Should holding be enforced more rigorously/severely?

[Cheek busting]

It's been abused for a long, long time. A lot of guys seem lost when it comes to fighting on the inside. I don't know if this just isn't taught in gyms anymore or what, it's non-existent in most modern boxing.

As far as penalizing, I'd say it definitely needs to be enforced a lot more. I'd also recommend these refs to start saying, "Punch and get out." That would cause a drop for sure. Most refs just jump right in and save these guys from giving us proof that they can't fight on the inside at all.

There is definitely a difference between inside fighting, and holding.

Some guys initiate a clinch/hold, and then start fighting on the inside. this shouldn't be allowed. because some guys use the clinch to their advantage on the inside.

So if somebody initiates a clinch, there should be a straight up separation, then verbal warning, point, etc.

If BOTH guys initiate it, then they shold be told to fight out..

[SugarRayCurtain]

The only time holding could be accepted is when an opponent is hurt
But other than that there is no reason to hold unless you accidently get tied up with your opponent

Holding to offtrack an opponents offense just because they cant fight inside isnt right and will always be disadvantage to the guy trying to fight inside ie Wladimer Klitscko against Povetkin or Floyd Mayweather against Pacquiao.

Half of Mayweather's defence against pressure fighters is to duck to his right below the waist (illegal) then hold his opponent then never gets warned for it.

[Outworn]

Yes definitely and too much running too. Worse if a fighter is a hugger and a runner in a fight like Fraud Moneystealer.

Judges shouldn't award points or the round to the coward.

[Willy Wanker]

It should be enforced when it gets excessive. There are times when it can't be avoided. Fighters sometimes get tied up during exchanges and a fighter who's stunned should be allowed to hold.

Fighters holding to avoid action or contact should be penalized. It makes the referee's job harder and it totally kills the inside fighting aspect of boxing. It's also an eyesore for fans. We want to see punches exchanged, not h0mo****** hugging contests.

[alexguiness]

It's solely down to the referee's interpretation of the rules and own preferences.

Holding and dirty boxing is a skill within a skill - A LOT of fans don't even appreciate or understand it.

Also holding is not casual crowd friendly, so referees may break up a hold to allow a fight to be more 'entertaining'.

[Illmatic94]

if holding was truly enforced in boxing Muhammad Ali would've been DQ'd from half his fights. Ali was the GOAT of clinching and headlocking, especially the 70's less mobile Ali. go watch his 2nd fight vs Frazier lol.. after a few rounds you'll see why that fight is totally ignored when they discuss that trilogy.

[Thraxox]

It's solely down to the referee's interpretation of the rules and own preferences.

Holding and dirty boxing is a skill within a skill - A LOT of fans don't even appreciate or understand it.

Also holding is not casual crowd friendly, so referees may break up a hold to allow a fight to be more 'entertaining'.

No, dirty tactics compensates for the lack of boxing ability you have.

[Boxfan7819]

I have seen it enforced. Just not in high profile fights.

[BLASTER1]

I can see rolling with this. After all, we want to see a "fight," and forget that boxing isn't the same as fighting.

Still, I think it should be pretty straightforward - with the refs having a little discretion, obviously. First few time - separation; second time - strong verbal warning; third time - point; fourth time - another point; fifth time - DQ. Again, some discretion; for example, maybe if both fighters are initiating because they're both exhausted (which happens a lot), then just immediately separate.

Too often fighters just literally incorporate holding into their styles. It may not be the only way they win, and hell, most of the time they'd probably win regardless. But a lot of times, repeated, intentional, blatant holding, has greatly inhibited fighters, or helped, aided, and even saved them.

We always hear announcers saying "he needs to hold"! when a fighter gets badly stunned. they say this because THEY KNOW the boxer will not get penalized for repeatedly holding until he has regained his senses. They have accepted that it's perfectly fine, for a boxer to save himself by smothering the other dude when he's hurt, and both buying him time to recover, AND inhibiting his opponent from getting off punches to potentially end the fight. Of course, this type of "spur the moment/situational" holding is more reactionary, and not a proactive, planned measure/strategy.

We got some badass fighters who, when stunned, simply plant their feet, tuck their chins, and go to war - for better or worse. Some of the greatest exchanges, and tide-changing, epic moments in boxing have occurred because a stunned boxer either doesn't know how, or refuses to hold when hurt.

Great response.
Really liked reading your insight. I agree with most of what you just wrote.

[Cheek busting]

The only time holding could be accepted is when an opponent is hurt
But other than that there is no reason to hold unless you accidently get tied up with your opponent

Holding to offtrack an opponents offense just because they cant fight inside isnt right and will always be disadvantage to the guy trying to fight inside ie Wladimer Klitscko against Povetkin or Floyd Mayweather against Pacquiao.

Half of Mayweather's defence against pressure fighter s is to duck to his right below the waist (illegal) then hold his opponent then never gets warned for it.

I don't buy that.

Holding to save yourself is still holding, ergo it's still a violation of the rules.

You are literally cheating to steal your opponent of his shot to win the fight by smothering him thereby inhibiting his ability to punch.

Like I was saying earlier, it's become so acceptable to hold when hurt the announcers are shouting ''HE NEEDS TO HOLD"! or "HE NEEDS TO TIE HIS OPPONENT UP"!

LOL can you imagine if they shouted "HE NEEDS TO GIVE HIS OPPONENT A SWIFT SHOT IN THE BALLS"! or "HE NEEDS TO HEADBUTT HIM TO BUY TIME"!

Heh, I really didn't want this thread to highlight Andre Ward's cheating - but I can't think of a more recent boxer who exploits the LAX holding/clinching rules more to his advantage. Lol, hell, Ward even ran the line with leading with the head. Very brilliant strategies - gotta give him credit

but he literally was placing precision nut shots after he hurt Kovalev, while jumping in with his head. And kovalev didnt even resort to holding then. And during the whole fight he was gettibg his shots off and then lunging in head first to tie Kovalev up, inhibiting him from popping out those long devastating punches from the outside. Really a brilliant game plan - just happened to be highly illegal.