No one has ever gave his opinion about boxing more elegant than Jonathan Lyons in answering the question "Should boxing be legal?":
"Boxing is brutal. There is no fan of the pugilist arts that will say otherwise. Boxing has come a long way from Marquis de Queensbury and bare knuckled brawling to today's spectacle.
It should be pointed out that the point of boxing, is not to pummel one's opponent to a bloody pulp, but to score points by means of a combination of hits to the upper body.
As has been noted in other answers, at the amateur level, a considerable amount of padding has been added to reduce injury. The thumbless glove alone was a great improvement. I think it would be wise to extend these innovations in the sport to the professional level. However, I do not believe that the sport should be banned altogether.
The boxers themselves in my opinion, endure training so hard that it makes them strong and determined to beat other fighters and get the fame, glory, and fortune that they deserve. No wonder, deserving boxers, they get filthy rich.
I guess the general point is right, boxing is rather the game of endurance than a pummelling and there are certain rules and security measures. Nevertheless, this doesn’t deny the fact that boxing is among the most traumatic kinds of sports (if not the most) and leads to serious long-term injuries. Yes, boxers become rich stars, so one could say it all pays off, but if in the end, one has brain damage does fame really matter?