Is clinching really that bad?

[Publius]

It seems to me that there are two schools of thought when it comes to fouling in boxing. One is that fouling/cheating is an offense that should be punished, and that fighters who abuse lax referring are cheaters. The other is that fouling is simply a part of the sport - a tactic - and that fighters who abuse lax refereeing are skilled tacticians.

The funny thing is that many of the people who love to call boxing the 'sweet' science, and to distinguish it from other combat sports by virtue of its controlled nature, are the same ones who support and defend fighters who clinch and headbutt. More importantly, they do not seem to have a problem with referees who allow this to go on.

Whether it's Salido cheating the scales and throwing **** shots, or Margarito loading his gloves, or Klitschko clinching and ****ing with the ring/gloves...people seem divided. For some this is just the smart thing to do, for others it ruins the sport.

So is clinching really that bad? I think it and other fouls should be called the same way as holding is in the NFL. Technically you could call it on every play, but it is so widespread that the refs usually only call blatant ones.

The problem with boxing is that blatant fouling is rarely called. For boxing to really be a sweet science you have to enforce the rules that make it different from UFC.

[-PBP-]

It's kind of a slippery slope. Tugging and wrestling and being strong in the clinch are all part of inside fighting. As long as the fighters are working in the clinch, I think its a part of boxing.

To me, it can be an issue when:

1. It is used by an out-boxer to prevent his opponent from fighting inside.

2. When the ref breaks the clinch up too fast, not allowing the opponent to work inside.

That's when clinching and officiating interferes with the opponents ability to compete. And that's when it becomes a problem.

[NEETzsche]

it's pretty much inevitable to an extent. there's no safer place in a boxing ring than in the clinch so fighters will naturally and instinctively do it when they need a moment of reprieve, e.g. after being hurt or after running out of gas. it'd be harsh and potentially dangerous to punish them for clinching in those circumstances. the problem arises when fighters deliberately incorporate it into a gameplan and spoil whole fights. refs are supposed to clamp down on that, but it can be hard to tell sometimes and also most refs are wary of imposing themselves on a fight too much because usually there will be fan backlash when point deductions or DQs determine fight outcomes

[Publius]

It's kind of a slippery slope. Tugging and wrestling and being strong in the clinch are all part of inside fighting. As long as the fighters are working in the clinch, I think its a part of boxing.

To me, it can be an issue when:

1. It is used by an out-boxer to prevent his opponent from fighting inside.

2. When the ref breaks the clinch up too fast, not allowing the opponent to work inside.

That's when clinching and officiating interferes with the opponents ability to compete. And that's when it becomes a problem.

Yeah and those two are almost opposite issues when it comes to referring. In the first case, the referees stand by and do nothing while in the second case they ruin the fight. I noticed the second in the Olympics a lot this year. Refs would not only break clinches instantly but then spend 5-10 seconds lecturing the fighters to not clinch. Half the ****ing round would be him talking.

[bojangles1987]

Clinching just to spoil and prevent action is terrible and fighters who do so excessively should be penalized.

I don't mind clinching when it's used to muscle and work inside. Clinching is a vital aspect of skilled inside fighting. It is used to maneuver, gain leverage, push fighters back, neutralize their own infighting, and set up your punches.

Unfortunately, few fighters clinch with intention to fight. They grab and hold and ****** because they're scared to death of getting punched.

[_Maxi]

Gayweather clinched like a girl. So did postol. So did Wlad.

[Madison Boxing]

watch ward v kessler then you will come to a conclusion whether its a good or bad part of th sport

[KingHippo]

No it isn't. And some of the guys who are accused of clinching don't even clinch that much. Mayweather is a perfect example.

Knowing how to fight in and out of the clinch is part of boxing.

[Eff Pandas]

Is clinching really that bad?

Yes. I think it makes boxing less fun, less entertaining & gives too much leeway to guys just trying to survive.

I think boxing would be a better, more viewer friendly sport if clinching/holding was a foul that refs would legit warn & legit take points if you do. One of my biggest pet peeves in boxing is the guys who get hurt or dropped & do that aggressive holding to survive bs. I think those situations should routinely be point deducted for excessive clinching/holding fouls. I mean the most exciting point of a fight is that moment right before a KO & the excessive clinching/holding guys ruin that moment with a smart strategy obviously, but its a strategy that sucks for fans & for fans of decisive wins.

[Jc8804]

I notice its the urban style that gets the benifit of the doubt. Outside fighters and slick fighters per say.

They are outgunned inside they clinch to spoil as a form of defense, the ref breaks it up right away.

They arent outgunned vs a fighter whos only chance to win is inside yet its not comfort area
The outside, slick, urban fighter clinches and fights out of the clinch disrupting the inferior fighters rhythm .

Floyd , wlad, ward, postol are notorious for this and get away with it. The ref is usually hired by these fighters promotional companies.

They disect the others inside game. If they are outgunned its a clinch and break immediately night. If they are superior its a rhythm breaker for the night.

It should be illegal. First time a warning
After that take a point each time.

You shouldnt be allowed to clinch. Imagine boxing without it