Is the shoulder roll defense legal or not?

[cpa5oh]

Someone in one of the Floyd vs. Oscar post-fight threads said that the shoulder roll is illegal (I think it was Kauki.) I never really thought about this. Oscar did it when he trained with Mayweather Sr (though not well) and Mayweather did it all night Saturday.

Is this true?

Seems reasonable to me that it would be illegal...tucking your chin and rolling your shoulder over top basically shows your back to your opponent...opponent isn't allowed to hit your back, but you can't show it to him either, can you?

[*Z*]

I think the shoulder roll is borderline. What I do think is or at least should be illegal is when Floyd bends all the way over and turns away. This leaves nothing but illegal openings.

[slystaff]

Someone in one of the Floyd vs. Oscar post-fight threads said that the shoulder roll is illegal (I think it was Kauki.) I never really thought about this. Oscar did it when he trained with Mayweather Sr (though not well) and Mayweather did it all night Saturday.

Is this true?

Seems reasonable to me that it would be illegal...tucking your chin and rolling your shoulder over top basically shows your back to your opponent...opponent isn't allowed to hit your back, but you can't show it to him either, can you?

YES..it is illegal!

Floyd is actually on his way to jail in the back of a police car as we discuss this.....

[CleanYourClock]

Someone in one of the Floyd vs. Oscar post-fight threads said that the shoulder roll is illegal (I think it was Kauki.) I never really thought about this. Oscar did it when he trained with Mayweather Sr (though not well) and Mayweather did it all night Saturday.

Is this true?

Seems reasonable to me that it would be illegal...tucking your chin and rolling your shoulder over top basically shows your back to your opponent...opponent isn't allowed to hit your back, but you can't show it to him either, can you?

Is a rear deltoid considered part of your back ? :lol:

[Baron]

I'd say that equating shoulder rolling to showing your back is a bit of a stretch. I haven't seen anything illegal on saturday night.

[CleanYourClock]

I think the shoulder roll is borderline. What I do think is or at least should be illegal is when Floyd bends all the way over and turns away. This leaves nothing but illegal openings.

Yes , IMO its a judgement call ... Depends on how far the fighter actually rolls ...
IMO Floyd's shoulder roll is acceptable ...

[Baron]

I think the shoulder roll is borderline. What I do think is or at least should be illegal is when Floyd bends all the way over and turns away. This leaves nothing but illegal openings.Yep, I think that is borderline legal, the shoulder roll is perfectly legal IMO.

[*Z*]

Yep, I think that is borderline legal, the shoulder roll is perfectly legal IMO.

Yeah, jus the shoulder roll is fine. It's when he bends over and turns all the way around. When he does that it should be legal to hammer fist the back of his head.

[IHATEJONES]

If they're gonna allow fighters like Mayweather and Byrd to fight the way they fight and exploit the rules of boxing to their advantage, then they should make it legal to hit your opponent in whatever part of the body is exposed, above the waist. I don't see why it's such a big deal to hit a guy in the back, or even the back of the head. I see this too often, where fighters get hurt, and turn their heads away, exposing the back of their head, and when they get hit in the back of the head, the referee steps in and warns the other guy. Why should they be protected like that? It's one thing to go out of your way to intentionally rabbit-punch a guy, but if your natural punching motion cause you to hit a guy in an area that he willfully exposes, that's his problem.

[Father of Muzse]

Someone in one of the Floyd vs. Oscar post-fight threads said that the shoulder roll is illegal (I think it was Kauki.) I never really thought about this. Oscar did it when he trained with Mayweather Sr (though not well) and Mayweather did it all night Saturday.

Is this true?

Seems reasonable to me that it would be illegal...tucking your chin and rolling your shoulder over top basically shows your back to your opponent...opponent isn't allowed to hit your back, but you can't show it to him either, can you?

It's legal...

"however"

Punches above the elbow and on the shoulder are considered fair blows. Those should be counted as landed punches.

Also, it's illegal to hit in the kidney's but if the guy turns away and offers the shot, I saw take it all day long.

That's what Rahman did against Toney. James ended up with a lacerated kidney afterwards. James bitched about the punches, but if he turned into the shot, what is Rahman supposed to do, not punch back?

I'd throw right hooks to the body until he stopped bending into the punches.

"protect yourself at all times" is the first rule of boxing. If you're offering those openings to your opponent, then you only have yourself to blame.

Oscar bitched about Mosley clubbing him on the back of the head, but Oscar regularly bent down when he saw the right hand coming in. Shane had no choice but to give him the baby seal treatment.

[steve_dave]

If they're gonna allow fighters like Mayweather and Byrd to fight the way they fight and exploit the rules of boxing to their advantage, then they should make it legal to hit your opponent in whatever part of the body is exposed, above the waist. I don't see why it's such a big deal to hit a guy in the back, or even the back of the head. I see this too often, where fighters get hurt, and turn their heads away, exposing the back of their head, and when they get hit in the back of the head, the referee steps in and warns the other guy. Why should they be protected like that? It's one thing to go out of your way to intentionally rabbit-punch a guy, but if your natural punching motion cause you to hit a guy in an area that he willfully exposes, that's his problem.


The thing is, getting hit in the back of the head is REALLY dangerous. That's how guys can get seriously hurt.

[Double L]

if PBF turns his back, or bends over like a turtle, his opponent's job is to hit him in the back. it's as simple as that. and the referee's job is to not be a dumb-ass about it and allow it. only then will it work itself out. either PBF will have to endure a back-beating, or he will fight legally. no other intervention is necessary. i think what's been lacking thus far, with few exceptions, is an opponent willing to hit PBF in the back when he ducks like he does.

[IHATEJONES]

The thing is, getting hit in the back of the head is REALLY dangerous. That's how guys can get seriously hurt.

Repeated rabbit-punches in clinches, like the ones Benn hit McClelland with, are dangerous since they have a cumulative effect, and they should be illegal since they can't be defended against. But if a fighter turns and exposes the back of his head and gets hit once, too bad. It's a good deterrent against him doing it again, as opposed to the referee stepping in and threatening to take a point from the other guy, which is what usually happens.

[slystaff]

The thing is, getting hit in the back of the head is REALLY dangerous. That's how guys can get seriously hurt.

yep.

if I was in the ring and my opponent hit me with Rabbit punches more than once...after the second time I'd immediately kick him in the balls...full strength.

[*Z*]

yep.

if I was in the ring and my opponent hit me with Rabbit punches more than once...after the second time I'd immediately kick him in the balls...full strength.

If you were doing what Floyd was doing you'd HAVE to kick me in the balls. I'd punch a guy in he back of the head if that is all I could hit.

[Tam Tam]

if PBF turns his back, or bends over like a turtle, his opponent's job is to hit him in the back. it's as simple as that. and the referee's job is to not be a dumb-ass about it and allow it. only then will it work itself out. either PBF will have to endure a back-beating, or he will fight legally. no other intervention is necessary. i think what's been lacking thus far, with few exceptions, is an opponent willing to hit PBF in the back when he ducks like he does.
Ridiculous. Next rant please.

[*Z*]

Ridiculous. Next rant please.
So if a fighter turns his back you should just not hit him?

[Tam Tam]

So if a fighter turns his back you should just not hit him?
Not in the fucking back, of course not. Its up to the official to punish a fighter who turns his back, via deductions and/or threat of disqualification.

I cannot believe this is even being asked. Are you fucking stupid? Do you even understand the rules of boxing and why they're necessary? Fucking christ.

[steve_dave]

Not in the fucking back, of course not. Its up to the official to punish a fighter who turns his back, via deductions and/or threat of disqualification.

I cannot believe this is even being asked. Are you fucking stupid? Do you even understand the rules of boxing and why they're necessary? Fucking christ.

:clap:

[Double L]

So if a fighter turns his back you should just not hit him?

no. it's more to do with me. if Double L makes a post, disagree with it and act like you're personally offended by it.

[Tam Tam]

no. it's more to do with me. if Double L makes a post, disagree with it and act like you're personally offended by it.
Thats no act, let me tell you.

[Double L]

Not in the fucking back, of course not. Its up to the official to punish a fighter who turns his back, via deductions and/or threat of disqualification.

I cannot believe this is even being asked. Are you fucking stupid? Do you even understand the rules of boxing and why they're necessary? Fucking christ.

ridiculous. next rant please (or alternatively, take your medication and bring us the zombified From the Ashes, the one we're more likely to be able to tolerate).

[Double L]

Thats no act, let me tell you.

well, if you're personally offended by remarks that i make about boxing in general, then you're just a bitch. i can't help you with that. sorry. ask your mother why you're such a bitch.

[*Z*]

Not in the fucking back, of course not. Its up to the official to punish a fighter who turns his back, via deductions and/or threat of disqualification.

I cannot believe this is even being asked. Are you fucking stupid? Do you even understand the rules of boxing and why they're necessary? Fucking christ.

Calm your ass down dumbass. I didn't ask for you to clarify the rules, and I don't need you to.

ref just did not enforce the rules. I'd have punched Floyd all over the back of his head and his back every time he did that bullshit. If the ref isn't going to call it, fuck it, you may as well foul right back.

