Why wasn't Kirkland given the same chance JMM got vs. Pac??

[Michael Hall]

I don't think there is such thing as a bad stoppage when a fighter has been dropped 3 times in the first round. Could it have gone on? Maybe but at the end of the day the refs job is to use his better judgement to protect the fighter and thats what he did. If you get dropped 3 times in a round its 50/50 the ref will stop it the 3rd time.

I agree with that as well.

My only gripe is that there is no consistency with these stoppages.

JMM was in worse condition against Pac in their first fight. Corrales was also in worse condition when he got dropped by Castillo in their first fight.

Gatti was always near death in most of his fights.

These guys are LEGENDS because they were given the chance to continue.

[Michael Hall]

He never recovered from the first kd he looked terrible whats wrong with that guy?

This was only his second fight in like 2-3 years.

Also, he seems to lack focus and discipline.

He may never become a star in boxing. Maybe he's mentally screwed up. I dunno what his life story is.

[Michael Hall]

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE 10 COUNT????????

Where is the consistency??

You have Montiel on the ground conlvusing and twitching and given a 10 count and allowed to get up.

You gave the example of JMM-Pac.

This is somewhat similar to what I saw in the Daniel Jaobs-Pirog fight. Jacobs get cracked and put down to a count of 7-8 and seems to suddenly realize he is on canvas and attempts to hop up quickly like Montiel did, but Robert Byrd litterally pushes his chest down to hold him there - stopping the 10 count. They're arguing as it's called off.

All of these examples happened during the first 2 rounds, except for Pirog-Jaobs which wasn't exactly a war to that point.

This is not me criticizing particular referee's or ignoring the importance of the health of the boxers , just asking the question of why there seems to be such inconsistency with 10 counts?

I'm with you, man.

Montiel-Donaire was another excellent example as well.

[johnm is...]

Most of the time, when a fighter gets knocked down 3 times in one round, the fight is going to be stopped. Complaining about it is comical.

If you don't want the referee to stop the fight because you got knocked down 3 times, then display a little defense, and don't get freaking knocked down 3 times.

[Michael Hall]

You gotta remember that in a championship bout there is a silent rule that they get that extra chance. He's young and it wont crush him.

I'm cool with a silent rule as long as its CONSISTENT.

I wish Meldrick Taylor would have been able to reap the benefits of the "silent rule" you speak of.

[Michael Hall]

I thought it was a fair stoppage before you posted this. Funnily enough after looking at those two videos side by side they are more or less identical. They both get knocked down quickly, get up quickly and are completely clear headed. The only difference is the way they fall. Kirkland's falling is a little more exaggerated.

As for Kirkland not being able to defend himself and being on shaky legs. Watch that Marquez round again. He is on shaky legs himself and gets nailed several times by left hands.

And that's the reason this thread was created...

[ding-ding]

He should have been given the chance to continue instead of being forced back down to the canvas by Cortez's crotch.

I did find that a bit strange

[Michael Hall]

Then I don't know what you saw.

Clearly you can see Marquez CALMLY getting up, his legs still there, that was not the case with Kirkland.

Kirkland's legs were jut not under him, I don't know what else to tell you other than it's right there in the video.

If Kirkland would have gotten up the way Marquez did, and his legs would have reacted the same, I would agree.

I have nothing against Kirkland and for the record, if Cortez stopped the JMM v Pac fight, I wouldn't have been upset, I would have completely understood but I see where Cortez was coming from.

I'm now officially convinced that you're either BLIND, or a typical NATIONLISTIC Mexican.

Which is it?

[studentofthegam]

I'm cool with a silent rule as long as its CONSISTENT.

I wish Meldrick Taylor would have been able to reap the benefits of the "silent rule" you speak of.

Thats a whole different monster because he only needed to stand for a few seconds. You act as if Im making this up. Champions get an extra chance (Montiel). People talked cash **** about him continuing. Thats where the consistency is needed. Its because its Cortez and thats the issue. If I aint mistaken Kirk tried to use Cortez to pull himself up. As far as consistency and the silent rule , that fight wasnt for a major championship man. See the difference.

[Michael Hall]

Most of the time, when a fighter gets knocked down 3 times in one round, the fight is going to be stopped. Complaining about it is comical.

If you don't want the referee to stop the fight because you got knocked down 3 times, then display a little defense, and don't get freaking knocked down 3 times.

I agree that Kirkland's defense is azz!!!

With that said, if there is no three knockdown rule then so what if he goes down three times? As long as he's not visibly hurt, unbalanced and still has his mental awareness then the fighter deserves the chance to keep fighting.