Serious Question for all...Concerns our sport...Everyones input appreciated

[Trainer Monkey]

A KO or TKO would be considered the same thing....The insurance promoters carry has nothing to do with the fighters themselves being injured due to neglect.....The pre fight exam is a joke and consisit of blood pressure weight a quick look at the eyes to see how they focus and pretty much is about it in most cases

The insurance expense would more then likely be a roll over policy that carries card to card,,,,and that is also why there would be only certain things outlined...not saying that the insurance will cover a fighter if he is injured only if something serious happens when neglecting the outlined criteria......If the promoters are strickter on weight issues like those outlined then it would force fighters to take care of themselves better as well.....Nothing stopping promoters from saying in a contract you fail to meet weight you are fined...eg the 8 lb difference

CC for your input



[/quote]
There are two rubs
A)Youve just handed way to much discretion to a ref,one bad stoppage,and your out of your ability to make a living.Lets face it,crappy stoppages happen constantly
B) Lisence standards are not universal,and theres no way to get them to be,the individual states wont give up the leeway
In Virginia for example,all they ask for is a sports physical.In California,and Pennsylvania they run you through a barrage before the lisence and sanction you,including an EKG and a Catsacan

Thats the thing with boxing,there is no unniversaly recognised governing body

[Gutbuster]

There are two rubs
A)Youve just handed way to much discretion to a ref,one bad stoppage,and your out of your ability to make a living.Lets face it,crappy stoppages happen constantly
B) Lisence standards are not universal,and theres no way to get them to be,the individual states wont give up the leeway
In Virginia for example,all they ask for is a sports physical.In California,and Pennsylvania they run you through a barrage before the lisence and sanction you,including an EKG and a Catsacan

Thats the thing with boxing,there is no unniversaly recognised governing body

Are we talking about ending careers or just saying you can't fight if you've had three knockouts in 18 months? You made a good point about tko's for cuts, etc. But it seems reasonable to say that a fighter needs should not be getting knocked out on a regular basis over a number of years. Even if the rule was that you can't have had three knockouts within last 18 months and you'd had three over a 17 month span then you just need to wait another month to fight. If you keep getting knocked out at least they would be spaced out a little more. And maybe its 4 within 18 months or 3 within a year... the details could change so that people can still make their living, but IMO the idea is sound.

As for the licensing, if there could be a federal law requiring the insurance it would probably be the most efficient way of dealing with all the commitees at once.

[Trainer Monkey]

There are two rubs
A)Youve just handed way to much discretion to a ref,one bad stoppage,and your out of your ability to make a living.Lets face it,crappy stoppages happen constantly
B) Lisence standards are not universal,and theres no way to get them to be,the individual states wont give up the leeway
In Virginia for example,all they ask for is a sports physical.In California,and Pennsylvania they run you through a barrage before the lisence and sanction you,including an EKG and a Catsacan

Thats the thing with boxing,there is no unniversaly recognised governing body

Are we talking about ending careers or just saying you can't fight if you've had three knockouts in 18 months? You made a good point about tko's for cuts, etc. But it seems reasonable to say that a fighter needs should not be getting knocked out on a regular basis over a number of years. Even if the rule was that you can't have had three knockouts within last 18 months and you'd had three over a 17 month span then you just need to wait another month to fight. If you keep getting knocked out at least they would be spaced out a little more. And maybe its 4 within 18 months or 3 within a year... the details could change so that people can still make their living, but IMO the idea is sound.

As for the licensing, if there could be a federal law requiring the insurance it would probably be the most efficient way of dealing with all the commitees at once.

If you keep getting dropped,most states wont sanction you anymore
Cali has a 30 day no contact at all rule after a KO/TKO

[DaxxKahn]

[/quote]

Are we talking about ending careers or just saying you can't fight if you've had three knockouts in 18 months? You made a good point about tko's for cuts, etc. But it seems reasonable to say that a fighter needs should not be getting knocked out on a regular basis over a number of years. Even if the rule was that you can't have had three knockouts within last 18 months and you'd had three over a 17 month span then you just need to wait another month to fight. If you keep getting knocked out at least they would be spaced out a little more. And maybe its 4 within 18 months or 3 within a year... the details could change so that people can still make their living, but IMO the idea is sound.