[Double L]

Calm your ass down dumbass. I didn't ask for you to clarify the rules, and I don't need you to.

ref just did not enforce the rules. I'd have punched Floyd all over the back of his head and his back every time he did that bullshit. If the ref isn't going to call it, fuck it, you may as well foul right back.

plus, it's not illegal to hit a fighter in the back if he turns his back to you. it's as simple as that. how can a fighter be expected not to hit his opponent in the back if the opponent turns his back to him?

[Tam Tam]

plus, it's not illegal to hit a fighter in the back if he turns his back to you. it's as simple as that. how can a fighter be expected not to hit his opponent in the back if the opponent turns his back to him?
Quoted, just in case you learn the rules and wish to come back and edit this.

[Tam Tam]

Calm your ass down dumbass. I didn't ask for you to clarify the rules, and I don't need you to.

ref just did not enforce the rules. I'd have punched Floyd all over the back of his head and his back every time he did that bullshit. If the ref isn't going to call it, fuck it, you may as well foul right back.
Great. Thats what you'd do. I'm glad you told the forum about your mindset. It has absolutely no relevance to what HUMANS do though, nor is acting illegal in any way glorifying.

[steve_dave]

Quoted, just in case you learn the rules and wish to come back and edit this.

:lol: Yeah, I was gonna say... still against the rules.

[Double L]

where's the proof that it's illegal? steve dave's co-sign isn't exactly compelling evidence. sorry.

[steve_dave]

where's the proof that it's illegal? steve dave's co-sign isn't exactly compelling evidence. sorry.

But considering Ashes and I actually know a thing or two about boxing, you should just take our word for it. Just like when I lectured you on the gloves a couple months ago. You can't hit on the back, ever.

[*Z*]

Great. Thats what you'd do. I'm glad you told the forum about your mindset. It has absolutely no relevance to what HUMANS do though, nor is acting illegal in any way glorifying.

I'd punch you in you smart ass face too for the record.

[Double L]

But considering Ashes and I actually know a thing or two about boxing, you should just take our word for it. Just like when I lectured you on the gloves a couple months ago. You can't hit on the back, ever.

FTA disagreed with you about the gloves, saying, "since when?" because historically, there have been fights at 154 made with 8 oz gloves. then you come on and say, "really? i thought...." not very convincing. sorry but i can't take your word for it.

[steve_dave]

FTA disagreed with you about the gloves, saying, "since when?" because historically, there have been fights at 154 made with 8 oz gloves. then you come on and say, "really? i thought...." not very convincing. sorry but i can't take your word for it.

Yeah well I turned out to be right. And you were wrong.

Same deal here. :lol:

[Double L]

Yeah well I turned out to be right. And you were wrong.

Same deal here. :lol:

you didn't turn out to be right. not in any absolute way.

[Double L]

i'm still waiting for the proof. and i have a feeling i'll be waiting a long time.

[steve_dave]

you didn't turn out to be right. not in any absolute way.

Luckily for you, the thread was lost when Cupey fucked up the boards.

[steve_dave]

i'm still waiting for the proof. and i have a feeling i'll be waiting a long time.

It's up to you to prove otherwise. You can't hit a guy on the back. Prove to me you can.

[?H?L?QU?L?$]

I have to grant it to double L... dude is often more wrong than anyone I know and keeps being proven wrong yet here he is, arguing yet another lost cause.

[Tam Tam]

I'd punch you in you smart ass face too for the record.
OOOoooOOOooooooo...ouch. :rolleyes:

[Double L]

I have to grant it to double L... dude is often more wrong than anyone I know and keeps being proven wrong yet here he is, arguing yet another lost cause.

and here you are, without proof, without an opinion (of your own anyways), and without anything to add. why are you here again?

[steve_dave]

Double L.

Prove to me you can hit on the back.

[Double L]

It's up to you to prove otherwise. You can't hit a guy on the back. Prove to me you can.

why is it up to me? i stated that it wasn't. you and FTA told me i was wrong. i think it's on you bro.

[Baron]

OOOoooOOOooooooo...ouch. :rolleyes:Stop pretending you're not afraid.:nono:

[Double L]

Double L.

Prove to me you can hit on the back.

that's not the argument. it's illegal to hit someone on the back. unless he's turned his back to you in which case it is not. nowhere have i claimed that under all conditions is it legal to hit on the back.

[steve_dave]

why is it up to me? i stated that it wasn't. you and FTA told me i was wrong. i think it's on you bro.

No but we hold the correct, logical opinion. You hold the wrong, stupid one. It's up to you to prove your ridiculous claim that you can hit on the back to be correct.

[steve_dave]

that's not the argument. it's illegal to hit someone on the back. unless he's turned his back to you in which case it is not. nowhere have i claimed that under all conditions is it legal to hit on the back.

I know what you're claiming.

[Alabama_Man]

Steve Dave stop being a bitch. :nono:

I agree with Double L. If Fraud Gayweather Jr turns his back and I'm a fighter, I'd be all over that bitch. Kidney punches, spine busters, and a few ass punches just to let him know I'm not fucking around.

Besides that shit is not meant to hurt or anything, those guys were 10oz gloves. Feels like tickles. :slap:

[steve_dave]

Steve Dave stop being a bitch. :nono:

I agree with Double L. If Fraud Gayweather Jr turns his back and I'm a fighter, I'd be all over that bitch. Kidney punches, spine busters, and a few ass punches just to let him know I'm not fucking around.

Besides that shit is not meant to hurt or anything, those guys were 10oz gloves. Feels like tickles. :slap:

I'm not asking anyone what they would do. I'm saying it's ILLEGAL to hit on the back, no matter what.

[?H?L?QU?L?$]

and here you are, without proof, without an opinion (of your own anyways), and without anything to add. why are you here again?
What is it there to add? You're wrong.. as always. You can't hit in the back.

[steve_dave]

What is it there to add? You're wrong.. as always. You can't hit in the back.

:lol: I can't believe I'm even arguing this.

[Baron]

Well, to play devil's advocate, I'd be really surprised if a ref penalized a fighter for punching the back of his opponent because he gave him a part of his back while trying to avoid a punch. I remember when Klitchko faced Peter, a lot of people here were justifying Peter's continuous rabbit punching by saying Klitchko was bringing it to him with his defense. I think there can be a grey area depending on the ref. Obviously I speak strictly from a common sense perspective as I don't know what is the precise ruling on this situation.

[Alabama_Man]

I'm not asking anyone what they would do. I'm saying it's ILLEGAL to hit on the back, no matter what.

Two wrongs make a right.

If Fraud Gayweather Jr turns his back and ducks and rolls his back into punching range, I'm punching the shit out of the back of his head until he plays fair. You can't rely on the refs to help you in that case. It's kill or be killed, that's what this sport is about. :blobbox:

[*Z*]

OOOoooOOOooooooo...ouch. :rolleyes:

It's true. sorry. You shoud really stop acting all high and mighty all the time. You come off as a condescending asshole.

[Alabama_Man]

if PBF turns his back, or bends over like a turtle, his opponent's job is to hit him in the back. it's as simple as that. and the referee's job is to not be a dumb-ass about it and allow it. only then will it work itself out. either PBF will have to endure a back-beating, or he will fight legally. no other intervention is necessary. i think what's been lacking thus far, with few exceptions, is an opponent willing to hit PBF in the back when he ducks like he does.

I agree with this man. This is a genius post. :clap:

If an opponent gives you their back, you take what you can get. This is war, not flower picking. I hope the next guy Fraud Gayweather fights recognizes this and starts pounding that back into submission. I hope he crushes Gayweather's spine.

[*Z*]

Two wrongs make a right.

If Fraud Gayweather Jr turns his back and ducks and rolls his back into punching range, I'm punching the shit out of the back of his head until he plays fair. You can't rely on the refs to help you in that case. It's kill or be killed, that's what this sport is about. :blobbox:

I agree and so do a bunch of others. Nobody is arguing if it's legal or not. I KNOW it's not legal to punch in the back or on the back of the head.

[*Z*]

I'll kick you in your vagina Baron! :tease:

[Alabama_Man]

I agree and so do a bunch of others. Nobody is arguing if it's legal or not. I KNOW it's not legal to punch in the back or on the back of the head.

Exactly. I'm all for punches directly into the spinal cord, kidney lacerations, and skull thumping hammer fist if someone turns their back. That's part of the game.

This is war people, it's killed or be killed.

Just like Denzel Washington said in the movie Training Day, "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove."

"Do you wanna go to jail or go home?"

"King Kong ain't got shit on me!"

[Baron]

I'll kick you in your vagina Baron! :tease:Try but my guess is that your foot will probably break when it'll hit my balls of steel.

[Double L]

Exactly. I'm all for punches directly into the spinal cord, kidney lacerations, and skull thumping hammer fist if someone turns their back. That's part of the game.

This is war people, it's killed of be killed.

Just like Denzel Washington said in the movie Training Day, "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove."

"Do you wanna go to jail or go home?"

"King Kong ain't got shit on me!"

i can never tell if you're being serious or not. but spinal cord injuries and kidney lacerations? you've gotta be kidding, right?

i'm not proposing that fighters hit their opponents in the back in the hopes that they inflict serious injury. i'm proposing they do it in order to deter their opponents from defending themselves illegally.

i do like the idea of a skull thumping hammer-fist though. :lol: i can't remember who, but i can remember distinctly fighters doing this before. perhaps Golota?

[cpa5oh]

Guess I'd have to watch it again to see how far Floyd was really rolling his shoulder over...but I'm not going to subject myself to that fight again. When I watched it the first time I thought nothing of it...wasn't until I read it here that I started to think about it.

