Would you rather see Usyk-Parker or Usyk-Dubois II?

[champion4ever]

Because it landed below the navel

These weird ass rules need to change. Since when has punching your opponent in the lower abdomen is considered a foul?

It has always been punching your opponent in the groin was a low blow. It appears to me that they want to take body punching out off boxing.

[champion4ever]

WTF? Are really saying that punch landed on the area above Usyk's hips?

Do you know what "hips" are?

You just posted Usyk’s hip line and belly button. Any referee could have easily ruled that a legal punch.

In addition, they wouldn’t have been wrong or have their decision overturned either. Once again that referee was both partial and biased.

He could have easily counted Usyk out if he wanted to but chose not to. A referee could have made a judgement call either way and not have been wrong.

The punch partially grazed the navel. Which made it a legal blow.

[billeau2]

For what it's worth, for the decades and decades I've watched Boxing, the "belt line" was generally always considered to be OK for the most part.

Kind of like how holding is illegal yet fighters hold none stop. Guess it's kind of the same, or similar at least.

Anyway, no matter what side of the fence you sit on a low blow is the refs discretion so fact of the matter is the shot was in the position where the rules state it can be deemed low, it was deemed low by the ref and therefore wasn't a legal punch.

Excellent post Dan. I have experienced the same reality. One can hypothesize that the beltline was the reference because it had a lot to do with how a fighter had their shorts on. So the ref would always (and still do) establish a beltline. Perhaps because the navel is covered by the shorts at times?

The holding as well. Two sets of rules here: "Protect yourself at all times." "Holding is illegal." So, clinching can be defined as types of strategies to temporarily tie an opponent up, while holding becomes excessive when it is employed beyond a certain point.

In both instances it comes down to the ref's discretion. Excessive clinching is something that can also be considered in the scoring, while holding at a certain point prevents a boxing match. Same with low blows, a point can be deducted at a certain point.

What caught people in the instance of the Dubois and Usyk fight was how profound the effects of the blow where on Usyk. It could have literally determined the fight, though not necessarily (Usyk may have gotten up if he knew the blow would stand).

[billeau2]

These weird ass rules need to change. Since when has punching your opponent in the lower abdomen is considered a foul?

It has always been punching your opponent in the groin was a low blow. It appears to me that they want to take body punching out off boxing.

Maybe the reasoning has to do with the space between the navel and groin and a boxing glove's dimensions. But refs always give a measurement they are comfortable employing, so there is definitely a contradiction.

Now one would imagine a ref is showing how the trunks worn involve the distance specified in the rules... But no ref ever really confirms that fact do they? Instead they say something along the lines of "I will consider a blow______ " while they show the area allowed on each fighter. I see your point that it becomes a bit of a grey area.

[Smash]

i wouldnt be putting any cold hard cash on sniffles unless hes got his jab first, oh wait he afraid of those as well

[kafkod]

Again, you have not answered the question. Why was Andre Ward able to get away with landing all of those low blows?

Why wasn’t he penalized, disqualified or why didn’t Kathy Duva file a formal protest for those fouls?

Perhaps, the rules have been amended but historically belt line punches were considered legal. It has always been protocol to land punches above the hips not the belly button.

These questions have already been answered. Kovalev and Duva did formally protest against the fouls.

Ward got away with punching Kovalev low because Tony Weeks is a corrupt POS of a ref.

[kafkod]

i wouldnt be putting any cold hard cash on sniffles unless hes got his jab first, oh wait he afraid of those as well

[IronDanHamza]

Excellent post Dan. I have experienced the same reality. One can hypothesize that the beltline was the reference because it had a lot to do with how a fighter had their shorts on. So the ref would always (and still do) establish a beltline. Perhaps because the navel is covered by the shorts at times?

The holding as well. Two sets of rules here: "Protect yourself at all times." "Holding is illegal." So, clinching can be defined as types of strategies to temporarily tie an opponent up, while holding becomes excessive when it is employed beyond a certain point.

In both instances it comes down to the ref's discretion. Excessive clinching is something that can also be considered in the scoring, while holding at a certain point prevents a boxing match. Same with low blows, a point can be deducted at a certain point.

What caught people in the instance of the Dubois and Usyk fight was how profound the effects of the blow where on Usyk. It could have literally determined the fight, though not necessarily (Usyk may have gotten up if he knew the blow would stand).

I have little doubt that Usyk gets up before 10 if the ref counted. I think he just took the time because he was entitled to after the call.

To me, just brings more of a storyline round the rematch though. Sure, Usyk dominated and stopped him but there are moving parts here, #1 the fight was in Poland, this one Wembley, that will definitely be a component.

#2 and more importantly, Dubois is coming off 3 good wins as betting underdog and his confidence is at sky high, these things can make huge differences. I don't see the first fight being the same as the second.

As for Parker, he definitely has done enough to deserve a title shot but as far as I'm concerned personally I couldn't have any less interest in that fight vs Usyk stylistically. I'd be very surprised if there's even a competitive round in the fight. Parker doesn't have the punch of Dubois to have a punchers chance and stylistically he he's not got a chance in hell of beating Usyk on points.

I don't think anyone at HW currently beats Usyk to be honest the only person I thought had a good chance was Fury and he couldn't do it.

But out of the current options, for me, the best of the bunch is Dubois. I'd actually rather see Usyk-Kabayel than Usyk-Parker personally.

[kafkod]

At the end of the day. Boxing is an art not science. Every referee is different. That referee made a judgement call by not counting Usyk out. He was both biased and partial.

Now if Referee Tony Weeks was officiating that bout; Then chances are Triple D would have won the bout by way of KO to the body.

Referee’s are human just like everyone else and have their favorites and non favorites. They have broad discretion while enforcing the rules.

Had that referee decided to count Usyk out he would not have been wrong but it would have ticked Usyk fan boys off. However, he just simply chose to not to.

The ref wouldn't have counted Usyk out because Usyk would have gotten up if the ref had started counting over him. The ref called the low blow and told Usyk to take his time recovering.

[kafkod]

I have little doubt that Usyk gets up before 10 if the ref counted. I think he just took the time because he was entitled to after the call.

To me, just brings more of a storyline round the rematch though. Sure, Usyk dominated and stopped him but there are moving parts here, #1 the fight was in Poland, this one Wembley, that will definitely be a component.

#2 and more importantly, Dubois is coming off 3 good wins as betting underdog and his confidence is at sky high, these things can make huge differences. I don't see the first fight being the same as the second.

As for Parker, he definitely has done enough to deserve a title shot but as far as I'm concerned personally I couldn't have any less interest in that fight vs Usyk stylistically. I'd be very surprised if there's even a competitive round in the fight. Parker doesn't have the punch of Dubois to have a punchers chance and stylistically he he's not got a chance in hell of beating Usyk on points.

I don't think anyone at HW currently beats Usyk to be honest the only person I thought had a good chance was Fury and he couldn't do it.

But out of the current options, for me, the best of the bunch is Dubois. I'd actually rather see Usyk-Kabayel than Usyk-Parker personally.

Out of the current options, the only one who beats Usyk is Father Time.