Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Came up with a perfect new rule in boxing that will instantly fix boxing for the better & bring back mainstream appeal"

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "Came up with a perfect new rule in boxing that will instantly fix boxing for the better & bring back mainstream appeal"

    What if there was a new rule in boxing where if your opponent is the only one landing tons of punches round after rd/being the only one attacking & a fighter is clearly just trying to survive 12 rds,the ref is required by rule to deduct pts & then to stop the fight(or just outright stop it after gives warning (s)). If this was the rule in boxing it would be a hell of a lot more entertaining because it would force fighters like Callum Smith/Chavez jr to actually fight back rather than try just to survive 12 rds when they know they lost but don't want to be kod.

    Basically it can be called the required offense rule that says a fighter has to be offensive enough at least every few rds otherwise they'll be told they need to start attacking if they don't want to be stopped (say after they're warned they have 1-2 rds to mount offense)
    Last edited by kushking; 04-17-2021, 04:00 PM.

  • #2
    Those rules already exist.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Toffee View Post
      Those rules already exist.
      Theres no rules saying someone like Smith can't just get clobbered for 12 rds like he did,nor Chavez jr? Otherwise they would've been rightly stopped

      Basically what im saying is that Smith should've been warned by the ref & told if he didn't start mounting offense hed be stopped.(if the rule I'm saying existed)
      Last edited by kushking; 04-17-2021, 03:50 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kushking View Post

        Theres no rules saying someone like Smith can't just get clobbered for 12 rds like he did,nor Chavez jr? Otherwise they would've been rightly stopped

        Basically what im saying is that Smith should've been warned by the ref & told if he didn't start mounting offense hed hed stopped.(if the rule I'm saying existed)
        There's absolutely that rule. One or both fighters can be warned, deducted points, or disqualified for not engaging.

        And of course a fighter taking punishment but offering nothing back can be stopped. Referee decision is final on that one.

        I don't think you'd apply them to Smith though. He was being roundly beaten but was still in the fight. He was engaging but was ineffective.

        I'm not sure what you're insisting on from Smith? That he be a better boxer? You can't put that in the rules!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Toffee View Post

          There's absolutely that rule. One or both fighters can be warned, deducted points, or disqualified for not engaging.

          And of course a fighter taking punishment but offering nothing back can be stopped. Referee decision is final on that one.

          I don't think you'd apply them to Smith though. He was being roundly beaten but was still in the fight. He was engaging but was ineffective.

          I'm not sure what you're insisting on from Smith? That he be a better boxer? You can't put that in the rules!
          Im saying that there should be a minimum offense rule,where if a fighter is being too defensive without attacking enough for several rds straight they should be forced to attack. (If there is that rule its sure as hell never been enforced nearly enough)

          What I'm saying is there shouldn't be any fights where a fighter is allowed to go 0-12 trying to survive like chavez chavez jr v canelo.

          Theres always talk of deaths & mitigating them in boxing,this can accomplish that too.
          Last edited by kushking; 04-17-2021, 03:57 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kushking View Post
            What if there was a new rule in boxing where if your opponent is the only one landing tons of punches round after rd/being the only one attacking & a fighter is clearly just trying to survive 12 rds,the ref is required by rule to deduct pts & then to stop the fight(or just outright stop it after gives warning (s)). If this was the rule in boxing it would be a hell of a lot more entertaining because it would force fighters like Callum Smith/Chavez jr to actually fight back rather than try just to survive 12 rds when they know they lost but don't want to be kod.

            Basically it can be called the required offense rule that says a fighter has to be offensive enough at least every few rds otherwise they'll be told they need to start attacking if they don't want to be stopped (say after they're warned they have 1-2 rds to mount offense)
            They had a similar rule in MMA, back in the Pride FC days, where if fighters don't engage, they get a yellow card which deducts 10% of their purse which goes to their opponent.

            Anyways, as far as stopping a fighter not making any effort, one problem is they're just gonna btch and complain about an "unfair" stoppage despite not doing sht to try to win.

            I do agree though, something should be done for fighters who slip into survival mode. Fighters do get warned and stopped, but only if they're taking a visible beating. That doesn't apply to fighters who make zero effort to win and only try to last the distance, but I think it should.

            It would save the fans the trouble of sitting through 12 rounds of a Canelo vs. Chavez Jr. or Pac vs. Clottey type of fight.

            But I also think fights like that don't happen too often, especially in big fights, maybe that's why a rule like that hasn't been enforced.
            Last edited by Willy Wanker; 04-17-2021, 04:24 PM.
            kushking kushking Zaroku Zaroku like this.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Willy Wanker View Post

              They had a similar rule in MMA, back in the Pride FC days, where if fighters don't engage, they get a yellow card which deducts 10% of their purse which goes to their opponent.

              Anyways, as far as stopping a fighter not making any effort, one problem is they're just gonna btch and complain about an "unfair" stoppage despite not doing sht to try to win.

              I do agree though, something should be done for fighters who slip into survival mode. Fighters do get warned and stopped, but only if they're taking a visible beating. That doesn't apply to fighters who make zero effort to win and only try to last the distance, but I think it should.

              It would save the fans the trouble of sitting through 12 rounds of a Canelo vs. Chavez Jr. or Pac vs. Clottey type of fight.
              I like this rule, raise a yellow flag and make the fighter not engaging lose money.

              Comment


              • #8
                Why not penalize the fighter who sees that he has an obviously timid opponent yet does not go in for the kill?

                It takes two to tango............ ................Rockin'

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by kushking View Post
                  What if there was a new rule in boxing where if your opponent is the only one landing tons of punches round after rd/being the only one attacking & a fighter is clearly just trying to survive 12 rds,the ref is required by rule to deduct pts & then to stop the fight(or just outright stop it after gives warning (s)). If this was the rule in boxing it would be a hell of a lot more entertaining because it would force fighters like Callum Smith/Chavez jr to actually fight back rather than try just to survive 12 rds when they know they lost but don't want to be kod.

                  Basically it can be called the required offense rule that says a fighter has to be offensive enough at least every few rds otherwise they'll be told they need to start attacking if they don't want to be stopped (say after they're warned they have 1-2 rds to mount offense)
                  Hmm.

                  If your rule was a thing:

                  Manny would have lost against Bradley in the second fight...

                  Crawford would have lost against Postol

                  Manny would have lost against Keef in the second half

                  Andrade would have more losses than wins

                  Joshua would have two losses to Ruiz

                  Tyson Fury would not be undefeated

                  Wilder would likely still be undefeated and lineal champion, since he would have gotten his hand raised against Fury and Fury would have retired (his words)

                  Saunders would have lost against Eubank

                  I mean, I could go on and on.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by revelated View Post

                    Hmm.

                    If your rule was a thing:

                    Manny would have lost against Bradley in the second fight...

                    Crawford would have lost against Postol

                    Manny would have lost against Keef in the second half

                    Andrade would have more losses than wins

                    Joshua would have two losses to Ruiz

                    Tyson Fury would not be undefeated

                    Wilder would likely still be undefeated and lineal champion, since he would have gotten his hand raised against Fury and Fury would have retired (his words)

                    Saunders would have lost against Eubank

                    I mean, I could go on and on.
                    I don't think those rules apply in most those cases, I'm saying in cases were its a blowout & a fighter is happily losing rd rd after rd just to survive 12 rds. I could see AJ fight being far different in current rules if he didn't have a handpicked paid ref that kept seperating Ruiz from AJ the entire fight.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP