How many rounds would you prefer in a title fight?

[FLY TY]

12 is a good enough for a boxers sake.........

yea, its their health.

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

12 is fine!!!!

[Spray_resistant]

How about either 13 or 11 rounds to eliminate closer scores and many draws?

[PittyPat]

How about either 13 or 11 rounds to eliminate closer scores and many draws?

Fouls and KDs can make that redundant, though. Sometimes a draw is justified if a fight really was that close.

[horge]

There should be only one round.
No time limit.

[TRIBULUS]

13.

15 is too much, 12 is garbage beecause it's way to easy to get a draw. 13 is fine.

[TRIBULUS]

How about either 13 or 11 rounds to eliminate closer scores and many draws?

11 is not enough, 13 would be great.

[PittyPat]

15 is too much, 12 is garbage beecause it's way to easy to get a draw. 13 is fine.

It'd be way too easy to get a draw with 13 rounds as well. Say if you have 124-123 in an otherwise clean fight, but the winner suffers a KD or commits a foul - you'd still get a draw.

Draws are part of the sport IMO. Bad judging is what ruins things.

[Spray_resistant]

It'd be way too easy to get a draw with 13 rounds as well. Say if you have 124-123 in an otherwise clean fight, but the winner suffers a KD or commits a foul - you'd still get a draw.

Draws are part of the sport IMO. Bad judging is what ruins things.

I guess it will never be perfect and we can't always get a clear winner

[Thread Stealer]

I prefer 15.

The official reason given for the change from 15 to 12 was fighter safety, but has it really proven to be safer? Fighters could just pace themselves a little different and the damage done could be just about the same. Fighters have been killed/permamently damaged in fights that went 11 or 12...does that mean we should change to 10?

The change in weigh-in procedures bother me more than the change in number of rounds.