The more I think about it, though, even if you just rolled it to where you were showing your opponent only your left side (like you were essentially standing sideways with your chin tucked, right arm up at your chin and left arm across your midsection) the only part he could hit you in with his right hand would be your back/kidneys/back of shoulders (to me the back of the shoulders is part of the upper back.) So to me that is "showing your opponent your back"...maybe not like turning around completely, but like turning halfway, using a "no hit" zone as a shield.

[*Z*]

Try but my guess is that your foot will probably break when it'll hit my balls of steel.

:lol: Touche!

[*Z*]

Ashes is like a grumpy ass old man though. He has hate in his heart.

[steve_dave]

Still waiting for that proof, Double L.

[Alabama_Man]

Still waiting for that proof, Double L.

Seriously Steve :lol:

:dunno:

[steve_dave]

Seriously Steve :lol:

:dunno:

What? :dunno:

[Alabama_Man]

What? :dunno:

"Proof" of legal back hitting? :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

[steve_dave]

"Proof" of legal back hitting? :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

He said it was legal if the opponent turns his back. I want proof. :dunno:

[*Z*]

It's not legal we all know that, but neither is what Floyd was doing. Let's just leave it at that.

[steve_dave]

It's not legal we all know that, but neither is what Floyd was doing. Let's just leave it at that.

Thank you.

The only real illegal tactic Floyd uses, IMO, is when he pushes off with his elbow. He doesn't get called nearly enough for doing that.

[Alabama_Man]

i can never tell if you're being serious or not. but spinal cord injuries and kidney lacerations? you've gotta be kidding, right?

i'm not proposing that fighters hit their opponents in the back in the hopes that they inflict serious injury. i'm proposing they do it in order to deter their opponents from defending themselves illegally.

i do like the idea of a skull thumping hammer-fist though. :lol: i can't remember who, but i can remember distinctly fighters doing this before. perhaps Golota?

Double L, I'm as serious as a fat lady in the buffet line.

In this sport it's kill or be killed, take or be taken.

This is war, we prepare for war in times of peace.

Nothing is more satisfying than punching a back turning bitch in the spine. :warning:

[StingerKarl]

Toney and Ezzard Charles were the two masters at that particular move, as are Roger and Floyd Mayweather.
I know Charles was one of James' boxing heroes, and he could execute that move just as well or if not better than Ezzard.
I know it takes balls to attempt that as one miscalculation and it's lights out as your chin is unprotected.

[Pascals Wager]

I think the shoulder roll is borderline. What I do think is or at least should be illegal is when Floyd bends all the way over and turns away. This leaves nothing but illegal openings.

He reminded me of Jimmy Young V Ali. It would n't of surprised me if he had stuck his head between the ropes...

[Double L]

Toney and Ezzard Charles were the two masters at that particular move, as are Roger and Floyd Mayweather.
I know Charles was one of James' boxing heroes, and he could execute that move just as well or if not better than Ezzard.
I know it takes balls to attempt that as one miscalculation and it's lights out as your chin is unprotected.

Wasn't Walcott somewhat of a pioneer in this area as well?

[StingerKarl]

Yeah, that's a good example.
I was thinking more in terms of rolling and throwing the counter uppercut which James ate Holyfield's lunch with and Charles destroyed Pat Valentino, Cesar Brion, and Rex Layne with, and really hurt Rocky on a few occasions with it.
I would say that Walcott was the master at the counter right with the roll, which is what he floored Louis with several times, and must have hit Marciano a dozen times flush with it in their first fight.
Walcott was a counterpunching genius, one of the best ever in any weight division, and he had those huge shoulders that he rolled and deflected blows with.

[mikE]

The thing is, getting hit in the back of the head is REALLY dangerous. That's how guys can get seriously hurt.

I've never seen anyone seriously hurt from this although many have been hit behind the head.

Everyone can name the Norris/Santana fight, but he wasn't seriously hurt, at least it didn't seem like it.

The one fight where it might have been a behind the head shot, but i'm not sure, was the Ratanachai vs Ibarra fight that messed up Ibarra. At least I think that was the fight...there may have been a joel luna zarate ko that had a guy out for a while, too, back then.

In any case, it doesn't happen nearly as much as the 'wive's tale' would predict. Obviously, I'm just going by empirical recollection here...and could be wrong.

[KaukipRrr]

If Fraud remained legally square like most fighters are obliged to, with his hand glued to the right side of his head, and the other laying across the left side of his body he'd be open for a left hook down low, a right hook up top, and all forms of jabs and straight shots plus the uppercut, it takes 'defensive brilliance' of the reflexes to stand your ground and guard 5 or 6 openings with two hands, however with Fraud's illegal stance he's only got to keep his hands in the same place and turn his fucking back ILLEGALLY to take away AAAAAALLLLL the holes, and there's nothing 'brilliant' about that, he now ducks and twists his HEAD to boot,..:eeeek: ..fuck!!!, and this is just the skin off the top of the soup, he runs, uses his elbow, forearms, palming-pushing in close quarters, etc, etc, etc.....as I said his style is 90% illegal and it stinks attrociously bad,...but it happens to be classified as "flashy" and "slick" :rolleyes: so I guess that's why he's assembled thousands of Ex-Roy groupies who are in love with that padded 'zero' (They fight NOTHING ALIKE and are NOT similar yet they 'appreciate his skillz' apparently, and back Fraud up in all areas in sync with his destructive ideological views towards boxing, systematically sucking the blood out of this once great sport in a sense, across the business, matchmaking aspect aswell, and to cap it off, in press conferences last year, Fraud introduces an unprecedented victorian styled 'class' system,..:lol: and what's further baffling is the fact that his cock-nibblers proudly echoed the sentiment, and distributed it widely across messageboards as a solid debating tool,....:eeeek: talk about uncle Tom,..

[Azazel]

I've never seen anyone seriously hurt from this although many have been hit behind the head.

Everyone can name the Norris/Santana fight, but he wasn't seriously hurt, at least it didn't seem like it.

The one fight where it might have been a behind the head shot, but i'm not sure, was the Ratanachai vs Ibarra fight that messed up Ibarra. At least I think that was the fight...there may have been a joel luna zarate ko that had a guy out for a while, too, back then.

In any case, it doesn't happen nearly as much as the 'wive's tale' would predict. Obviously, I'm just going by empiracal recollection here...and could be wrong.

I agree, I love how everyon say rabbit puches are so dangerous yet, faled to acknowledge that in some MMA organizations, puches behind the head are legal and I have yet to see a death or serious injuries from it. I remember 2 cases of guy being hurt by punches behind the head, Santos vs Tszyu and some fat amerindian bum on ESPN. So, by FTA and Steve Dave logic, Tszyu should have been dq or, at the very least, it should have been a nc

[KaukipRrr]

Guess I'd have to watch it again to see how far Floyd was really rolling his shoulder over...but I'm not going to subject myself to that fight again. When I watched it the first time I thought nothing of it...wasn't until I read it here that I started to think about it.

The more I think about it, though, even if you just rolled it to where you were showing your opponent only your left side (like you were essentially standing sideways with your chin tucked, right arm up at your chin and left arm across your midsection) the only part he could hit you in with his right hand would be your back/kidneys/back of shoulders (to me the back of the shoulders is part of the upper back.) So to me that is "showing your opponent your back"...maybe not like turning around completely, but like turning halfway, using a "no hit" zone as a shield.

Lovely post sir,.. Fighters like Fraud, Toney and Hopkins use a 2 part illegal back and brain-stem defensive system,...which is attrociously glorifed by the media and forums alike,.......... Hopkins, Toney and Fraud are unique (and shameless) in the fact that they BEGIN turning thier backs on thier opponents while they are rigidly upright, ........they THEN transcend into part 2 of the illegal system, which sadly,...ALOT of other fighters seem to have adopted aswell,.........it's the notorious 'back and brainstem FOLD'..., which effectively transfers thier heads below thier opponents belt level,..where, just like part 1 of the 'shoulder roll', the only place you can crack them is along the spinal column from the arse to the top of the skull, 'the fold' usually turns into a clinch upon completion,...

Be careful when disputing the legality of fundamental impliments in certain fighting styles around here though mate,...a majority of Fightbeat posters despise boxing rules at approximately a 40 to 5 ratio,... it is to them, about favoured fighters 'winning',... not the health or potential of this sport as a whole, they dont want the rats to be flushed out, on the account of 'most' of them being American. It is as simple and as pathetic as that, thier retort against the rule book is to submit crying emoticons, and they dont realise, in thier exasperation against the truth,.. just how right they are,.. the situation is a sad one indeed.

[Hut*Hut]

Shoulder roll is legit - turning your back all the way round like Floyd does is surely illegal. Frankly after a few warnings his opponent should just be given free reign to beat the fuck out his back.

[KaukipRrr]

Shoulder roll is legit - turning your back all the way round like Floyd does is surely illegal. Frankly after a few warnings his opponent should just be given free reign to beat the fuck out his back.

Turning your back on your opponent is illegal full stop. You can't perform the shoulder roll and remain legally square I'm afraid. The closest legal relative to the shoulder roll is the 'chin-tuck' which can be done by shrugging the lead shoulder up and tilting the head down within a legally square stance where the spine does not twist,...Hopkins uses this pose by default (it's simultaneously great for bumping the forehead in),...but his pose changes once his opponent advances too close,... he then becomes an utter disgraceful coward.

