Cuts caused by punches should be considered accidental

1. Any boxer who doesn't attempt to hurt and cut his opponent is in the wrong sport.. 2. Some cut easily; some never cut. Some can take a decent punch; some can't take a light jab. It's another natural advantage/disadvantage.. 3. This ain't taikwando..

never go full retard bro

:lol1: :lol1:

You're making up things I never said so that you can win an argument I'm not arguing. Here, suck on it, (from the LATimes); After a ninth round in which Cotto continued to beat on the eye, the primary ringside physician, Dr. Barry Jordan, ruled Margarito couldn't see out of the eye and told referee Steve Smoger to stop the fight despite the objections of Margarito and his corner men. "The eye was completely shut," Smoger said. "He couldn't see out and I couldn't see in. We have a rule in New York that if you can't see out of an eye, we have to stop the fight." What I think he's getting at isn't the actual reason they stopped the fight. It was more about TS's argument that boxers don't really intend to cut another opponent with a punch. Cotto definitely had the intent to inflict a cut, swell, damage, etc. on Margarito's eye. So IF the fight was stopped on a cut above the eye, it was definitely part of Cotto's gameplan to do so, thus nullifying TS's argument.

Rafael Marquez vs Israel Vazquez 4 - Did you see the scar tissue above Vazquez's eye? You can't tell me that Marquez didn't intend to cut that eye. I'm sure that wasn't the only part of his game plan, but it definitely wasn't accidental.

I know a lot of people will disagree but give me a logical argument. Scenario. Fighter is pitching an 8 round shut out so far, is gassing and has just been cut bad. The other fighter is starting to come on strong, he isn't going to win on the cards. So what the fighter that is coming on strong needs to do in this situation, is avoid punching that part of his head so he can get a proper knockout? His own clean punches could cause him to lose the fight? No, absolutely not, I can see your reasoning but there are plenty of problems with it.

This is false, so false. Ali use to twist his jab at the end to pinch/turn the skin. he was intending on cutting his man. Many fighters will look for grazing blows, purposely, because it will cut their man. That is all.

Omg re reading this thread makes me just sick.

Nah..... Not feeling this one at all

After reading the opening post I felt 1,200 brain cells immediately commit suicide.

Think about it, no fighter is actively trying to cut his opponent, the fact that one punch happens to cause a cut is something that is out of the fighters control. You can hit a guy 200 times and not cause a single cut and you can cut a guy with the first big punch you land. Therefore the cut is accidental which means it should be treated like an accident. If the doctor decides that a fighter cannot continue because of a cut caused by a punch, we should go to the scorecards if 4 rounds have been completed. I know a lot of people will disagree but give me a logical argument. http://www.deviantart.com/download/297131025/come_at_me_bros_by_theacornmusicplayer-d4wwjrl.png No cut from a punch is accidental. You are trying to hurt the dude in front of you. You are trying to knock him down, make him bleed, etc. One you see blood you go after him, it's a big boost when you see blood, and it changes fights. The system in place is fine. Boxing needs a replay systems and that's it.

Boxers do have the ability to Cut each other on purpose, that has always been a strategy if an opponet cuts easy you throw slicing punches. in the Hatton vs floyd, Hatton had not been cut in 3 YEARS before the fight floyd camp kept saying they are going to stop hatton on cuts Lampley even mentions it during the ring walk fast forward to the third round floyd hits hatton with 3 slicing punches and cuts hattons eye yes you can cut someone on purpose, erik morrales was great at cutting people up because he threw sharp slicing punches

Im sure that his main point is that it sucks when they stop a fight on a guy who still has some rounds and determination to keep fighting, but the ref stops it based on the doc's advice. But, rules are rules... I agree. And, I think the emotional responses we're seeing are tied into the classic Vitali vs Lewis argument that's so popular around here.

Im sure that his main point is that it sucks when they stop a fight on a guy who still has some rounds and determination to keep fighting, but the ref stops it based on the doc's advice. But, rules are rules...

Some fighters do intentionally try to cut the other fighter with legal blows. In the Cotto Margarito fight Cotto said before the fight he would target Margarito's bad eye just as everyone advised him to do. Some fights with fast hands and ripping punches are known to cut other fighters up more than most fighters do. Pacquiao often makes a mess out of his opponent's face. Other fighters are more cut prone than most. Fighters sometimes do try to cut their opponent up by targeting scare tissue where that fighter has been cut before. I don't agree that a cut caused by legal blows should be treated as an accident and that will never become a rule.

Certain punches like flicker jabs are designed to cause cuts, so it's blatantly untrue that fighters don't try to cut their opponents.

Take a lap man, take a lap.

If you walked up to someone and punched them in the faces which resulted in a big gash opening on their forehead do you think the prosecution will be concerned with you not intending to cause the cut? The determining factor would be your intention to cause damage which is what applies in the ring. If we are to follow your logic Marquez v Pacquiao IV would have gone to the score card as Marquez did not intent to put Pacquiao to sleep. absolutely. marquez didn't bring pacquiao a glass of warm milk and a blanket. there was no premeditation.

Honestly the worst thread i've ever seen.

Yes! In the face!!!!