Should the Ref count be longer?

**bklynboy** · 02-08-2014, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by DannYankee09

I have seen a lot of fights where the guy just rushes to get up too fast takes a stumble and the ref waives it off even if they where ahead, and while not all of them some of those instances seem premature. If those guys would have had extra 5 seconds or something like that to get up, and compose themselves the fight could have very well continued in some cases. Not to mention the ref's who count 1...2...3 skip a few 10 are out there.

Are you guys in love with the 10 count or is it something that could be changed in your mind to give fighters more time to compose themselves, and continue the fight after getting stunned and suffer a flash KD.

Would you be in favor of changing it from 3 strikes you're out in baseball to 4 or 5 or another number?

A 10 count more than proves the point that the guy was down. If you're out for 2 seconds in the street your opponent can stomp on you. You're dead.

**Spray_resistant** · 02-08-2014, 11:20 PM

No, its a fair measuring stick for whether someone should be fit to continue fighting how long should we give them a whole half a minute?

**Ringlife** · 02-08-2014, 11:20 PM

The ten count is long enough.

**Kuyukut** · 02-08-2014, 11:21 PM

is a 15-count (50% longer) you're out ok with you, brah?

**ShoulderRoll** · 02-08-2014, 11:21 PM

UK ref Phil Edwards thinks it should be shorter.

**DannYankee** · 02-08-2014, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by bklynboy

Would you be in favor of changing it from 3 strikes you're out in baseball to 4 or 5 or another number?

A 10 count more than proves the point that the guy was down. If you're out for 2 seconds in the street your opponent can stomp on you. You're dead.

Just because it has been the rule forever does not mean it's perfect this is boxing not baseball not a street fight. Think of all the great action missed because a fighter rushes to get up and is waived off prematurely . I think we just accept somethings because we are so used to them we never stop and think if they are the best way in the first place.

Originally posted by ShoulderRoll

UK ref Phil Edwards thinks it should be shorter.

That guy don't even make it to three....1 ...2 skip a few 10

Originally posted by Kuyukut

is a 15-count (50% longer) you're out ok with you, brah?

Doesn't have to be 50% longer that is just a hypothetical number i threw out there but is the 10 (sometimes shorter) count really the best ?

**Tay Roc** · 02-08-2014, 11:25 PM

15 seconds would be better. Or a slower 10 count.

**SlySlickSmooth** · 02-08-2014, 11:26 PM

Its fine the way it is, the only thing I see happening from a 15 count is more fighters will have time to "get **** together" when in reality are just as hurt if they got up at 5-7 with wobbly legs.. who knows how they could be feeling in the ring.

**DannYankee** · 02-08-2014, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by robust_

15 seconds would be better. Or a slower 10 count.

Originally posted by SlySlickSmooth

Its fine the way it is, the only thing I see happening from a 15 count is more fighters will have time to "get **** together" when in reality are just as hurt if they got up at 5-7 with wobbly legs.. who knows how they could be feeling in the ring.

If Lara would have rushed like a lot of fighters do I think he probably would have dragged his face all over that ring after his kd's but he was composed, but a lot of fighters panic to ****, and rush to get up looking worst than what they really are in the process and sometimes fights can end prematurely because of that. Not to mention the refs who count til 9.

I remember watching a Gamboa fight against some undefeated kid marcos ramirez I think, and thinking wtf was that Gamboa took the guy down with a body shot the ref counted 8910 in 1 damn second I felt like I was robbed of more fight, and Im sure I cant be the only one who that has happened to more than once. The kid was aiming to get up at 8 or 9 and the ref just did the skip a few on him .

Should the Ref count be longer?