[suiteness]

Who do you despise more, Hopkins or Floyd?

[KaukipRrr]

Who do you despise more, Hopkins or Floyd?

Hopkins by far!,..

Fraud's felons are all to do with defending himself, the cactus elbow, forearm and palming/pushing the head back, is more of a 'keep away' tool than a malicious infliction..

Hopkins felons are essentially fundamental to his entire game, both defensively and offensively, he embraces exploitation of the rules and lack of enforcement (perhaps pre-organised),..and will gladly roll around on the floor screaming if his opponent roughs him back up.

[cdogg187]

Toney and Ezzard Charles were the two masters at that particular move, as are Roger and Floyd Mayweather.
I know Charles was one of James' boxing heroes, and he could execute that move just as well or if not better than Ezzard.
I know it takes balls to attempt that as one miscalculation and it's lights out as your chin is unprotected.


exactly what I was going to say

[Hut*Hut]

Turning your back on your opponent is illegal full stop. You can't perform the shoulder roll and remain legally square I'm afraid. The closest legal relative to the shoulder roll is the 'chin-tuck' which can be done by shrugging the lead shoulder up and tilting the head down within a legally square stance where the spine does not twist,...Hopkins uses this pose by default (it's simultaneously great for bumping the forehead in),...but his pose changes once his opponent advances too close,... he then becomes an utter disgraceful coward.

Nah man, I definitely think rolling with a shot or blocking with your shoulder is a perfectly legit move. Your opponent couldn't legally hit you with a right in the position you end up in, but that's utterly irrelevant because his right is in extension and he isn't in a position in a position to throw it anyway. And of course he can still come back with a left. So as long as you don't then stay balled up there once the shot has been retracted, it's a great move.

What Floyd often seems to do is some sort of bastardized preemptive shoulder roll though, where he basically shows the other guy his back before the shot is thrown, so the guy doesn't have the option of throwing it legally in the first place. He isn't protecting himself, he's relying on the ref and the rules to do it for him, which IMO makes a mockery of the sport. He should get points off for that shit, or even better have his back and back of his head battered until he stops doing it.

[Pascals Wager]

Someone in one of the Floyd vs. Oscar post-fight threads said that the shoulder roll is illegal (I think it was Kauki.) I never really thought about this. Oscar did it when he trained with Mayweather Sr (though not well) and Mayweather did it all night Saturday.

Is this true?

Seems reasonable to me that it would be illegal...tucking your chin and rolling your shoulder over top basically shows your back to your opponent...opponent isn't allowed to hit your back, but you can't show it to him either, can you?

The way PBF does it most of the times-yes. In fact most of his defensive techique is. He turns his back on his opponent & bends right over.

[Double L]

Ridiculous. Next rant please.


how is this ridiculous? you're ridiculous. you have no logic to back up any of your arguments, ever. you never did. and you never will. you're the true definition of a troll. critical but without the intelligence (or effort) to construct a coherent argument. so you do what you do best. toss insults and try to belittle posters who's posts you don't like.

Ridiculous.

[r o o s t e r]

how is this ridiculous? you're ridiculous. you have no logic to back up any of your arguments, ever. you never did. and you never will. you're the true definition of a troll. critical but without the intelligence (or effort) to construct a coherent argument. so you do what you do best. toss insults and try to belittle posters who's posts you don't like.

Ridiculous.

whose

[Double L]

whose

thanks.

seriously though. since this very old thread was made, PBF continues to turn his back and bend over when he's in trouble and can't get out of the corner. how can his opponent respond to that inteligently other than to hit him there? and when and if he does, he should not be penalized for it.

it's the same deal when someone lands a low-blow but isn't called for it because his opponent was pulling his head down. same exact concept.

it shouldn't even be debatable except that in the eyes of so many on this fcking board PBF can do no wrong.

this is typical of a thread that is critical of PBF. half of the posters make logical and substantiated arguments and the other half sling insults and get personal.

should tell you something about who's right and who's wrong.

[KaukipRrr]

Nah man, I definitely think rolling with a shot or blocking with your shoulder is a perfectly legit move. Your opponent couldn't legally hit you with a right in the position you end up in, but that's utterly irrelevant because his right is in extension and he isn't in a position in a position to throw it anyway. And of course he can still come back with a left. So as long as you don't then stay balled up there once the shot has been retracted, it's a great move.

Well, thoroughly agreed on Fraud ofcourse,... .. but I dont understand what you mean by 'rolling with a shot' as opposed to turning your back?....I would think in order to 'roll', you've got to twist that spine pre-emptively to compete with the lightning quick speed of a punch,.. it may be just a flash in sequence, but so is a soft head knick or quick brush accross the balls,.. it's still on the spectrum and it's still illegal.

[KaukipRrr]

seriously though. since this very old thread was made

I found this thread through google,.. Fightbeat appears to be the only messageboard in the world to have identified the illegal foundation of the shoulder roll,.. and that fills me with a sense of short-lived pride really :cheer:,..---------but it also helps to illustrate a grim reality, considering 40 people to 5 on fightbeat, also think Hopkins headbutts, low blows, clinches, hold and hits, excessive failure to engage, etc is well in accordance with the rules of boxing,........:notallthere: Ummmmmmmm.... What The Fuck!?,........THUS, you can imagine the same tally across other messageboards,...:shit::shit::shit::shit::shit::sh it: *splat*,...

.............Yes, so, boxing's chances of proper regulation, are about as likely as 'world peace'..

[cdogg187]

Shoulder roll is an old school move and its perfectly legal. Now completely turning your back, thats another thing altogether.

but the shoulder roll isnt some new deviant form of fighting invented by Floyd Mayweather

as Hegman astutely pointed out (I cant believe Im saying that) its an old time move... Ezzard Charles was great at it

I should also like to add Jersey Joe Walcott (who had many clever moves) to the discussion as well as the master technician Harold Johnson

Shoulder roll is perfectly legit and is a classic move and one that is HARD to master, that is why only a small group of fighters have been successful with it...

when it works and when a fighter can counter accurately out of it (Toney on his best nights was a classic example of the beauty of the thing) it is a classic, artistic, beautiful thing to watch

Mayweather has recently straddled the lines of legality at some moments, but not enough to where its all he does and the only reason he wins

I dont like the guy, but he is great boxer... get over it

[broadwayjoe]

Shoulder roll is an old school move and its perfectly legal. Now completely turning your back, thats another thing altogether.

but the shoulder roll isnt some new deviant form of fighting invented by Floyd Mayweather

as Hegman astutely pointed out (I cant believe Im saying that) its an old time move... Ezzard Charles was great at it

I should also like to add Jersey Joe Walcott (who had many clever moves) to the discussion as well as the master technician Harold Johnson

Shoulder roll is perfectly legit and is a classic move and one that is HARD to master, that is why only a small group of fighters have been successful with it...

when it works and when a fighter can counter accurately out of it (Toney on his best nights was a classic example of the beauty of the thing) it is a classic, artistic, beautiful thing to watch

Mayweather has recently straddled the lines of legality at some moments, but not enough to where its all he does and the only reason he wins

I dont like the guy, but he is great boxer... get over it

agREED. :bears:

[The Genius]

Seeing as you just bumped a two year old thread Kauks, the least you could do is give us the state you live in. :warning:

PS - Squalor doesn't count either.

[KaukipRrr]

Shoulder roll is an old school move and its perfectly legal. Now completely turning your back, thats another thing altogether.

but the shoulder roll isnt some new deviant form of fighting invented by Floyd Mayweather

as Hegman astutely pointed out (I cant believe Im saying that) its an old time move... Ezzard Charles was great at it

I should also like to add Jersey Joe Walcott (who had many clever moves) to the discussion as well as the master technician Harold Johnson

Shoulder roll is perfectly legit and is a classic move and one that is HARD to master, that is why only a small group of fighters have been successful with it...

when it works and when a fighter can counter accurately out of it (Toney on his best nights was a classic example of the beauty of the thing) it is a classic, artistic, beautiful thing to watch

Mayweather has recently straddled the lines of legality at some moments, but not enough to where its all he does and the only reason he wins

I dont like the guy, but he is great boxer... get over it

Then the rules have to be changed to cater for Fraud, Toney and Hopkins I'm afraid,...it's a distinct contradiction,.... you cant 'roll' without 'turning your back' on your opponent,.. I've seen James Toney at work as you've said, and I wasn't concerntrated on the shoulder roll at that time,.. but I recall thinking how oddly bizarre this exhibition looked,.. watching Jirov grinding his cup up Toney's arse and thigh, stretching his left arm around Toney's shoulder which completely masked Toney's entire head, barely being able to merely prod him in the face with anything?,...Is that really 'beautiful' ?...lol well...to each thier own,..but one thing is for certain, it is ILLEGAL,.. it doesn't matter how glorified felons of the past are,..Marciano's elbow is looked upon as a 'thing of beauty' to 'old school' purists aswell,... is that the historical precedent required to impliment deliberate elbows into the contemporary game?,...

What if Wlad crunched his elbow into a hopeful American heavyweight contender's temple and knocked him out?,.... Would most American journalists, say like the self admitted 'parochial' Ron Borges, ...be respectful of Wlad's vintage use of an old school American tactic?...."What a monster!! he looked like Marciano in there!...he hurt him with a crisp left elbow and finished him off, beautiful stuff"......................:stir: Oh I dont think sooooooo... neither would the messageboards, which would be up in flames..

