Printable View
Which of the following do you think should be enacted by all boxing commissions and organizations.
1) Instant Replays.
Simply stating that in close or controversial rulings, instant replays may be used to review and change if necessary the outcome of the fight.
2) Ranking Champions by all Organizations
A Champion of for example the WBC would still be ranked by the WBO, IBF and WBA
3) Limit organizations to ONE champ.
Eliminate Super, Interim and Emeritus titles
Would rather have just one belt each division, but yeah to all 3
Do away with number three all together! and yes to 1 and 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by plopeater
Yeah but realistically these organizations aren't going anywhere, It would be an ideal situation to simply have the Ring title IMO. I can't see the alphabets saying "we no longer have a need for money" unfortunately though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepQuote:
Originally Posted by plopeater
Yeah but realistically these organizations aren't going anywhere, It would be an ideal situation to simply have the Ring title IMO. I can't see the alphabets saying "we no longer have a need for money" unfortunately though.
And Ring is in for what? Cookies and milk?
The Ring does not collect sanctioning fees.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostQuote:
Originally Posted by killersheepQuote:
Originally Posted by plopeater
Yeah but realistically these organizations aren't going anywhere, It would be an ideal situation to simply have the Ring title IMO. I can't see the alphabets saying "we no longer have a need for money" unfortunately though.
And Ring is in for what? Cookies and milk?
Many feel the ring's cred has been comprimized from the purchasing by ODLH, so now what?Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepQuote:
Originally Posted by plopeater
Yeah but realistically these organizations aren't going anywhere, It would be an ideal situation to simply have the Ring title IMO. I can't see the alphabets saying "we no longer have a need for money" unfortunately though.
No to replays wont work.
Could give a guy hurt valuble seconds to recover also referees could use this to favour the home town fighter.
I agee with one champion but again wont work the orgs would never agree.
I should have been more clear, the replays would be used only post fight on rulings such as cuts and low blows for point deductions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
The Ring sells mag's and the more they sell, the more they make. Just like all the rest of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepThe Ring does not collect sanctioning fees.Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostQuote:
Originally Posted by killersheep
And Ring is in for what? Cookies and milk?
A rule was already set where they had one minute in between rounds to review the tape, kind of like they do in football, a minute might not always be enough but if they move fast enough, they might be able to solve some issues. I was judging the Leonard/Hagler fight and I gave round 4 to Leonard but after watching a replay, I had to change my score and call the round even because SRL's bolo punch was not right on the money, it was a low blow and it was that bolo punch that made the difference in me giving the round to SRL but after seeing it was low, how could I give that round to Ray? I am not saying the judges should have access to instant replay but I think the corner should be able to get a quick review call the foul in question and if it is a foul, let the judges see it and then they can turn in their score cards ;D That is fair. Give each corner 3 review chances? Two maybe per fight? I don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
I say one minute of instant replay is some cases is better than none at all.
;)
In the case of the Thompson fight last week, it did not take 20 seconds to view that it was a head butt that caused the cut. Simple as that jack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepI should have been more clear, the replays would be used only post fight on rulings such as cuts and low blows for point deductions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
The thing about boxing is two men enter they slug it out then at the end there is a definative result one way or the other. If fans go home not knowing if a result will be over turned would just not work.
Imagine paying for a ppv then having to wait to see if the result stands and again i think one mans slip is another mans kd.
There should be no reason for a result to take more than 10 minutes of review, more likely 5 minutes, by the time the fight is over the incident in question will be queued and immediately reviewed.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkusdarkusQuote:
Originally Posted by killersheepI should have been more clear, the replays would be used only post fight on rulings such as cuts and low blows for point deductions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
The thing about boxing is two men enter they slug it out then at the end there is a definative result one way or the other. If fans go home not knowing if a result will be over turned would just not work.
Imagine paying for a ppv then having to wait to see if the result stands and again i think one mans slip is another mans kd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostThe Ring sells mag's and the more they sell, the more they make. Just like all the rest of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by killersheepThe Ring does not collect sanctioning fees.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
Yes the ring is a business, but they do not profit by having multiple titles like Interim, Super, Emeritus, which is exactly what this topic is about. Making money from selling magazines will happen regardless if they have a vacant champ or a champ in place. The alphabets only get paid if someone pays sanctioning fees (compounded by the different sub-titles)
So the WBA for example could be receiving fees from their Regular, Super and Interim titlists at the same time, so it is in their best interest to have MORE titles. That is the difference here. You have to fight to earn a Ring top 10 spot, you have to PAY to earn an alphabet top 10 spot.
Agree with all three but the replay shouldn't overturn the cards in less a head butt is discovered that wasn't previously scored as. Like in the fight on friday night where Anthony Thompson got screwed cause a butt from Arvin in the 3rd opened up a nasty cut which was never ruled as a butt. Thompson was easlily winning the fight before the Doctors called it a tko 6 in favor of Ismail Arvin. The men in charge to oversee the bout even looked at the replay and admitingly seen the head butt, but still had to make the wrong ruling.
Yeah I don't like the replay idea... I wouldn't like the fight being played out and finishing, and then having to go over some tape to crown a winner...
I think it should definetly stay in the hands of the ref. As long as we are prepared for them to sometimes make mistakes, and accept that that is just boxing, then I think it would stay a more enjoyable sport..
