WBC To Create an Age Limit of 39 For World Title Bouts?

[Xyei]

lol, wow that is a ****** ass idea. I think Hopkins being a 40+ year old champion and doing pretty well against Tarver, Winky and Calzaghe pretty much proves that 40+ year olds can hang. not too mention the countless 40+ year old champions long before bhop.

yeah, WTF. What if a boxer doesn't even start his career until his i in his late 20s or early 30's? If they started that late, they would most likely be fine by 40.

[Jim Jeffries]

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.

Most people thought George Foreman beat Shannon Briggs when George was like 2 months shy of his 49th birthday. I think this ruling is crap, if a guy starts boxing late and takes care of himself, doesn't take a lot of punishment in the ring, he should be allowed to box as long as he is able.

[Feint]

The sport does not need this rule. As someone mentioned a boxer needs to be medically cleared before they can fight.

[ИATAS]

Most people thought George Foreman beat Shannon Briggs when George was like 2 months shy of his 49th birthday. I think this ruling is crap, if a guy starts boxing late and takes care of himself, doesn't take a lot of punishment in the ring, he should be allowed to box as long as he is able.

Not too mention he was 45 when he Knocked Moorer the **** out!

[Ryn0]

****** rule............

[j.razor]

39?

thats bull****!!!!!!!! dont try 2 stop a man from making a living...i would take that personal ! why u think u have referee's 4 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kris Silver]

An online petition should be started against this, would demonstrate the the WBC just how much fans whom pay theyre wages wouldn't like it, and make them and others in the industry think twice. Another organisation could even stop them, if nothing else on age discrimination grounds.

[Mr. Ryan]

If boxing commission's could effectively filter out fighters who are unfit for combat, there would be no need for an age limit. As it is, fighters are holding out for those last paydays well past the age when they should be fighting.

I was so upset that Evander Holyfield was allowed to fight after being suspended following the Larry Donald fight. I felt that should have been a red flag that no one could deny. Instead he's allowed to run off a winning streak against the least talented bunch of heavyweights that could be dragged up and then allowed to fight for one of the titles in the division.

Is there no accounting for past histories? Every fight after that clearly defined line (The Toney fight) when Holyfield should have hung them up is elevating the risk of long-term damage.

I still don't think the WBC cares much for the health of fighters when they are allowing a medically suspended fighter in Oscar Larios fight for an interim title. Give me a break.

Being old isn't alright, but bleeding on the brain is no a big deal?

[Mr. Ryan]

Not too mention he was 45 when he Knocked Moorer the **** out!

You forget that up until the knockout, Foreman was getting his ass kicked by a guy who wouldn't have gotten out of the first round with him in his prime.

[Njord777]

I think the reason it seems so shockingly brutal as a rule is the fact that it destroys the idea- illusion or not- that a man can keep fighting until he decides to quit. The boxer would no longer make the decision if he can battle it out; even if often to wrong decision is made. There's a certain freedom that comes with no age limit...we never know how far a boxer will battle, how long his career will wage on....with this rule- forty and you're done. The end. It's the finality of it all that gets to me.