Tweet
History would have changed if the rule of stopping when your opponent is knocked down was not in the rule book.
At one point in time, you were allowed to hover over your opponent when you knocked him down. Fights of Dempsey come to mind.
And then it became the "neutral corner" rule....and of course the "standing 8."
In MMA, when the opponent is down, like more towards a real street-fight...and let's not get to deep into what is a "real street-fight"...but sticking with my point...you are allowed to continue to attack to finish off your opponent. He is hurt, you finish him.
Dempsey may have beaten Tunney.
Louis may have lost more fights.
Same with Patterson, Ali, Marciano, Holmes, Holyfield, etc.
I bring this up because of the debate of giving massive credit to a fighter that is down and can come back to win since I've always had it in my mind that although cool to see, and it helps the fight last longer, and it does show something for "heart and courage"; it is not quite on the level of what a fight is about. Of course, neither is giving fighters a short rest period either...but let's just stick with one rule at a time.
One of the debates started with Tyson. Although never able to come back from being down to win, he was stunned a few times and did come back...but yet no credit because he wasn't down. Despite, possibly being as hurt, if not more so than some of the guys that get credit for coming back to win when down and allowed that extra time to recover. When Tyson was stunned, he was still up and being attacked.
I've always said, Tyson's chin was to good, legs to strong, will to stubborn, taught specifically to keep fighting, that he wouldn't go down until you absolutely beat the **** out of him.
No thought of taking a knee. No thought from his mind to go down from the shock of the blow.
Of course it can be argued it was a disadvantage as well.
So continuing on...
It definitely differs from ancient boxing...that's for sure. Of course, they were also allowed brace-knuckles on leather straps back then...but anyway...
In the amateur ranks, it is even worse with giving standing 8 counts when an opponent is stunned. Imagine bringing this into play on that level in Pro Boxing?
Amateur fights are complete bull**** today. Pitty-pat points and all that goes with it has stunted the growth of these fighters that may turn pro.
Of course, it is more "sport" oriented now in the amateur ranks. It is "safer." But it used to be about training to be a pro. Training to be a "fighter." Watch amateur fights way back, when they weren't wearing head-gear, and these guys were fighting 3 rounds like Pros.
I'm not saying change the rule but I've always found it a bit odd that the rule is in place.
At one point in time, you were allowed to hover over your opponent when you knocked him down. Fights of Dempsey come to mind.
And then it became the "neutral corner" rule....and of course the "standing 8."
In MMA, when the opponent is down, like more towards a real street-fight...and let's not get to deep into what is a "real street-fight"...but sticking with my point...you are allowed to continue to attack to finish off your opponent. He is hurt, you finish him.
Dempsey may have beaten Tunney.
Louis may have lost more fights.
Same with Patterson, Ali, Marciano, Holmes, Holyfield, etc.
I bring this up because of the debate of giving massive credit to a fighter that is down and can come back to win since I've always had it in my mind that although cool to see, and it helps the fight last longer, and it does show something for "heart and courage"; it is not quite on the level of what a fight is about. Of course, neither is giving fighters a short rest period either...but let's just stick with one rule at a time.
One of the debates started with Tyson. Although never able to come back from being down to win, he was stunned a few times and did come back...but yet no credit because he wasn't down. Despite, possibly being as hurt, if not more so than some of the guys that get credit for coming back to win when down and allowed that extra time to recover. When Tyson was stunned, he was still up and being attacked.
I've always said, Tyson's chin was to good, legs to strong, will to stubborn, taught specifically to keep fighting, that he wouldn't go down until you absolutely beat the **** out of him.
No thought of taking a knee. No thought from his mind to go down from the shock of the blow.
Of course it can be argued it was a disadvantage as well.
So continuing on...
It definitely differs from ancient boxing...that's for sure. Of course, they were also allowed brace-knuckles on leather straps back then...but anyway...
In the amateur ranks, it is even worse with giving standing 8 counts when an opponent is stunned. Imagine bringing this into play on that level in Pro Boxing?
Amateur fights are complete bull**** today. Pitty-pat points and all that goes with it has stunted the growth of these fighters that may turn pro.
Of course, it is more "sport" oriented now in the amateur ranks. It is "safer." But it used to be about training to be a pro. Training to be a "fighter." Watch amateur fights way back, when they weren't wearing head-gear, and these guys were fighting 3 rounds like Pros.
I'm not saying change the rule but I've always found it a bit odd that the rule is in place.
Comment