As for the licensing, if there could be a federal law requiring the insurance it would probably be the most efficient way of dealing with all the commitees at once.
[/quote]

CC for the input

There are two rubs
A)Youve just handed way to much discretion to a ref,one bad stoppage,and your out of your ability to make a living.Lets face it,crappy stoppages happen constantly
B) Lisence standards are not universal,and theres no way to get them to be,the individual states wont give up the leeway
In Virginia for example,all they ask for is a sports physical.In California,and Pennsylvania they run you through a barrage before the lisence and sanction you,including an EKG and a Catsacan

Thats the thing with boxing,there is no unniversaly recognised governing body

Are we talking about ending careers or just saying you can't fight if you've had three knockouts in 18 months? You made a good point about tko's for cuts, etc. But it seems reasonable to say that a fighter needs should not be getting knocked out on a regular basis over a number of years. Even if the rule was that you can't have had three knockouts within last 18 months and you'd had three over a 17 month span then you just need to wait another month to fight. If you keep getting knocked out at least they would be spaced out a little more. And maybe its 4 within 18 months or 3 within a year... the details could change so that people can still make their living, but IMO the idea is sound.

As for the licensing, if there could be a federal law requiring the insurance it would probably be the most efficient way of dealing with all the commitees at once.

If you keep getting dropped,most states wont sanction you anymore
Cali has a 30 day no contact at all rule after a KO/TKO

I see that rule broken all the time everywhere. Besides you are getting off topic and starting to argue different things such as this state does this and that state does that ect....Ref makes bad stoppages ect...almost like you are making excuses for things to happen....Question was just a point on certain things and if people thought it was a cause worth persuing no one mentioned re altering the sport....

Virgina the state you speak of let a guy who was KO'd and TKO'd in 5 of his last 6 fights and has not had a win since 2001...your going to tell me this guy is not a punching bag?....And besides cat scans do not always show things and EKG's are usually only accurate at the time of a problem EG if your having a heart attack an EKG will show the heart movement...when you are OK again the EKG will show normality....

Same as a catscan....

[Trainer Monkey]

There are lots of professional tomatos out there,they oil the gears of the sport
Im not getting off of topic really Daxx
Im pointing out that what your hitting at is un-enforcable
And even if it was,allowing a TKO to count allows for all kinds of back door shennanigans,same as PA's stupid Morality clause in the lisencing process
And as far as it goes the 4 states that are notorious for putting on shaky fights,Virginia is one of them.And they arent going to change without National oversite
And since there isnt any,and any national set of rules is going to be challenged both internationally,and in the courts by the states who count on the license fees,it wont work
I could get a corpse booked in LA,so they make plenty on their license fees.
You think they arent going to challenge national oversite?
You have to work five times as hard to get one booked in PA,theyre going to challenge the national oversite if its too weak

[DaxxKahn]

There are lots of professional tomatos out there,they oil the gears of the sport
Im not getting off of topic really Daxx
Im pointing out that what your hitting at is un-enforcable
And even if it was,allowing a TKO to count allows for all kinds of back door shennanigans,same as PA's stupid Morality clause in the lisencing process
And as far as it goes the 4 states that are notorious for putting on shaky fights,Virginia is one of them.And they arent going to change without National oversite
And since there isnt any,and any national set of rules is going to be challenged both internationally,and in the courts by the states who count on the license fees,it wont work
I could get a corpse booked in LA,so they make plenty on their license fees.
You think they arent going to challenge national oversite?
You have to work five times as hard to get one booked in PA,theyre going to challenge the national oversite if its too weak

Thanks for the input