Is holding and/or clinching technically allowed in boxing? If boxing is supposed to follow both the Marquess of Queensberry Rules and the modernized rules per the Association of Boxing Commissions, the Queensberry Rules state that hugging is not allowed and the ABC rules state that holding is not allowed.
Of course, we've all seen holding/clinching/hugging used in fights, sometimes very effectively to stifle an opponent. One case where it was used to great effect is Mosley vs. Margarito. I loved that Mosley punished Margarito after the plaster incident, but the fight has an asterisk on it given how much Mosley tied up Margarito.
It seems to vary per ref how much it's allowed.
Dont want to write something long but I hate the hit and clinch style which is for the purpose of slowing down the pace and not giving opponents an opportunity to fire back.
This is why I love lomachenkos style, he doesn't need to clinch to get out of the danger zone. His footwork is so fluent that he is nowhere to.find after his attack.
Very different things, there's hugging and holding... Then there's "staying close ..locking up your opponent during their attempt to fire while I position myself for more work along the rope all while leaning on the fighter creating a tough and hard fight"
The second is an art of inside fighting that some confuse with just blatant holding
When they're stunned it's ok, but points should be taken off when it's excessive and it's obvious they're just coasting. Tyson's opponents held on for dear life and it was becoming a problem, but Mills Lane took a firm approach and took a point off from one of his opponents early on in the fight. I wish more refs today would take the same approach.
Whats the difference between clinching & holding in boxing anyway? I've never been super clear on that.
To me the rules says any deliberate clinching or holding is a foul doe so that says to me most of the bs we see is a foul when guys are separated. I suppose the real problem is who do you take points from when so much of the holding/clinching is "consensual".
That's a tough one. I guess points should be taken away from anyone that deliberately holds their opponent without actually fighting on the inside.
Whats the difference between clinching & holding in boxing anyway? I've never been super clear on that.
To me the rules says any deliberate clinching or holding is a foul doe so that says to me most of the bs we see is a foul when guys are separated. I suppose the real problem is who do you take points from when so much of the holding/clinching is "consensual".
Don't try to argue with them. They are Floyd and Ward fans.
There were way more holding back in the old days PPL just dont want to hear it bc guys like Johnson and Ali are great and used excessive LEGAL clinchin (not holding behind the head ) but fighters who use it today are lazy and cant fight?
Clinchin is a part of boxing its a skill in itself , excessive clinchin to just avoid damage or fighting for 12 rnds is not ......
this makes no sense. so you can do it but only sometimes? why else would you clinch other than to avoid damage and avoid fighting? the only other reason would be to hold and hit which is also clearly illegal. or possibly to wrestle your way into position to throw a punch after breaking a clinch like ward does but it says no wrestling as well. if only refs knew the rules....
Yea its the most often committed, least called foul in boxing.
https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NAC/NAC-467.html
Its f#cking retarded. I wish boxing took a more aggressive stance on holding as I believe it hurts the flow of the fight & also impairs ones ability to score a KO, which is exactly what most fans wanna see, which ultimately hurts the bottom line of the sport. No holding at all & points taken more often for it = boxing is a better more fun sport.
Exactly man, you nailed it, great point.