It doesn't matter what name you use to decorate the felony of 'turning your back' with,....For example,..if your glove is on your chin while you TURN YOUR BACK, that makes it 'the shoulder roll' instead, so suddenly it becomes legal?,.. that's like exonerating a low blow because you flap one of your arms like the 'funky chicken'? lol,.....sorry, the rules are the rules,.. and there can be no argument against that. If your point was to demonstrate how the lack of rule enforcement has been historically poor,... then yes that is indeed true,.. and I alongside the 'minority' on Fightbeat, have been stressing the importance of why the rules should be enforced, and how it would improve fights aesthetically, seeing as the 'fairness' and 'honour' angle still doesn't make any sense to most forum members around here :nono:.

[KaukipRrr]

Seeing as you just bumped a two year old thread Kauks, the least you could do is give us the state you live in. :warning:

PS - Squalor doesn't count either.

Dont you remember that post,.. "You poor bastard, are you able to breathe down there?.. I'm hundreds of miles away in the middle of ______ and there is smoke everywhere"... :nono: You forgot!,... you forgot you forgot...and you obviously never absorb anything I have to say :crying: !!

[cdogg187]

Then the rules have to be changed to cater for Fraud, Toney and Hopkins I'm afraid,...it's a distinct contradiction,.... you cant 'roll' without 'turning your back' on your opponent,.. I've seen James Toney at work as you've said, and I wasn't concerntrated on the shoulder roll at that time,.. but I recall thinking how oddly bizarre this exhibition looked,.. watching Jirov grinding his cup up Toney's arse and thigh, stretching his left arm around Toney's shoulder which completely masked Toney's entire head, barely being able to merely prod him in the face with anything?,...Is that really 'beautiful' ?...lol well...to each thier own,..but one thing is for certain, it is ILLEGAL,.. it doesn't matter how glorified felons of the past are,..Marciano's elbow is looked upon as a 'thing of beauty' to 'old school' purists aswell,... is that the historical precedent required to impliment deliberate elbows into the contemporary game?,...

What if Wlad crunched his elbow into a hopeful American heavyweight contender's temple and knocked him out?,.... Would most American journalists, say like the self admitted 'parochial' Ron Borges, ...be respectful of Wlad's vintage use of an old school American tactic?...."What a monster!! he looked like Marciano in there!...he hurt him with a crisp left elbow and finished him off, beautiful stuff"......................:stir: Oh I dont think sooooooo... neither would the messageboards, which would be up in flames..

It doesn't matter what name you use to decorate the felony of 'turning your back' with,....For example,..if your glove is on your chin while you TURN YOUR BACK, that makes it 'the shoulder roll' instead, so suddenly it becomes legal?,.. that's like exonerating a low blow because you flap one of your arms like the 'funky chicken'? lol,.....sorry, the rules are the rules,.. and there can be no argument against that. If your point was to demonstrate how the lack of rule enforcement has been historically poor,... then yes that is indeed true,.. and I alongside the 'minority' on Fightbeat, have been stressing the importance of why the rules should be enforced, and how it would improve fights aesthetically, seeing as the 'fairness' and 'honour' angle still doesn't make any sense to most forum members around here :nono:.


There isnt any point in talking about boxing with you. Everything with you is about this supposed American organized front of hypocrisy... its all horseshit... if there was such a thing, i certainly didnt get the memo inviting me to join

All I see is you constantly having a negative slant... you like Taylor solely because he 'beat" Hopkins, but Taylor is hardly an aesthetically pleasing fighter... he misses wildly with his right hand at times, almost comically so... he holds... he has had numerous very boring fights... you only like him based off of his win over Hopkins, because you hate him so

As far as Marciano's elbows, I certainly never made any claim that an elbow was a legal and legitimate boxing tactic

What some idiot like Ron Borges has to do with me or what I just posted is beyond me

You do not have to stand with your shoulders perpindicular to your opponent in boxing, as a matter of fact this is not something that I or anyone else would recommend... should it be illegal to bob and weave since you arent giving your opponent a fa9ir chance to punch you in the face?

Using your shoulder to protect the side of your face and deflect a punch is a move that has always been around the game, its not illegal and there is nothing wrong with using it as a defense

you and DOuble L can scream about it all you want, it wont make you right and it wont make the move any less LEGAL

[KaukipRrr]

There isnt any point in talking about boxing with you. Everything with you is about this supposed American organized front of hypocrisy... its all horseshit... if there was such a thing, i certainly didnt get the memo inviting me to join

All I see is you constantly having a negative slant... you like Taylor solely because he 'beat" Hopkins, but Taylor is hardly an aesthetically pleasing fighter... he misses wildly with his right hand at times, almost comically so... he holds... he has had numerous very boring fights... you only like him based off of his win over Hopkins, because you hate him so

As far as Marciano's elbows, I certainly never made any claim that an elbow was a legal and legitimate boxing tactic

What some idiot like Ron Borges has to do with me or what I just posted is beyond me

You do not have to stand with your shoulders perpindicular to your opponent in boxing, as a matter of fact this is not something that I or anyone else would recommend... should it be illegal to bob and weave since you arent giving your opponent a fa9ir chance to punch you in the face?

Using your shoulder to protect the side of your face and deflect a punch is a move that has always been around the game, its not illegal and there is nothing wrong with using it as a defense

you and DOuble L can scream about it all you want, it wont make you right and it wont make the move any less LEGAL

I dont mean to irritate you with "the book"... I just wish you and 95% of Fightbeat, would have some respect for the rules, that's all.

It is physically impossible to shield the entire left side of your body and your ENTIRE head, without turning your back on your opponent... turning your back is simply illegal, and that's the end of that,.. you and the majority of others refuse to accept the rules, and it's a sad thing that boxing continues it's degenerative course with minimum regulation.

[Hut*Hut]

Well, thoroughly agreed on Fraud ofcourse,... .. but I dont understand what you mean by 'rolling with a shot' as opposed to turning your back?....I would think in order to 'roll', you've got to twist that spine pre-emptively to compete with the lightning quick speed of a punch,.. it may be just a flash in sequence, but so is a soft head knick or quick brush accross the balls,.. it's still on the spectrum and it's still illegal.

The closest thing I can find to demonstrate it is this :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-DggRQngGM&feature=channel

The only time his/her back faces his opponent is, as I said, at the point the right hand is in full extension. His opponent isn't prevented from throwing any subsequent shots because of the position he/she is in. In actual fact the way the body turns angles him TOWARDS the left hook, which is the only punch the guy could possibly throw anyway. Thus - why the dickens would you say that move properly executed should be illegal? It's a legitimate way to defend against a right hand in any environment, whether under the Marquess of Queensberry the street or anywhere else.

Floyd on the other hand would many times get his spine and brain stem mashed without the ref defending him. Hopkins main offense on the other hand is ducking down and relying on the referee to break the action and prevent the other guy from battering his brain stem from above. Both should get points of for it, IMO. 'Defend yourself at ALL times'. Anything else makes a mockery of the sport.

[KaukipRrr]

The closest thing I can find to demonstrate it is this :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-DggRQngGM&feature=channel

The only time his/her back faces his opponent is, as I said, at the point the right hand is in full extension. His opponent isn't prevented from throwing any subsequent shots because of the position he/she is in. In actual fact the way the body turns angles him TOWARDS the left hook, which is the only punch the guy could possibly throw anyway. Thus - why the dickens would you say that move properly executed should be illegal? It's a legitimate way to defend against a right hand in any environment, whether under the Marquess of Queensberry the street or anywhere else.

Floyd on the other hand would many times get his spine and brain stem mashed without the ref defending him. Hopkins main offense on the other hand is ducking down and relying on the referee to break the action and prevent the other guy from battering his brain stem from above. Both should get points of for it, IMO. 'Defend yourself at ALL times'. Anything else makes a mockery of the sport.

In that video link,.. which bit are you referring to mate,.. how many minutes in?.. ...

[KaukipRrr]

The closest thing I can find to demonstrate it is this :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-DggRQngGM&feature=channel

The only time his/her back faces his opponent is, as I said, at the point the right hand is in full extension. His opponent isn't prevented from throwing any subsequent shots because of the position he/she is in. In actual fact the way the body turns angles him TOWARDS the left hook, which is the only punch the guy could possibly throw anyway. Thus - why the dickens would you say that move properly executed should be illegal? It's a legitimate way to defend against a right hand in any environment, whether under the Marquess of Queensberry the street or anywhere else.

Floyd on the other hand would many times get his spine and brain stem mashed without the ref defending him. Hopkins main offense on the other hand is ducking down and relying on the referee to break the action and prevent the other guy from battering his brain stem from above. Both should get points of for it, IMO. 'Defend yourself at ALL times'. Anything else makes a mockery of the sport.

Hut hut, from that video you posted I saw nothing illegal whatsoever in that demonstration, I think we had two different things in mind regarding the 'rolling'.. I was thinking of the upright back-twist and fold,.. ..but in that demonstration...:lol: ..out of interest,.., it's all very well to go through the motions like that slowly, but I've never seen anyone counter a straight right with a left to the body like that,.. the only fighter I recall not blocking the straight right with his gloves, and instead turning his head with the punch to lessen the impact was Roberto Duran against Davey Moore,..the unorthodox crazy bastard,...:lol: ..THIS, is an extremely risky way to defend yourself,.. but it ofcourse has nothing to do with Hopkins Fraud and Toney.... I think we're agreed on the issue at hand of the 'back and brain stem' shoulder-roll defence,... and thats what the other posters in here are screaming is legal, when it's absolutely not.

