Comments Thread For: Forgoing The Luck of The Draw, For Good

[Liondw]

I suggest making all title fights and any "big" fight 13 rounds. If they both won 6 rounds, then in most but not all cases someone will win the 13th round. If still no clear winner, then sure, it's a draw. Just to touch on Hearns-Leonard II, everybody knows Hearns won that rematch, clearly.

[Slip&Counter]

Love the article

[Marchegiano]

In pretty much every other sport in the world "best of" competition is usually decided on an odd number, so seeing the 12th round go, or having another added doesn't seem too farfetched. The sport originally decided a winner with an odd number of rounds, so why not?

Other sports are less deadly. We didn't get to 12 because we decided it's a nice judging number. There's more to consider.

If you make the rounds too short then the fighting and pacing will be quicker, and that is deadly. If you make them too long the pacing will be hella slow but the endurance it takes to go that long is also deadly. 12 rounds has done well to not kill.

[doom_specialist]

Other sports are less deadly. We didn't get to 12 because we decided it's a nice judging number. There's more to consider.

If you make the rounds too short then the fighting and pacing will be quicker, and that is deadly. If you make them too long the pacing will be hella slow but the endurance it takes to go that long is also deadly. 12 rounds has done well to not kill.

Can't say I agree with you, since quite a few people have died in the ring since the change to 12 rounds. Not only that, if I were a fighter, I'd want fair outcomes as much as possible, and an odd number of rounds would go a long way toward that. 12 has hardly been some perfect number that protects fighters, and it has resulted in a lot of lousy decisions.

[Marchegiano]

Can't say I agree with you, since quite a few people have died in the ring since the change to 12 rounds. Not only that, if I were a fighter, I'd want fair outcomes as much as possible, and an odd number of rounds would go a long way toward that. 12 has hardly been some perfect number that protects fighters, and it has resulted in a lot of lousy decisions.

get more into history then. I promise you this 12 did not come out of the blue. It wasn't just something folks felt would probably do well then forgotten.

Like I said in other post, too few rounds is dangerous because of pacing. No one holds anything back when they have no reason to. Too long and you're ending up with endurance issues. There is a sweet spot. Nothing can make boxing not deadly, but, the 12rnder has made it much less so.

We have canvas because Jimmy Barry killed a man with a punch until it was discovered Barry KO the man and the floor killed him. We still got deaths from the canvas, but, much less often. So it stuck. To address skulls hitting canvas you'd need something more beneficial than the padding. We know bare doesn't work. If you said maybe we should use bare surfaces and I said nah, causes death and you answered but there's death anyway we'd be about where we are now with this round stuff.

I have a post of all the authorities and laws in history, also Boxrec has a good number of laws on their records, look at the laws, you'll see the story of rounds and won't need any more explanation. We've done everything from 4 to limitless and everything in between. 6-12 rounds is the best. Anything over kills more, anything under kills more. Loads of history for this.

[john l]

I like Fitz but disagree here. The champ should not lose title with a draw, and a draw is not such a bad thing. Sometimes you cant really separate fighters in a certain fight, and one guy should not win just because "they're has to be a winner". Also with how much losses hurt guys careers these days a draw is sometimes the BEST outcome like the Lara vs Castono fight, neither guy deserved to lose. Also the Easter vs Barthemaly fight where no one deserved to win.