussion on Cumberland-Westmoreland, the piece stated that the “only other system which needs particular mention is the Lancashire, or ‘catch-as-catch can’ wrestling…” Now it is not from before the 1880s, as the author requests, but evidently the terms were interchangeable by the early-mid 1880s. Also, the piece was reprinted from Bell’s Life, which was a London-based paper. The Lowell [Massachusetts] Weekly Sun, dated October 18, 1879 ran a short piece on a “Lancashire wrestling” bout staged in the American North East, so evidently the term “Lancashire,” not just “catch-as-catch-can” did receive some use in the United States during the 1870s. Even as late as 1895, the term saw occasional use (e.g. the Logansport [Indiana] Journal, dated November 19, 1895, described a match between renowned catch-as-catch-can practitioner Dan McLeod and J.C. Comstock in Indianapolis as a “Lancashire wrestling match.”)
Are you aware of a particular reason for the author’s request for an article from Lancashire using the term “catch-as-catch-can” prior to 1865? Why not 1870? 1879? 1844? What is the significance of that date? Also, why would an account of a local match from a mid-nineteenth century Lancashire newspaper need to qualify the style of wrestling used at all?
Would they not just use “wrestling”? Even today, with a highly developed global sports and entertainment infrastructure, when I read American newspapers, they don’t use the term “American football” They just use football because the system is so dominant in the country that it does not need a qualifier. The same could likely be said of a regional wrestling style in the region where it originated and was predominant.
The early British Olympic champions did not come from Lancashire? What of it? By the time amateur catch-as-catch-can was given Olympic status, the art had been in international practice for decades and people from all over the world, never mind the tiny island of Great Britain, were adding to it, modifying it, and improving it in a “best practices” kind of way.
I’ve always viewed the term “catch-as-catch-can” and “freestyle” as inter-changeable within the context of amateur wrestling.
I’m not sure of the exact date when they started using the term freestyle TO THE EXCLUSION of catch-as-catch-can in amateur competition. The Naval Aviation Physical Training Manual: Wrestling (1943) states that” In the Catch-as-Catch-Can contest, sometimes called “Free Style,” wrestlers are permitted to take holds below the waist…” (page 5). Evidently the transition was underway by WWII.”
Mmm I too wonder why that certain date was chosen (1865)?
also Rileys was NOT just a Pro gym, several very prominent and successful amateurs trained there as well… but most Pros were sent to Rileys to IMPROVE their wrestling.. not to learn Show wrestling but SHOOT wrestling. Lancashire Catch Style
Jimmy Niblett, who but for an injury would have been a CERT for the 1948 Olympics in London (by the way thats BEFORE the 1950′s) trained at Rileys
as did John Rigby who got an OBE for his work in AMATUER wrestling
Albert Aspen .. and medalist in Commonwealth and Olympic games trained there..plus many others including Roy Wood (BillyRiley’s successor).. Roy had many amatuer bouts with great success
I could produce more and more evidence, but it would be refuted probably..
I am also not really all that bothered WHO used the term Catch as Catch Can first..
I do know I have several old books written in the early 1900 and late 1800′s that use that term for the Lancashire style..
many old timers from that region (many long dead some still around) who I spoke to in the 1960′s and 70′s used CACC as the term for their wrestling .. others alternated words.. plain ‘catch’ was used. ‘lancashire catch’ was also used.. sometimes the changes would occur in the middle of the same sentences..
Oh well the world will keep turning regardless of who used the term first
I have the only certified ' carny style' catch wrestling club outside the usa. I have been certified by Billy Wicks himself while i was training at his gym in N Carolina.I will be getting Johnny Huskey over in the spring next year to do some seminars.
Ian,
Where are you based?
Manchester mate, where are you ?
I'm in Blackburn, so not too far. Send me an email and we'll have a chat. I'm interested.
Hi, have tried emailing you but they keep getting blocked. Check my website http://www.sbgstockport.co.uk, see what you think and give me a ring. Mobile is on the site.
Thanks. I just got some work come through so I'll give you a shout once I've got that sorted. (I'm a copywriter).
Leave a Comment