[Hut*Hut]

Hut hut, from that video you posted I saw nothing illegal whatsoever in that demonstration, I think we had two different things in mind regarding the 'rolling'.. I was thinking of the upright back-twist and fold,.. ..but in that demonstration...:lol: ..out of interest,.., it's all very well to go through the motions like that slowly, but I've never seen anyone counter a straight right with a left to the body like that,.. the only fighter I recall not blocking the straight right with his gloves, and instead turning his head with the punch to lessen the impact was Roberto Duran against Davey Moore,..the unorthodox crazy bastard,...:lol: ..THIS, is an extremely risky way to defend yourself,.. but it ofcourse has nothing to do with Hopkins Fraud and Toney.... I think we're agreed on the issue at hand of the 'back and brain stem' shoulder-roll defence,... and thats what the other posters in here are screaming is legal, when it's absolutely not.

The example wasn't perfect, as I said, but it contains the basic method of turning with a shot to avoid it which is basically all a properly executed shoulder roll is. When it's done properly as was by Floyd earlier in his career & was by Toney, Charles, etc it's is a great move. But yeah, I'm with with you that some of things Floyd & Hopkins do are or should be illegal for the basic reason that they aren't defending themselves - they're relying on the ref to do it for them.

[r o o s t e r]

kauki's right: a google search for "shoulder roll boxing" brings up FB as the second result

:cheer:

[Hut*Hut]

kauki's right: a google search for "shoulder roll boxing" brings up FB as the second result

:cheer:

I noticed that too.:lol:

[Donnybrook]

I think the shoulder roll is borderline. What I do think is or at least should be illegal is when Floyd bends all the way over and turns away. This leaves nothing but illegal openings.

Bingo.

SHoulder roll is legal.

Showing your back (NOT your side, don't get those confused) to your opponent is not.

Neither, frankly, is bending below the opponent's waist.

[Donnybrook]

Shoulder roll is an old school move and its perfectly legal. Now completely turning your back, thats another thing altogether.

but the shoulder roll isnt some new deviant form of fighting invented by Floyd Mayweather

as Hegman astutely pointed out (I cant believe Im saying that) its an old time move... Ezzard Charles was great at it

I should also like to add Jersey Joe Walcott (who had many clever moves) to the discussion as well as the master technician Harold Johnson

Shoulder roll is perfectly legit and is a classic move and one that is HARD to master, that is why only a small group of fighters have been successful with it...

when it works and when a fighter can counter accurately out of it (Toney on his best nights was a classic example of the beauty of the thing) it is a classic, artistic, beautiful thing to watch

Mayweather has recently straddled the lines of legality at some moments, but not enough to where its all he does and the only reason he wins

I dont like the guy, but he is great boxer... get over it

Absolutely. Hell, KID CHOCOLATE used it.

[The Genius]

Dont you remember that post,.. "You poor bastard, are you able to breathe down there?.. I'm hundreds of miles away in the middle of ______ and there is smoke everywhere"... :nono: You forgot!,... you forgot you forgot...and you obviously never absorb anything I have to say :crying: !!

So you did. My apologies.

[KaukipRrr]

Bingo.

Showing your back (NOT your side, don't get those confused) to your opponent is not.

Neither, frankly, is bending below the opponent's waist.

No it isn't. Unless they made this clause up by themselves.

"*You can't hold your opponent and hit him at the same time, or duck so low that your head is below your opponent's belt line".

http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Rules_of_Boxing

I can definitely see the sense why it would be illegal,.. as it's the same deal with the shoulder roll,.. where do you hit your opponent when he's folded over like that?...

[cdogg187]

Absolutely. Hell, KID CHOCOLATE used it.


exactly

and thats the 1930s we're talking about

[TysonFan4Ever]

Not in the fucking back, of course not. Its up to the official to punish a fighter who turns his back, via deductions and/or threat of disqualification.

I cannot believe this is even being asked. Are you fucking stupid? Do you even understand the rules of boxing and why they're necessary? Fucking christ.


No reason to call somebody stupid because they disagree. I don't see anything wrong with Floyd's shoulder roll, and I wouldn't hit him in the back of the head but I would smash his back and kidneys every time he showed it to me though.

[KaukipRrr]

exactly

and thats the 1930s we're talking about

Cdogg, does that mean we can embrace De La Hoya's dive,... by stating in responce to his match-fixing scandal against Hopkins... that... "JAKE LAMOTTA DID IT!!"....'old school baby'... 'corruption is a part of boxing',....?

..........and no, please dont say "What does Jake Lamotta have anything to do with this??" ... you know,..as you did in my last post,..it's an example in perfect allignment with the precedent you're trying to set by expressing vindication that the rules have been broken in the past and that justifies it in the ring today..., because obviously, it's impossible to argue in favor of breaking the rules.

Beyond the hurricane of spin, and writhing this subject seems to bring devout fans of these contemporary American fighters who possess this fundamentally illegal defensive apparatus,... the argument comes down to one, sole, irrefuteable element,.. there is a direct and distinct contradiction against the rules of boxing, which states, that you cannot turn your back on your opponent, neither can you duck your head below your opponents waist-line,...Illegal implimentation featured in part 1 and part 2 of this 'rolling' defence.

1) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=72&stc=1&d=1237937763

2) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=71&stc=1&d=1237937666

[cdogg187]

Cdogg, does that mean we can embrace De La Hoya's dive,... by stating in responce to his match-fixing scandal against Hopkins... that... "JAKE LAMOTTA DID IT!!"....'old school baby'... 'corruption is a part of boxing',....?

..........and no, please dont say "What does Jake Lamotta have anything to do with this??" ... you know,..as you did in my last post,..it's an example in perfect allignment with the precedent you're trying to set by expressing vindication that the rules have been broken in the past and that justifies it in the ring today..., because obviously, it's impossible to argue in favor of breaking the rules.

Beyond the hurricane of spin, and writhing this subject seems to bring devout fans of these contemporary American fighters who possess this fundamentally illegal defensive apparatus,... the argument comes down to one, sole, irrefuteable element,.. there is a direct and distinct contradiction against the rules of boxing, which states, that you cannot turn your back on your opponent, neither can you duck your head below your opponents waist-line,...Illegal implimentation featured in part 1 and part 2 of this 'rolling' defence.

1) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=72&stc=1&d=1237937763

2) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=71&stc=1&d=1237937666

first off, I dont believe for a second that DLH took a dive against Hopkins... he may have decided to not get up, but he went down legitimately from a body shot... secondly, you are attempting to equate a legal defensive tactic (presenting a more a narrow target to your opponent -- the true shoulder roll... note I dont say completely turning your back to a guy) to someone purposely quitting in a fight in order to present a false outcome... those two things can not be reconciled... they arent in the same galaxy

Should Pernell Whitaker or Niccolino Locche have asterisks next to their victories because they moved in such a way that they always kept their opponents off balance and presented them with no square targets to punch at???

Apparantley, it should be illegal to use angles when you are flat footed???

Turning your back completely IS illegal, but rolling your shoulder to avoid a punch isn't

Again, it is laughable that you compare the shoulder roll to someone actually throwing a fight

[KaukipRrr]

first off, I dont believe for a second that DLH took a dive against Hopkins... he may have decided to not get up, but he went down legitimately from a body shot... secondly, you are attempting to equate a legal defensive tactic (presenting a more a narrow target to your opponent -- the true shoulder roll... note I dont say completely turning your back to a guy) to someone purposely quitting in a fight in order to present a false outcome... those two things can not be reconciled... they arent in the same galaxy

Should Pernell Whitaker or Niccolino Locche have asterisks next to their victories because they moved in such a way that they always kept their opponents off balance and presented them with no square targets to punch at???

Apparantley, it should be illegal to use angles when you are flat footed???

Turning your back completely IS illegal, but rolling your shoulder to avoid a punch isn't

Again, it is laughable that you compare the shoulder roll to someone actually throwing a fight

:nono: Uh Cdogg,.. What does 'narrowing' mean?,... How does a fighter 'narrow' his target?.... :nono: does he blow wind out of himself like a puffer fish?.. or when you say narrow... do you mean.. he hides the 'legal hit zones' by turning his back?... (here it comes....*yawn*)--> *You cannot punch your opponent's back, or the back of his head or neck (rabbit punch), or on the kidneys (kidney punch). that's the clause in plain english...

Look at those pictured examples above??... Fraud certainly 'narrows the target' doesnt he?...LOL... all the legal punch zones are 'narrowed' alright,....to hit Fraud legally while he has that safe little 'time-out' behind the no-hit zone.. you'd have to put your fist THROUGH his spine like a sequence you'd see in the terminator sequels, ...groupies who find themselves pinned to the wall against 'the book'...say.. "ok ok.. then just hit him in the back when he does that".... um NO....that's wrong too,.. ..are we to begin unravelling all the rules to comfort a few popular American fighters??.... The referee needs to pull the initial felony up, instead of allowing the 'you foul, I foul' philosophy to extrapolate,..- if the ref lets it all ride,...it's only a matter of time before someone falls down crying, trying to get the other guy disqualified i.e the beloved Bernard Hopkins...the life long infamous abider of the 'dishonour code' will squirm his way back behind the 'honour code' for a few seconds and give the referee his familiar 'he fouling me' bitch face,....(the way he has done before).

