And weigh ins on the same day as the fight.
Printable View
And weigh ins on the same day as the fight.
Why? I like 15 round fights, but is it worth putting extra risk on athletes in an already incredibly dangerous sport? I don't think it is, I'm happy with 10 and 12 rounders. I admire the guys who went 15 rounds because you have to have great stamina and be tough as nails, but I don't think they are necessary.
I like the earlier weigh ins thats better for the fighters healths
Yea i agree thats old and finished i don't wana see 15 rounds back after all tragedy i see but just think Ali needed them extra rounds to win so it was better for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Is there any evidence that reducing world title fights from 15 to 12 rounds resulted in less ring death or injury? Not that I can see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Maybe not, but can you imagine the effects of fighting just a few hours after weighing in? Maybe it would stop some fighters from cutting too much weight, knowing they won't have as much time to rehydrate, but it will just be dangerous above everything else. Add that in with 15 round fights...I wouldn't want to see that.Quote:
Originally Posted by zzz
I enjoyed "blood and guts" Boom boom Mancini 15 round fights.
Its a bit 'catch-22' this one. If you have the weigh-in on the day of the fight you have the risk of a fighter who has struggled to make weight getting into the ring de-hydrated and evidence shows that this causes a lack of protective fluid around the brain which leads to injury in the later rounds (ie between 12 and 15). However, with the weigh-in the day before the fight it can lead to a huge difference in weight between the fighters come fight time. This is especially prevalent if one of the fighters is boiling down and the other stepping up or a 'natural'. I think there should be two weigh-ins... the official one the day before (as is the case now) but the fighters should also have to weigh into the ring and not to be more than, say, 4 pounds over the weight limit. I do agree though that 15 round fights were better for world title fights. Rounds 13 - 15 weren't known as the championship rounds for nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEANIE
Wish I could regurgitate the exact article, but I did read one a while back that stated they had evidence of most brain damage that takes place during a prize-fighter (back then), occurred from rounds 12-15. Whether it's true or not, wouldn't we rather play it safe? I like the excitement as much as anyone else but I don't see a couple of extra rounds being worth more people living their life as a vegetable.Quote:
Originally Posted by zzz
Hehe as do I, but remember the reason Deuk Koo Kim died in his fight with Mancini was due to the fact that he took more punishment than he should have, and he took it for a total of 14 rounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacstraightleft
well i guess we won't ever see a HW bout go fifteen rounds...esp not as lazy as they are nowadays...
i think the major championship fights should go fifteen..but barrera v morrales and an extra nine rounds combined in their three fights and erik would be dead....
Yea lets go back to 15 rounders was just f uckin awsome :):):)
Unfortunately, it was "Boom Boom's" fight with Duk Koo Kim that cemented the end of 15 rounders...I do agree that there is no correlation between 15 rounders and more deaths rather than the pure numbers of rounds that increase the frequency of ring deaths so what does that mean?...that if you do away with 15 rounders people will theoretically fight more 10-12 rounders so the total number of rounds will not be decreased and thus frequency of death is not deminished...theoretically of course, not taking into account the fatigue assoiciated with 15 rounders...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacstraightleft
Actually there is since the advent of the 12 round championship in the 80's fatalities immediatly decreasedQuote:
Originally Posted by zzz
There was no decade before the 80s with less then 90 fatalities,there hasnt been a decade since with more then 72
This decade may change that though,with the increasing popularity of ToughMan style competions
And these fatalities you speak of were in world title fights? Are you sure? Lets make sure we understand the reason for these drops. Might just as easily be due to increased awareness, and nothing at all to do with going to 12 rounds in title fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
hell yeah, i would love to see 15rd champion ship fights back in play and 10 or 12 rds for non-title fights.
there would be far less contraversial draws , cause the fighters would have 3 more rds to convince the judges that they deserve the win. and also 15 is an un-even number which will also reduce the chance of a draw....and for all those concerned about a fighters health.......for fwocks sake, they're there to hurt each other not take them on a date ::** they know the risks , its a gladiators game(well it use to be) they shouldnt be fighting in they're worried about braking a nail :P
ps....i think the last 15rd fight was 1987 or something like that. and since then there has been a couple of deaths and loads of serious injuries. so you cant stop ring injuries but they can minimize them which they have done by making the ref more aware and to step in if a fighter is getting unecicerally hurt. and they should also have the 3 judges which they have , but also appiont the 3rd man in the ring(the ref) as a 4th judge. i mean the ref as a better view than anyone and having a 4th judge would minimize the chances of a pesky draw even further 8)
Could be both,lord knows nobody wants to be the ref for the next Kim/Mancini fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by zzz
But as noted by another poster rnds 12-15 are the braindamage rounds,just observational evidence alone suggests that to be true.
Fighters are going further past their primes(in some cases they never had a prime,Kenny Craven)but most dont sound like theyve got a mouth full of marbles when their done
15 rounders should come back. It would decrease controversial decisions and bring it back to the glory days. And i don't wanna hear the "It will be bad for them to deal with 3 extra rounds of punishment" argument because you can be killed with a single punch. People have died in their first amateur fights from blunt force trauma (single punch) and others have survived thru many 15 rounders and retired without complications. It depends on the person and their health should be closely monitored and i believe they have now more than ever the safest boxing environment to date. As for weigh -ins, they should not be the same day as the fight because dehydration and things a long those lines have added to brain damage so keeping them a few days in advanced is a much better idea.
Name oneQuote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Name 1 single fighter who went through numerous 15 rounders whose head was clear at the end
Do you have a single clue what blunt trauma dementia is like?
