Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Things in Boxing that piss me off

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by CubanGuyNYC View Post
    I understand that most fans use the words "hold" and "clinch" interchangeably, but there's a distinction. You don't see the difference, so I'll try to tackle the problem from another angle.

    The rules you cite use the word "hold" in the following rule: "You can't hold your opponent and hit him at the same time..." Yet another rule uses the word "clinch": "When the referee breaks you from a clinch, you have to take a full step back..." The writer isn't using different words for creative purposes. Specific words are being used because "clinch" and "hold" have similar but different shades of meaning.

    If clinching is illegal, why does the rule say, "When the referee breaks you from a clinch, you have to take a full step back; you cannot immediately hit your opponent--that's called 'hitting on the break' and is illegal." Why doesn't the ref issue a warning or deduct a point for clinching in the first place? Because clinching is legal, that's why.
    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.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by Funky_Monk View Post
      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.
      a clinch and a hold are different. A Fighter who is CLINCHING can still fight whilst doing so, but a figher who is HOLDING can not fight while doing so. A proper clinch keeps an arm free, both men can work out of that and 'fight out of it'. A hold though, is when a fighter hugs his man up and doesn't allow him or even himself to get any work off, that warrants for a referee to break them up, because they can not fight out of that.

      What Devon was doing to Marco was holding. What ward did with kessler was clinching.

      Comment


      • #43
        mandatories
        in a stale division, so be it, fight who the organizations want
        but in a division with good names, let the champs fight good comp
        don't cockblock unification matches either
        guys get stripped and big fights get blocked for stupid mandatories
        it's annoying as hell

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by Jack Napier View Post
          mandatories
          in a stale division, so be it, fight who the organizations want
          but in a division with good names, let the champs fight good comp
          don't cockblock unification matches either
          guys get stripped and big fights get blocked for stupid mandatories
          it's annoying as hell
          Co-sign.

          Stop blocking good/big fights with BS.

          Stop banning dudes for exposing up and comers. Collazo and Pirog immediately come to mind. Instead of trying to sign them up right after the fight, they ****ing ban them and trash their names.

          Low risk high reward fights rather than the obvious #1 vs #2 guy fights.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by intoccabile View Post
            Clinching isn't illegal. Holding is.

            There is a difference.
            Yeah i know, but legalization doesn't stop it from being annoying.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by ElMeroChingon View Post
              Yeah i know, but legalization doesn't stop it from being annoying.
              Lol at the posters trying to say that clinching is different than holding. You can't even hold with one arm and punch with the other, it's not allowed. Why am I even bothering...

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by pesticid View Post
                Lol at the posters trying to say that clinching is different than holding. You can't even hold with one arm and punch with the other, it's not allowed. Why am I even bothering...
                Whether it's illegal or not, it's happening and it needs to stop.

                Comment


                • #48
                  whats boxing without clinching??????????? its a part of the game buddy and should be used in certain situations... but not all the time

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by ElMeroChingon View Post
                    Whether it's illegal or not, it's happening and it needs to stop.
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by turbotime View Post
                      Or when a fighter has a good performance, everyone jumps on the bandwagon.
                      They have a bad performance, everyone jumps off and calls that fighter "exposed".
                      this is one of my biggest dislikes in the boxing community

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP