Three changes to help boxing

[marbleheadmaui]

[QUOTE=generalbulldog;963107][QUOTE=marbleheadmaui;963099]

It has been widely cited that the reason of the change to 12 rds was that there were studies that showed fighters taking too much damage in those 3 extra rounds. I haven't seen the study yet, but boxing has been known to be a very physically debilitating sport, this is an undeniable fact that can't be refuted.

Well the people that want 15 rounds usually aren't the ones inside the ring taking damage. So I think it's ridiculous to want them to take even more damage when it's not necessary. It reminds me of when NFL fans want to go back to the rule of the 60s to 80s with those nasty hits. Yeah it's easy to say you want more boxing, but you are not the one in the ring taking the punches.

The safety of the fighter comes first period.[/QUOTE

That is COMPLETE bullshit. If THAT were true there'd be no sport. Or we'd have headgear in the pros and they wear 20oz gloves and a single knockdown or drawing blood would stop a fight.

Boxing is bloodsport.

That is true boxing is a bloodsport just like American football is a collision sport. But guess what changes are done to ensure the safety of the college and NFL players today. Just like horse collar tackling is banned, trying to suplex the QB isn't allowed anymore, other sorts of tackling aren't allowed, and leather helmets has been replaced with plastic ones and now there are mandatory face bars for all of the helmets, etc.

In boxing many of the changes has come to at least make it a little safer and not some complete blood bath. So what do you want? Go back to bare knuckling and have all those rounds where boxing goes to 45rounds? Or how about fighting to the death like the old Roman Colliseum? Since you did say it's a blood sport?

As for 15 rounders, as you note, there is simply no reason to believe that those three rounds raise the risk in a significant way. The risk is there from round one of fight number one. As I said, it would be good for the sport to again tier fights the way we used to at 10-12-15 rounds.

And no, you don't escape ANY of the guilt you ascribe to "bloodthirsty" fans just because you'd like to see fights stopped sooner. The equation is simple. People who REALLY carew about the health of boxers support abolition of the sport.

Like I said there are risks in the sport that I do understand, just like there are risks for playing in the NFL, but guess what the NFL did make some changes to make it a little safer for the players. Boxing did the same I have no problem with that. Like I said there were medical reports out there that 15 rounds were more dangerous for the fighters. So do you have these reports that 15 rounds are not more dangerous? I would like to see them.

And I find it ridiculous to say that fans who care for the fighter's well being want the sport to cease to exist. That's like saying fans of the NFL who don't like to see horse collar tackles or cheap shots like they did in the 60s and 70s want the sport of football to be abolish because they care a little bit on the welfare of the players. See how ridiculous that argument is?

Just because you and some fans want to see a guy have a higher chance of dying in the ring or becoming another Gerald McClellan doesn't mean I do. And just because I don't like to see that happening doesn't mean I want

And btw, what's good for the sport is not a return to 15 rounders. What's good for the sport is to abolish the alphabet gangs and have one universally recognized world title. What's good for the sport is a return to same day weigh ins so that another guy doesn't have such an massive weight advantage against another or the fighters are not massively cutting weight. What's also good for the sport is to have one universally recognized commission that applies the same rule and standards everywhere. And finally what's good for the sport is to have many of it's matches on network television to reach another larger spectrum of fans to entice them and future participants into the sport.

Anyways it doesn't matter anyway because 15 rounders are just like pagers/beepers, it's become obsolete now in this modern world.

We'll just agree to disagree.

There is a mile wide hole in your logic trying to equate those who support 15 rounders as bloodthirsty while you are a caring compassionate guy who wants to protect fighters by only having twelve rounders. And that hole is stuffed with the broken and dead bodies of fighters permanently damaged or killed in twelve round or less contests. Isidro Perez, Jimmy Garcia, Nceba Gobozi, Draculae Derbez, Shawn Thomas, Ricardo Valasquez, David Thio, Jesus Ortiz, Patrick Stone, Clive Skwebu, Alan Goldstein, Kid Akeem Anifowashe and believe me I can keep going. As a matter of fact since the Kim-Mancini fight, through the end of 2006 (last data I could find) nearly 120 fighters died. That is almost exactly five fighters a year. And those are just fatalities, not those like G-Man or Oscar Diaz who have been pernanently injured.

That is almost exactly the same pace over the prior 25 years in the fifteen round era. In fact, despite your claims of studies (they don't exist) that show 12 rounders are safer? The facts don't bare it out.

If you were SERIOUSLY concerned about fighter safety, you'd find those numbers unacceptable and would be arguing for headgear or even shorter fights or 20 oz gloves.

Like I said present your studies that 12 rounders are more dangerous. Something like from the American Medical Association would do. A valid study. Do you have them?

BTW the 12 rounders and 24 hour weigh ins were introduced around the same time. There has been speculation that it's the 24 hour weigh ins where fighters are cutting so much weight and then rehydrating that's the problem. Because from what I heard from guys that are into this kind of stuff are that the body cannot be properly rehydrated especially the brain in such a short amount of time, hence the more injuries and death. I am not an expert but I have heard this argument before.

And yes I do know the sport is quite brutal even in the 12 round era, but I believe and many others do that this has to do with the 24 hour weigh in process and not being properly rehydrated as being the culprit and not because boxing went down from 15 to 12 rounds. Correlation does not equal causation. Meaning on the surface it seems that the 12 rounders are the culprit of the more deaths in this era when it more than likely could be something else like the rehydration process. And notice almost all of these deaths and serious injuries are below the HW division where fighters cut massive weight and then rehydrate on fight night. Coincidence? I think not.

So do you have those studies that some credible organization has published that the more recent deaths in boxing has to do with 12 round fights? Something that is a peer reviewed journal or from some really credible source would do.

Hey YOU were the one talking about studies comparing 12 and 15 round fights. As I've said a number of times THERE AREN'T ANY! I am NOT making the case 12 rounders are more dangerous. I am making the case there is no evidence they are safer. So the notion that 15 rounders are more dangerous rests on, well, nothing as near as I can figure.

Interestingly, in 1982 after the Kim-Mancini fight the AMA passed on dealing with the issue and focused on better record keeping, consistent rules etc.

Boxing is inherently risky and as a fan one MUST accept some amount of responsibility for the damage done to entertain us. The notion that supporting 12 rounds rather than 15 is a morally superior stance simply isn't supported by ANY data. In fact what the data suggests is the danger is inherent in ANY boxing contest with reasonable sized gloves, no headgear and Marquess of Queensbury Rules.

I should say this view isn't religion to me. If the data really did show we were getting something significant regarding safety by going to 12 rounders, my view might well be different. But it's just not what the data shows.

My views on same day weigh-ins are somewhat the same. I see zaero evidence day before weigh-ins provides any safety benefit. Instead what it leads to are, among other things, size mismatches and tragedies like Gatti-Gamache.