Most people dont have to stand 'completely square' either ...e.g- the way Mike Tyson used to,.. Hopkins can tuck his chin behind his shoulder and still remain legally square... ... the PROBLEM I have... is simply with those snapshots I've taken above 1) & 2) ...it's the critical animated components of the "brilliant shoulder roll" - "defensive wizardry"...that we see Fraud frequently perform, alongside James Toney,..and occasionally Bernard Hopkins will impliment part 1,... but most of the time indulge only in the 2nd part of that illegal shit above (as do alot of other fighters sadly),..

Yes you dont have a problem with it, but it's CLEARLY contradictory to the rules that are made to keep a fair system functioning,...*this is when I type in a scenario of an 'undesireable European' exploiting the lack of rule enforcement to beat offensive-minded American fighters*,... see if the conditions weren't so well suited from 'popular American fighters' points of view,.. Id dare to say most messageboards alongside American sportwriters would finally be crying about the 'state of tactics' seeing as there is this continuous and intense whining and sobbing over petty personal complexities like the fact that most of the top heavyweights are from Europe?,..--shit like this will dominate website headlines on a daily basis,... but boxing's serious lack of enforcement of her own rules, or WORSE, the paradox of embracing the filthy tactics, will be mentioned favourably in praise of the 'ruthless, ring legend' Bernard Hopkins, ie ("he knows where the ref is at all times the cunning old dog")...:doh: could this be unprecedented in any other sport?....I see these double standards clearly,.. and it's directly connected,... one snip of the wire can stop the entire engine from functioning properly,... this is why I go off into one of those frequent 'irrelevant rants' Cdogg,..... they stem from the initial point of rule breaking....*snip* ...and the system begins to degenerate... it is getting worse... but,.. it has been under-performing for quite some time.

:nono: ... Mohammed Ali's 'chronic holding' ...'Wlad-like' holding.. was illegal,.... it also meant for eye-searing viewing,.. ..it doesnt seem to matter in retrospect because Mohammed Ali was a 'popular celebrity' and 'civil rights advocate',... he still shouldnt have been allowed to stop the fight whenever he pleased,... just like Wlad should not be allowed to do so in kind,... it is against the rules,... so no more ... 'examples of felonies' from the past,...those examples do not legalise felonies in the present day.... it only illustrates a problem shared.

[LOK]

first off, I dont believe for a second that DLH took a dive against Hopkins... he may have decided to not get up, but he went down legitimately from a body shot... secondly, you are attempting to equate a legal defensive tactic (presenting a more a narrow target to your opponent -- the true shoulder roll... note I dont say completely turning your back to a guy) to someone purposely quitting in a fight in order to present a false outcome... those two things can not be reconciled... they arent in the same galaxy

Should Pernell Whitaker or Niccolino Locche have asterisks next to their victories because they moved in such a way that they always kept their opponents off balance and presented them with no square targets to punch at???

Apparantley, it should be illegal to use angles when you are flat footed???

Turning your back completely IS illegal, but rolling your shoulder to avoid a punch isn't

Again, it is laughable that you compare the shoulder roll to someone actually throwing a fight

brother Cdogg.. Kauki has some really weird thing against Floyd.. to even argue with him is pointless as his obsession with the "shoulder roll" is ridiculous

[Roll With The Punches]

1) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=72&stc=1&d=1237937763

2) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=71&stc=1&d=1237937666




:atu: those pictures are disgraceful
....that is a complete joke....floyd may as well have spit out his mouth piece, turned his back, and ran to the other side of the ring

but you'd be hard pressed to find pics like that of other shoulder rolling fighters

[KaukipRrr]

:atu: those pictures are disgraceful
....that is a complete joke....floyd may as well have spit out his mouth piece, turned his back, and ran to the other side of the ring

but you'd be hard pressed to find pics like that of other shoulder rolling fighters

:crafty: Ohhh I wouldnt bet on it,... it's actually very easy,.... afterall....I've got all 12 rounds of Toney - Jirov,... more back than you'll ever see in a history of Illuminati's signatures..

[cdogg187]

:nono: Uh Cdogg,.. What does 'narrowing' mean?,... How does a fighter 'narrow' his target?.... :nono: does he blow wind out of himself like a puffer fish?.. or when you say narrow... do you mean.. he hides the 'legal hit zones' by turning his back?... (here it comes....*yawn*)--> *You cannot punch your opponent's back, or the back of his head or neck (rabbit punch), or on the kidneys (kidney punch). that's the clause in plain english...

Look at those pictured examples above??... Fraud certainly 'narrows the target' doesnt he?...LOL... all the legal punch zones are 'narrowed' alright,....to hit Fraud legally while he has that safe little 'time-out' behind the no-hit zone.. you'd have to put your fist THROUGH his spine like a sequence you'd see in the terminator sequels, ...groupies who find themselves pinned to the wall against 'the book'...say.. "ok ok.. then just hit him in the back when he does that".... um NO....that's wrong too,.. ..are we to begin unravelling all the rules to comfort a few popular American fighters??.... The referee needs to pull the initial felony up, instead of allowing the 'you foul, I foul' philosophy to extrapolate,..- if the ref lets it all ride,...it's only a matter of time before someone falls down crying, trying to get the other guy disqualified i.e the beloved Bernard Hopkins...the life long infamous abider of the 'dishonour code' will squirm his way back behind the 'honour code' for a few seconds and give the referee his familiar 'he fouling me' bitch face,....(the way he has done before).

Most people dont have to stand 'completely square' either ...e.g- the way Mike Tyson used to,.. Hopkins can tuck his chin behind his shoulder and still remain legally square... ... the PROBLEM I have... is simply with those snapshots I've taken above 1) & 2) ...it's the critical animated components of the "brilliant shoulder roll" - "defensive wizardry"...that we see Fraud frequently perform, alongside James Toney,..and occasionally Bernard Hopkins will impliment part 1,... but most of the time indulge only in the 2nd part of that illegal shit above (as do alot of other fighters sadly),..

Yes you dont have a problem with it, but it's CLEARLY contradictory to the rules that are made to keep a fair system functioning,...*this is when I type in a scenario of an 'undesireable European' exploiting the lack of rule enforcement to beat offensive-minded American fighters*,... see if the conditions weren't so well suited from 'popular American fighters' points of view,.. Id dare to say most messageboards alongside American sportwriters would finally be crying about the 'state of tactics' seeing as there is this continuous and intense whining and sobbing over petty personal complexities like the fact that most of the top heavyweights are from Europe?,..--shit like this will dominate website headlines on a daily basis,... but boxing's serious lack of enforcement of her own rules, or WORSE, the paradox of embracing the filthy tactics, will be mentioned favourably in praise of the 'ruthless, ring legend' Bernard Hopkins, ie ("he knows where the ref is at all times the cunning old dog")...:doh: could this be unprecedented in any other sport?....I see these double standards clearly,.. and it's directly connected,... one snip of the wire can stop the entire engine from functioning properly,... this is why I go off into one of those frequent 'irrelevant rants' Cdogg,..... they stem from the initial point of rule breaking....*snip* ...and the system begins to degenerate... it is getting worse... but,.. it has been under-performing for quite some time.

:nono: ... Mohammed Ali's 'chronic holding' ...'Wlad-like' holding.. was illegal,.... it also meant for eye-searing viewing,.. ..it doesnt seem to matter in retrospect because Mohammed Ali was a 'popular celebrity' and 'civil rights advocate',... he still shouldnt have been allowed to stop the fight whenever he pleased,... just like Wlad should not be allowed to do so in kind,... it is against the rules,... so no more ... 'examples of felonies' from the past,...those examples do not legalise felonies in the present day.... it only illustrates a problem shared.


Im not going to bother with you... you are still on this made-up "undesirable European" "popular American" bullshit

Im not like that, and Im not going to bother discussing anything with you if you keep going in that direction

I didnt even read the remainder of your post after that. I am not going to bother trying to have a debate with a guy who has an ulterior motive

[KaukipRrr]

Im not going to bother with you... you are still on this made-up "undesirable European" "popular American" bullshit

Im not like that, and Im not going to bother discussing anything with you if you keep going in that direction

I didnt even read the remainder of your post after that. I am not going to bother trying to have a debate with a guy who has an ulterior motive

Ok,.. we'll agree to disagree,..I tried to explain in that extensive post above, how those 'irrelevant rants' were actually linked to the initial point of breaking the rules and how it may expansively harm the sport.

I persisted with this subject, as I find it baffling,.. that in those pictured examples...you and virtually everyone here bar a scarce few, refuse to see how it breaches the rules in 1) Turning your back on your opponent, and 2)..Ducking below your opponents waistline.... I see this two bit 'twist and fold' move performed by the '3 great defensive wizards' of boxing again and again, round after round,.. and due to the fact that there is a contradictory clash between these three boxers (who are a lovely bunch of moral characters), up against the official rules of boxing, ie the health and integrity of the sport,........ which 'interests' do the majority choose?...
...so feel free to use that crying emoticon for me all that you wish, it's fitting enough...I do find it sad,.. from a philosophical point of view especially.

