Things in Boxing that piss me off

[turbotime]

Pacquiao's ******ed fans.

[piojo del norte]

oh yeah this also

Pacquiao's ******ed fans.

[ElMeroChingon]

Clinching,

I understand if they get rocked and need to get a breather, but if you're doing that all day after every combo, F@k you I'm not wasting my time watching you hug your sorry ass all the way to the finish line. Screw that.

Like a movie without a climax. Whats the point?

[CubanGuyNYC]

- You cannot hit below the belt, hold, trip, kick, headbutt, wrestle, bite, spit on, or push your opponent.

- You can't hold your opponent and hit him at the same time

I understand that most fans use the words "hold" and "clinch" interchangeably, but there's a distinction. You don't see the difference, so I'll try to tackle the problem from another angle.

The rules you cite use the word "hold" in the following rule: "You can't hold your opponent and hit him at the same time..." Yet another rule uses the word "clinch": "When the referee breaks you from a clinch, you have to take a full step back..." The writer isn't using different words for creative purposes. Specific words are being used because "clinch" and "hold" have similar but different shades of meaning.

If clinching is illegal, why does the rule say, "When the referee breaks you from a clinch, you have to take a full step back; you cannot immediately hit your opponent--that's called 'hitting on the break' and is illegal." Why doesn't the ref issue a warning or deduct a point for clinching in the first place? Because clinching is legal, that's why.

[Hitman18]

I hate clinching, corrupt judges, scumbag promoters, HBO's analysts, and many many other things. But perhaps the number one thing that I hate the most,

the best fighters not fighting each other. I love Cotto vs. Mayweather even if Cotto loses because they are two of the best. I hate how Mayweather-Pac isnt happening, I hate how Juanma-Gamboa didn't happen, I dont care much for Rios-Abril, or Pac-Bradley, or Marquez-Sedchenko or watevs, and too many other to name. Too many times I find it hard to get excited for fights nowadays. I miss the days of Castillo-Corrales, Morales-Barrera, De la Hoya-Mosley, Cotto-Judah, and many others as well. You may not agree with my selection of fights here but maybe you agree that more often than not, the best fighters don't fight each other.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Clinching is not illegal, its been part of boxing since the first fight

Otherwise every boxer in history would be DQ'd

Pretty much.

If clinching were illegal, the boxing world would've been spared the "fight" between Mike Tyson and James "Bonecrusher" Smith. After that wrestling match, Smith was dubbed by boxing journalists "Boneclutcher."

And would John Ruiz have had a career if clinching were illegal?

[gauze]

i hate how they dont show the ringcard girls. at least a little split screen action while they show the corner work.

[Enzo Mc is SHIT]

I don't like it when clenching is the rule rather than the exception. Wlad's an example - he's exciting to watch when he's throwing straights and hooks, but the jab-jab-grab is infuriating.

[Fish_Scotland]

Or when a fighter has a good performance, everyone jumps on the bandwagon.
They have a bad performance, everyone jumps off and calls that fighter "exposed".

This is my number 1 hate on this forum. My general hate in boxing are the organisations/ number of belts.....you know where I'm going with this!

[intoccabile]

Clinching isn't illegal. Holding is.

There is a difference.