Things in Boxing that piss me off

[CubanGuyNYC]

Originally Posted by Funky_Monk

You say they are different as others do in the thread, yet there has been no definition of holding and clinching.
Other than some weird anology to hands and fingers which bears little resemblance.
I'm not taking a side here just asking for clarification.

One example: Picture the two combatants in one corner of the ring. One has his back to the ring post, the other is directly in front of him. The one in front holds (you wouldn't say he "clinches") his opponent's arms against his body with his hands. This act would be considered illegal. You can expect the ref to separate the fighters, look the offender in the eye, point and call attention to the foul. (You know what that looks like.)

The classic image of the clinch -- the defensive boxer with his arms around the aggressor's torso, while the latter flails and tries to escape the clinch -- is perfectly legal. (We all know what this looks like, too.) If a boxer were to continue clinching after the ref instructs him to break, the referee could warn, deduct a point, or even disqualify the offender.

[jose830]

I hate referees that bet money on the
fight they working on that's what Juanma told me, Lol

I really hate early stoppages.
(not Juanmas he lost fair and square, a well fought battle)

[CubanGuyNYC]

Originally Posted by pesticid

It is illegal and every time it happens there needs to be a warning, three warnings and deduct a point. That's it, enforce the rules but they are not gonna do that against Bhop, Ward, Wlad and Devon - no way. Imagine if Hopkins didn't hold against Zaghe he would've been undressed as a fighter a submerged in the later rounds.

Are you saying that guys like Hopkins, Ward, W. Klitschko and Alexander are given a pass? lol The last I checked, they allow unknown journeymen to clinch as well. Tune in to "Friday Night Fights" this week, I'll guarantee you there's some clinching going on in one of the undercards...and no point deductions. It's not because the refs are "looking the other way." It's because clinching has been around as long as boxing itself and is legal.

What other rule is so blatantly "disregarded," as you claim? Rabbit punching? Hitting on the break? Hitting below the belt? Typically, if a ref observes any violation, he calls the fighter's attention to the offense in some manner.

In "Boxing: A Self-Instruction Manual" by Edwin D. Haislet, pg. 58, the author describes the proper way to clinch. Imagine that! A book on boxing fundamentals offering instruction on how to execute an illegal tactic! I wonder why Mr. Haislet doesn't describe the proper way of hitting below the belt or some other foul....

[CubanGuyNYC]

Originally Posted by jose830

I hate referees that bet money on the
fight they working on that's what Juanma told me, Lol

I really hate early stoppages.
(not Juanmas he lost fair and square, a well fought battle)

Early stoppages suck, but early deaths are far worse.

[pesticid]

Originally Posted by CubanGuyNYC

Are you saying that guys like Hopkins, Ward, W. Klitschko and Alexander are given a pass? lol The last I checked, they allow unknown journeymen to clinch as well. Tune in to "Friday Night Fights" this week, I'll guarantee you there's some clinching going on in one of the undercards...and no point deductions. It's not because the refs are "looking the other way." It's because clinching has been around as long as boxing itself and is legal.

What other rule is so blatantly "disregarded," as you claim? Rabbit punching? Hitting on the break? Hitting below the belt? Typically, if a ref observes any violation, he calls the fighter's attention to the offense in some manner.

In "Boxing: A Self-Instruction Manual" by Edwin D. Haislet, pg. 58, the author describes the proper way to clinch. Imagine that! A book on boxing fundamentals offering instruction on how to execute an illegal tactic! I wonder why Mr. Haislet doesn't describe the proper way of hitting below the belt or some other foul....

I can write a book on boxing how to illegally headbutt but to appear accidental, so what of it? I think Ruiz should write a book about clinching, even forehead in your face Holyfield couldn't get out of it.

It's not within the rules, stop trying to convince people that clinching and holding are two different things.

Just cause Abner mares hit King Kong 10,000 times under the belt and the ref did nothing about it, does not make it legal. Sometimes referees do their job like Khan vs Peterson. Khan was pushing, holding and what not and he was deducted for that thank God, it ended up being a better fight. How about the Collazo vs Berto fight, Berto was deducted points for clinching - fine holding (freaking semantics) and the fight ended up being great as well.

How about Khan knocking out Judah with a shot under the belt, hey it must be legal - the ref did count out Zab.

How about Rahman hitting James in the kidneys the entire fight and james pissing blood for weeks after. The ref did nothing so it must be legal.

Refs are **** and the majority of them allow holding/clinching in big fights and even in not so big fights because they don't want to look like a black sheep for penalizing one of the fighters. That's the reason they rarely deduct points not cause it's allowed. Otherwise they wouldn't ask participants to break and give them warnings.

[pesticid]

Here are the 12 rules that comprise the fundamental rules of boxing:

To be a fair stand-up boxing match in a 24-foot ring, or as near that size as practicable.
No wrestling or hugging (clinching) allowed.
The rounds to be of three minutes duration, and one minute's time between rounds.
If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man.
A man hanging on the ropes in a helpless state, with his toes off the ground, shall be considered down.
No seconds or any other person to be allowed in the ring during the rounds.
Should the contest be stopped by any unavoidable interference, the referee to name the time and place as soon as possible for finishing the contest; so that the match must be won and lost, unless the backers of both men agree to draw the stakes.
The gloves to be fair-sized boxing gloves of the best quality and new.
Should a glove burst, or come off, it must be replaced to the referee's satisfaction.
A man on one knee is considered down and if struck is entitled to the stakes.
That no shoes or boots with ****es or sprigs be allowed. [6]
The contest in all other respects to be governed by revised London Prize Ring Rules

[pesticid]

I am just bumping this thread in light of last night's fight