15 rounds to 12 rounds

[REMOVED SHARK 97]

Round 1 45 deaths
Round 2 62 deaths
Round 3 54 deaths
Round 4 82 deaths
Round 5 49 deaths
Round 6 95 deaths
Round 7 46 deaths
Round 8 91 deaths
Round 9 44 deaths
Round 10 92 deaths
Round 11 13 deaths
Round 12 35 deaths
Round 13 10 deaths
Round 14 10 deaths
Round 15 13 deaths
Round 16 9 deaths
>16 rounds 14 deaths

56 more deaths than if it was stopped by round 12.

[Vasyl’s dad]

56 more deaths than if it was stopped by round 12.

and yet, 5 other rounds, singly produced more deaths than 4 and more rounds did, combined.

Go figure.


So how is 15 rounds any safer than 12 again?


You guys keep looking at it from a simple perspective, "more rounds means more damage",

but the data isn't supporting that theory.

As I said earlier, there are more factors to account for than just "more damage for 3 more rounds".

[Konstantin]

and yet, 5 other rounds, singly produced more deaths than 4 and more rounds did, combined.

Go figure.


So how is 15 rounds any safer than 12 again?


You guys keep looking at it from a simple perspective, "more rounds means more damage",

but the data isn't supporting that theory.

As I said earlier, there are more factors to account for than just "more damage for 3 more rounds".

lol are you thick??

The data does support the Theory!! 58 more people died after 12 rounds!!

[REMOVED SHARK 97]

You guys keep looking at it from a simple perspective, "more rounds means more damage"

but the data isn't supporting that theory.

"more rounds means more death"

By your facts.

[Konstantin]

Here's the problem you are arguing a different point than you think you are. Here's your first post.

What scientific or medical studies were done to ensure and prove that 12 rounds were safer than 15 round bouts?

Is there proof that 12 rounders are any safer?

Then you provide data which shows that would have been in fact 56 less deaths if they were 12 rounds fights instead of 15.

Here is your more recent argument.

and yet, 5 other rounds, singly produced more deaths than 4 and more rounds did, combined.

Go figure.

This evidence doesn't refute that 12 rounds is safer than 15. What is shows is that whoever decided that 12 would be the cuttoff point was obviously not basing his decision on health factors, or he would have cut if off earlier.

This point was agreed upon by Blooper and several others who said it was probably just a show for the public to make it seem like something was being done for the safety of the fighters.

[Aussie!]

lol are you thick??

The data does support the Theory!! 58 more people died after 12 rounds!!

maybe those 58 ppl would have died anyway if it were just 12.


based on the chart posted by johnny, i think i see a very effective solution to the safety issue.

since very few fighters died after the 12th, we should start the fights in the 13th and end in it the 27th.

that way, we are able to skip the deadly rds and still fight for 15.

[Vasyl’s dad]

lol are you thick??

The data does support the Theory!! 58 more people died after 12 rounds!!

Actually it does.

If more rounds equaled more damage,

why do 5 earlier rounds have more deaths?

Based on "common sense",

we'd be seeing a high rate of deaths in the rounds past 12,

but the rate was much lower.

Round 4 alone has produced 84 deaths, almost 30 more than 4 rounds past 12 combined.

[REMOVED SHARK 97]

In a fight you could die from rounds

1 - 12

What does it matter what round from 1 - 12 they die in?, That's the risk of the sport.

---

1 - 15

Anything above 12 which would be the usual fight finish would by your stats equal more death.

The 56 people that died... died in a FIGHT THAT WAS MORE THAN 12 ROUNDS!

CHANCES ARE IF I WAS IN A 12 ROUND FIGHT I WOULDN'T HAVE DIED!!!!!!!!

THE FACT THAT ALOT MORE PEOPLE DIED IN ROUND 6 DOESN'T MATTER!! WHY????????

BECAUSE ROUND 6 COULD BE IN A 12 OR 15 ROUND FIGHT!!!!!, ROUNDS 13,14,15+ ARE NOT IN A 12 ROUND FIGHT!...


Thats it i'm outta here.

[Vasyl’s dad]

Here's the problem you are arguing a different point than you think you are. Here's your first post.



Then you provide data which shows that would have been in fact 56 less deaths if they were 12 rounds fights instead of 15.

Here is your more recent argument.



This evidence doesn't refute that 12 rounds is safer than 15. What is shows is that whoever decided that 12 would be the cuttoff point was obviously not basing his decision on health factors, or he would have cut if off earlier.

This point was agreed upon by Blooper and several others who said it was probably just a show for the public to make it seem like something was being done for the safety of the fighters.

How about, we just take out the most dangerous rounds?

2, 4, 6 and 8.


The data does in fact show they are much more dangerous than anything past round 12.

[Konstantin]

Actually it does.

If more rounds equaled more damage,

why do 5 earlier rounds have more deaths?

Based on "common sense",

we'd be seeing a high rate of deaths in the rounds past 12,

but the rate was much lower.

Round 4 alone has produced 84 deaths, almost 30 more than 4 rounds past 12 combined.

OK I understand your argument now.

You are arguing that the 4 round is deadlier than round 14 because it has 50ish more deaths? Is that right?