One Rule Change, like MMA, Boxing would be different. Continue to fight when down...

[NesNY]

boxing rules are fine.

[AllEyesOpen]

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.

The problem with this is that a lot of great fight would be stopped prematurely because the ref would stop the fight quicker to protect the fighter from too much damage, just like mma, robbing us of great and legendary wars.

[BoxingTech718]

Here is a great solution for you GTFOH and go to the sherdog forum dweeb.

[ballgamessuck]

I have always thought that there should perhaps be a five count instead of an eight or ten count. Another thing I would like to see is a standing count in many cases instead of stopping a fight while a fighter is still on his feet. One more thing is that more referees should penalize for excessive holding, some do but I would like to see more of it.

[King Ju-Ju]

mma sucks balls, boxing will always be above that sport.

[Benny Leonard]

mma sucks balls, boxing will always be above that sport.

So let's talk about ancient boxing vs. today.

Today's boxing is a watered down version of ancient boxing.

Ancient fighters/boxing > modern.


boxing was created for protection...for war.

In a real fight on the street, and will keep it "honorable,"....when a man is stunned, and goes down...who has the advantage?
Is there anyone to stop the fight?
How are fights like these usually stopped?


Point being, in a way, it is unfair for the fighter that hurts/stuns/downs his opponent but is not allowed to follow up for the victory.
You are taking away from the actual fight that should be closer to what boxing was intended for.

[PittyPat]

I consider MMA to be more about 'fighting' and brutality than modern boxing. The latter has become a sport, in which victory by clever point-scoring has become paramount in an era where there are more rules like the standing 8-count, neutral corner, etc.

I'm perfectly happy with how things are now. If there's anything I'd change in the ring itself, it'd be to with how judging is performed.

[Benny Leonard]

The problem with this is that a lot of great fight would be stopped prematurely because the ref would stop the fight quicker to protect the fighter from too much damage, just like mma, robbing us of great and legendary wars.

Yes, very true. But there is still a point to be made with the level of unfair treatment towards the fighter who is able to hurt that opponent, downs that opponent...but has to allow his opponent to recover.

In the end, if the victor is the person that comes back from being hurt/knock-down, because those 8 crucial seconds helped him recover...how does that prove he is the better fighter when he could have most likely been defeated?

[Gonzalez_Boxing]

Yes, very true. But there is still a point to be made with the level of unfair treatment towards the fighter who is able to hurt that opponent, downs that opponent...but has to allow his opponent to recover.

In the end, if the victor is the person that comes back from being hurt/knock-down, because those 8 crucial seconds helped him recover...how does that prove he is the better fighter when he could have most likely been defeated?

It's a rule. Both combatants know and agree to the rules before the match. How can it be unfair when the rule is implemented for both fighters?

Put yourself in the position of a professional prize fighter who has just knocked down his opponent. Do you think in his head he is thinking how unfair it is that he can't pounce on his fallen foe? No. He know's what the rules are and he knows he didn't do enough to finish the job, and the fight continues.

[SBleeder]

It's a fight. It is supposed to resemble a fight.

Since when?

Boxing is a sport. It requires discipline and athleticism. If you want to watch a street fight go watch some drunks go at it in an alley.