But if we truely wanted boxing to return to Glory, I think having only one belt would do just that..... I mean, boxing needs to appeal to the general public as well, and they can't follow 3 or 4 champs.... One belt, one world champion in each weight division. Throw them ALL into the one pot and work your way to the top of that division by having to fight THE best....
It would make boxing so much more explosive....
But it's about diversifying these days, and I suppose for the actual fighters, it's a much better industry now with all the belts/organizations, and opportunity to have more money earning fights... How it is now is definetly good for the fighters, but it takes a bit away from boxing/sports fans..
Thanks to all the banter back and forth. It is good to see both sides of these debates.
You make it sound as though every fight is full of contraversy and that is not the case but KillerSheep gave a perfect example of a fight in which the instant replay would have helped solve the situation and corrected the human error.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizaster
It's not easy to follow the sport and takes way too much time to follow all of the divisions and that is why I dont watch the fat azzes for example. I try to narrow down watching fights in divisions such as super featherweight thru super middleweight and even then I have a difficult time keeping track of the sport. I am accused of only knowing Cotto and Mora and that is ok by me ;D
Don't get me wrong, I have all of the classic fights of a great era of Ali, Holmes, Smokin Joe etc.. I stopped watching the fat boys during the Tyson era. :mad: I hated Tyson and I guess I still do. Have not payed attention to the fatboy division since he came in. Right now, the heavy weight division stinks ;D So I ain't missing anything anyway and would much rather watch something else. (Oooppps I was put to sleep by Vladimir Clitoris last month, don't know why I was watching :mad: )
Pay Per View Killed boxing MainStream Media as we once knew it.
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...cons/icon8.gif
I can not ever see The politicos going to one Champion in each division,Just will not happen.Far to many affiliated slicksters getting fat on sanctioning fees and back room money in general.
The Replay scenario is so overdue its absents makes Boxing look stuck in the stone ages at times.There are crystal clear examples (Friday night most recently) in which a thought out managed system could have been utilized to ensure a just and fair call when a fighters future hangs in the balance......on nearly every descision made by the officials.The Commissions need to show half the balls the fighters do,a step in the right direction.
Replays may come about, but I predict it will be fought. Controversial decisions= Lucrative re-matches!
Not saying one champ per division, one champ per alphabet org.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins
I'm with ya but the genie is out of the bottle.That would call for universal reform.....maybe even The Gov getting invold? Might be like trying to herd (regulate) cats ;D.They are glutinous slobs feeding at the buffet and have already seen what they can make coming up with sub-sub Championships....."W.B.A Youth Championship" Wtf :bucktooth: How about we find a way to have only one Alphabet racket per division ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by killersheepNot saying one champ per division, one champ per alphabet org.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins
I voted yes to all except ranking champs.
I assume you have to pay sanctioning fees to rank? Thats unlikely to change.
Replays:No
I just don't see how they can be implemented efficiently without giving additional time for fighters to recover. I would say that they could be useful to determine how a cut was caused i.e. Headbutt or fist, but only post fight.
Other two: Yes
I actually think that the alphabet titles are now almost worthless in boxing to proper boxing fans and are used plainly as a marketing tool. For example, the Hatton v Lazcano fight was billed as a world title fight based on an IBO title and a Ring title. Lazcano only became ranked by Ring after the announcement of his fight with Hatton. Pure Politics.
I count a fight between 2 fighters on merit rather than belts on show.
On the contrary. I don't feel there is enough contraversy in the sport of boxing to warrant an official repley either during or post fight to assess certin incidents that could have been interpreted wrong by a ref...Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny_GYou make it sound as though every fight is full of contraversy and that is not the case but KillerSheep gave a perfect example of a fight in which the instant replay would have helped solve the situation and corrected the human error.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizaster
It's not easy to follow the sport and takes way too much time to follow all of the divisions and that is why I dont watch the fat azzes for example. I try to narrow down watching fights in divisions such as super featherweight thru super middleweight and even then I have a difficult time keeping track of the sport. I am accused of only knowing Cotto and Mora and that is ok by me ;D
Don't get me wrong, I have all of the classic fights of a great era of Ali, Holmes, Smokin Joe etc.. I stopped watching the fat boys during the Tyson era. :mad: I hated Tyson and I guess I still do. Have not payed attention to the fatboy division since he came in. Right now, the heavy weight division stinks ;D So I ain't missing anything anyway and would much rather watch something else. (Oooppps I was put to sleep by Vladimir Clitoris last month, don't know why I was watching :mad: )
Pay Per View Killed boxing MainStream Media as we once knew it.
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...cons/icon8.gif
If there was some sort of result where the winner was up for debate, then an appeals tribunal could be set up where video replay is used to support cases for the fight being awarded to the other fighter..
But again I don't think there is enough contraversy (I know that's incorrect spelling but I can't find a way that it looks right) in the sport for such things..
Although it may also be that I havn't seen very many fights or events where such a replay system would have been of benifit..
I prefer weigh-ins to be 8 hours before the fight rather than 28-32 hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thread Stealer
I agree with that too, except most of the most popular fighters of today would have to move up a weight class.
I voted yes to replay and no to the others.
Only one champ sounds good to us fans but fighters need something to fight over.
And the champ rankings could cause WWIII
Good point, actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by DAWGSWIN
Good point on Fighting for something.I have lost confidence in the Alphabet soup boys long ago but I'd imagine that to many fighters, the achievement means a great deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxingGorilla
"Gotta spread" Lol
I agree with all 3 of them. This would help out especially with a ref like Cortez in the ring.