-
-
I think this is a ****** rule...
I agree more with what Felix Trinidad Senior says about handling it case by case.
I think a fighter like Hopkins (who appears to still be good even though past his prime) is very well capable of doing well and protecting himself in a fight...
Maybe a fighter who is punch-drunk and over the hill looking for a big payday but has not done anything that would make someone believe he will do anything but collect money shouldnt be allowed to challenge for the title.
Its not a good rule...
it should be based on where the fighter is currently.Comment
-
****** Rulin because i haven't seen enough evidence in which older fighters are getting battered in the ring to the point where u fear their safety and health..if anythin the older fighters seem to be making impressive accounts for themselves considering their age (hopkins, johnson)...i think it should be taken on a case to case basis as i think it would do more harm than good for the majority of older fighters....
i like the irony that trini senior suggested the case to case basisComment
-
I think this is less about the health of the fighters and more about protecting the credibility of the belts.
Look at the situation we have at LHW right now. You have Hopkins at 43, Tarver and Jones and Glen Johnson are 39, Calzaghe almost 37, Winky Wright 36. These are some of the biggest names in boxing and it is not inconceivable that with fights usually happening once a year they could quite easily keep any belts they hold tied up fighting each other forever, avoiding younger guys who would probably beat them. Fighters fighting later and later in life sems to me to be an increasing trend and might actually get worse. I think the WBC is just trying to ensure a situation like this doesn't happen in the future.
Another possibility is that the WBC is protecting itself from future lawsuits. There is no way in hell that fighting past 39 can possibly be good for you, it was unthinkable in the past. The WBC have to sanction fights and it would be easy for a fighter who winds up with neurological impairment to turn around and blame the WBC, saying they should never have sanctioned his later fights in the first place.Comment
-
I could understand 50+ but not 40Comment
-
That would destroy the LHW division. Most of the top fighters in that division are over 39 years of age.
39-year old Glen Johnson recently fought for Dawson's WBC title and despite a 14 year age difference he certainly did not look out of his league in that fight.Comment
-
****** rule, don't know why they'd really consider it, what have they got to back it up really, not much, there's way more to the contrary.
Surely they'd struggle to get it through on age discriminatory grounds anyway, certainly pretty strict laws on age, nation, colour grounds and all sorts. The English Premiere Football league most likely can't enable a minimum amount of home grown players, even though the other players are just within the EU. How would they push through a rule like this world wide. Can't see happening, certainly shouldn't.Comment
-
If the age limit is 39, I understand why Calzaghe is retiring. He won't have any opponents left to fightComment
-
Just out of curiousity, what if the reigning champ is 39 years old? Does that mean he can't defend his title when he turns 40?Comment
Tweet
Comment