Andre Waters,a football safety,committed suicide rather then deal with it any more
The autopsy said he had the brain of an 80 year old
He was in his 40s
People who play in ANY TYPE OF CONTACT SPORT Can suffer from that. Helmet to helmet contact can cause that in football and as i said it differs from person to person and i don't see a problem with bringing back the 15 rounders.
Theres a mile of difference between CAN suffer it,and demanding they doQuote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Its the difference between a sport,and human dog fighting
Here is a theory, lets make em 10 rounds. This means fighters have less time to get into a fight and have to go at it from the first bell. This may lead to more excitement and more fans coming back to boxing. no use having 15 rounds if its just two blokes hugging for the last 5.
People who have abandoned boxing for mma can stay gone. You either like boxing or you don't you can't suddenly decide that you like it or hate it. And no we need an odd number of rounds for a title fight for clearer decisions. 10 rounds can have a 5-5 draw 12 rounds can have a 6-6 draw but with 13 or 15 its harder to get a draw.Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle
I'd support 13 round title fights its just one more round. But a lot of supersticious (fuck that word it is too hard to spell) people would object.
Id be more open to that or 11 for all that matterQuote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
11 is a joke 13 is the bare minimum for a title shot. You're fighting for the most historical titles in sports history. You know the risk you take when you enter the ring or step onto the football field. Thats why it pays so much because you never know when you won't be able to do it anymore.
For the sake of safety, I would endorse this idea for fights that require a 'tie-breaking' round. If 12 calls it, no need to go the distance. Even if safety wasn't an issue, those extra 9 minutes of fighting will result in an increased time necessary for rest between fights meaning less fights in a given amount of time. Unless you're an early KO artist, 1 fight a year is what can be expected for fighters going past 12 rounds. This also opens the door for fighters to 'bore' it up in the first half knowing they have a few more rounds to try and land that miracle combination. Less pressure on the fighters to perform. As far as the draws, it should be the fighter's job to ensure that contoversy does not rear its ugly head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
??? Shouldn't it then also be the fighters job to stay busy during the course of the fight wether its 15 rounds or 3?Quote:
Originally Posted by MistaDibbs
Do you know what I have for cartilege in my nose?Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
I dont
I have the main bone and not much else
Want to know what my knees sound like on a humid day?
Like a bag full of dice
Want to know how I react when any of my fighters,fight?
I puke,nerves just get to me
Im still trying for a comeback at 37,nothing big,round the dirtball tracks
All for your amusment
But apparently thats not enough for you
We should die,or talk like bathering idiots,all so assholes like Don King can take every single penny WE earned
No one very force anybody else to box or put their body on the line. Boxers choose to be boxers and soldiers choose to be soldiers. They're bravery should be comended but in no way should they complain about something they did to themselves.
Anybody that knows boxing knows the boxers. Neither the boring ones (making boring fights) nor the exciting ones (where anything can happen) really need to be put in the ring for longer than necessary. Who wants to watch a boring fight, much less expect an exciting fight to go the distance? There have been more TITLE fights that I wish would have been stopped at the 7th round than those that went the distance. For every match you'd want to see 15 rounds of, there are others that should have ended early.Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Hit somebody or starveQuote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Man thats a great "choice"
I box because the grand I earn in November gets treatment for my kid that isnt available otherwise
But that thousand bucks will get a whole lot of help for him
And Im well off for a boxer,at least I own my own house
That was the reason they took away 15 roudners in the first place. They examined it and concluded that the most severe damage that a fighter sustains takes place in the 13th to 15th round.Quote:
Originally Posted by zzz
To me, your arguement is the same as if someone said "well there are tons of people who die in car accidents even when their seatbelt is on, so whats the point of seatbelts?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Punisher136
Actually no. They decided that fighters tend to get hurt more when they are tmore ired, so they took away some rounds reasoning that if they were less tired, they would get hurt less. There was no careful conclusive resarch, it was pretty much a knee jerk reaction that happened quite quickly. There is a certain logic I suppose, but that's about all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
We are talking about reduction in length from 15 to 12 rounds for title bouts? Can anyone here convincingly say that at any time the majority of ring deaths happened in title bouts?
Ok well what is the good for 15 rounds? So we can get a few more rounds of action? So we can, in a way, get back to the "old school"?? These kinds of reasons do not justify making these athletes fight for 9 minutes more (and, as a consequence, take 9 minutes more of punishment while exhausted)? To me its stupid and unnecessary. Boxing is a brutal sport, and anyone who is in favor of making it harder and more brutal in any way simply does not have any respect for the athletes.
And even from a spectator's point of view it still sucks. What will happen is that fighters will be taking more rounds off, saving energy to go 15 rounds, and we'll end up with much more slower paced rounds.
I dont think Duk Kim Koo and Ray Mancini would agree.
I hate the attitude that treats boxers like some kind of Human Cock FightQuote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Its bad enough that theyre being ripped off 9 out of 10 by their promoters,its bad enough theres all kinds of slugs coming around for investments for them(why Joe Frazier live in an apartment over his gym)do they have to get freaking killed for peoples amusment as well?
weigh ins the same day, sure but 15 rounds....naaaaaaah buddy we don't need that
I'm saying some people can take that damage and some people can't. Those that can't should not be in the sport. I'm saying if you choose a tough occupation and receive congratulations on your bravery for it you can't be allowed to complain about the physical injuries you receive from it. Now getting ripped off is a whole other story. If promoters wanna make all that money they should get their asses in the ring to collect it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
I like day-of-the-fight weigh ins but 15 rounders are a bad idea. It would be great for fights like Barrera-Morales or Gatti-Ward but not for 2 lazy, knackered heavyweights who have been struggling for stamina since round 4.