[Hut*Hut]

Cdogg, does that mean we can embrace De La Hoya's dive,... by stating in responce to his match-fixing scandal against Hopkins... that... "JAKE LAMOTTA DID IT!!"....'old school baby'... 'corruption is a part of boxing',....?

..........and no, please dont say "What does Jake Lamotta have anything to do with this??" ... you know,..as you did in my last post,..it's an example in perfect allignment with the precedent you're trying to set by expressing vindication that the rules have been broken in the past and that justifies it in the ring today..., because obviously, it's impossible to argue in favor of breaking the rules.

Beyond the hurricane of spin, and writhing this subject seems to bring devout fans of these contemporary American fighters who possess this fundamentally illegal defensive apparatus,... the argument comes down to one, sole, irrefuteable element,.. there is a direct and distinct contradiction against the rules of boxing, which states, that you cannot turn your back on your opponent, neither can you duck your head below your opponents waist-line,...Illegal implimentation featured in part 1 and part 2 of this 'rolling' defence.

1) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=72&stc=1&d=1237937763

2) http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=71&stc=1&d=1237937666

I think everyone can agree those moves are illegal and Floyd should have been deducted points. Does anyone disagree? And conversely, you seem to agree with the legality of a legit shoulder roll. So lets all stop thu fussin' and thu fightin'!

[KaukipRrr]

I think everyone can agree those moves are illegal and Floyd should have been deducted points. Does anyone disagree?

And conversely, do you disagree with the legality of a legit shoulder roll? You don't seem to. If not why all the fightin' and the fussin' over the last eight pages when everyone seems to be in complete agreement on this issue!?

In that video you provided,.. is the 'legal' shoulder roll featured at all?... because, Im still scratching my head,.. I saw no illegal backtwisting in that demonstration whatsoever, nothing that I was referring to, nor anything that resembled my understanding of what the 'shoulder roll' is supposed to be (obviously as you can see in those snapshots).. That demonstration reminded me of Duran against Moore,.. twisting his neck to lessen the impact of the punch,..the insane nutter,... Fraud, Hopkins and Toney are nowhere to be seen in that video mate,....

edit - Oh and the majority,...still dont seem to be able to bring themselves to admit that my pictured examples above,..are illegal. ^...

[cdogg187]

brother Cdogg.. Kauki has some really weird thing against Floyd.. to even argue with him is pointless as his obsession with the "shoulder roll" is ridiculous


looks that way, bro

Im not a fan of Floyd, and I can see where sometimes he turns the shoulder roll into an outright turning of the back... but to insinuate that he ALWAYS does that or that the true shoulder roll is illegal is just dumb to me

[cdogg187]

I think everyone can agree those moves are illegal and Floyd should have been deducted points. Does anyone disagree? And conversely, you seem to agree with the legality of a legit shoulder roll. So lets all stop thu fussin' and thu fightin'!


Exactly

Those are examples where it becomes simply a matter of ducking and turning and is not a legit defensive move

THOSE are illegal

but the shoulder roll, done properly, is not illegal

[Hut*Hut]

In that video you provided,.. is the 'legal' shoulder roll featured at all?... because, Im still scratching my head,.. I saw no illegal backtwisting in that demonstration whatsoever, nothing that I was referring to, nor anything that resembled my understanding of what the 'shoulder roll' is supposed to be (obviously as you can see in those snapshots).. That demonstration reminded me of Duran against Moore,.. twisting his neck to lessen the impact of the punch,..the insane nutter,... Fraud, Hopkins and Toney are nowhere to be seen in that video mate,....

edit - Oh and the majority,...still dont seem to be able to bring themselves to admit that my pictured examples above,..are illegal. ^...

I said at the time the vid i posted was far from a perfect example. But it contained the basic kernel of what a legit shoulder roll is, minus the actual deflection of the blow with the shoulder. The stuff you saw from Floyd there isn't a shoulder roll - it's cheating.

[KaukipRrr]

I said at the time the vid i posted was far from a perfect example. But it contained the basic kernel of what a legit shoulder roll is, minus the actual deflection of the blow with the shoulder. The stuff you saw from Floyd there isn't a shoulder roll - it's cheating.

Fraud's stance is legal,..

Right here --> http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78&stc=1&d=1238099793

No problems, the flow of the boxing match can continue, Fraud is blocking the left side of his stomach, leaving his head open.

Then all of a sudden with just a little micro-twist..

---> http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=80&stc=1&d=1238099837

The whole of Fraud's left side becomes an illegal hit zone,.. kidney's, spine and brainstem,...Oscar's right hand, according to the rules, should now be completely disabled?....

The next 2 frames in this sequence is as you already know the "full twist and fold", more suitable for springboard diving than the boxing ring,...... it just goes to show.. how foul riddled this illegal defence truelly is,...and the way Fraud can fluctuate in subtle ways between the 1 part legal, 6 parts illegal zones,.. it's like Hopkins sometimes butting soft,...sometimes really putting in the full gore http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/images/icons/icon12.gif:lol:.

[Hut*Hut]

Fraud's stance is legal,..

Right here --> http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78&stc=1&d=1238099793

No problems, the flow of the boxing match can continue, Fraud is blocking the left side of his stomach, leaving his head open.

Then all of a sudden with just a little micro-twist..

---> http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=80&stc=1&d=1238099837

The whole of Fraud's left side becomes an illegal hit zone,.. kidney's, spine and brainstem,...Oscar's right hand, according to the rules, should now be completely disabled?....

The next 2 frames in this sequence is as you already know the "full twist and fold", more suitable for springboard diving than the boxing ring,...... it just goes to show.. how foul riddled this illegal defence truelly is,...and the way Fraud can fluctuate in subtle ways between the 1 part legal, 6 parts illegal zones,.. it's like Hopkins sometimes butting soft,...sometimes really putting in the full gore http://www.fightbeat.com/forums/images/icons/icon12.gif:lol:.

Oscar's right hand is already disabled - he's already thrown it! He doesn't have two right hands, mate. As long as Floyd isn't in that position when Oscar is in a position to throw another right (which he often is and should be penalized immediately for, preferably with a barrage to the kidneys and brain stem) then there is no foul. If he turns too far and happens to take the shot on the kidney then it's entirely his fault.

[KaukipRrr]

Oscar's right hand is already disabled - he's already thrown it! He doesn't have two right hands, mate. As long as Floyd isn't in that position when Oscar is in a position to throw another right (which he often is and should be penalized immediately for) then there is no foul. If he turns too far and happens to take the shot on the kidney then it's entirely his fault.

Yeah but see that's the other thing,.. this is what I mean by his right hand should now be 'disabled'...according to the rules, illegal activity now runs rampant,.. 'foul for foul' ..cant work either,.. the initial felon must be pulled up,.. and that's Fraud,.. with his 'masterful' defence.

All praise the DELICIOUSLY LEGAL, TRUE masters of defence,.. Winky Wright,..Joshua Clottey,..Arthur Abraham,.. Eddie Chambers,... they abide by the rules when they dont even have to!!!!..:pray:

Because of this thread Hut Hut,.. I now must wear 'the bible' in my avatar at all times for protection,.. it makes all the demons shreik and hiss and turn thier heads and cover thier eyes,..

[cdogg187]

Oscar's right hand is already disabled - he's already thrown it! He doesn't have two right hands, mate. As long as Floyd isn't in that position when Oscar is in a position to throw another right (which he often is and should be penalized immediately for, preferably with a barrage to the kidneys and brain stem) then there is no foul. If he turns too far and happens to take the shot on the kidney then it's entirely his fault.


Thank you! Exactly!!

Close the thread!

[KaukipRrr]

Thank you! Exactly!!

Close the thread!

So above we see Oscar hitting Fraud in the back,.. and thats ok?,.. no legal problems there?...

How did Oscar hit Floyd in the back?... did he jump behind him and hit his back?,.. or was the back presented to him as he hit it?...

Whatever the case, ............it's both illegal, for Oscar to hit him there,..and for Fraud to defend the entire left side of his body and head with his kidneys and brain-stem. The only way to clean this shit up, is to penalise Fraud for turning on his opponent. Full stop. Closing threads is not going to vaporise the rules of boxing,.. as I said, I think this might be unprecedented in any other sport,...it's like trying to defend some 'legendary midfielder' for slapping the ball down with his hand on the soccer pitch,..then screaming and writhing and rolling around trying to free him from the burden of internationally recognised rules, to benefit that 1 fucking player,..and not the entire game.. :notallthere:.... Oh,..let me guess.."whats soccer got anything to do with this??" .....^^^^^ there's framed evidence in abundance, virtually taken in a sequence,...yet you,.. are still trying to desperately find a way to clear that maneuver, which is irrefuteably illegal, in accordance with the rules of boxing. Im not trying to be offensive, nor am I trying to be a troll,..it's just baffling that you cannot see the contradiction in what Fraud does, verses what the rules permit.

[Hut*Hut]

So above we see Oscar hitting Fraud in the back,.. and thats ok?,.. no legal problems there?...

How did Oscar hit Floyd in the back?... did he jump behind him and hit his back?,.. or was the back presented to him as he hit it?...


If Floyd takes the shot on his back it's because he's fucked up the move! But he certainly doesn't gain any advantage by fucking up the move and taking a kidney shot instead of taking it on his elbow, so why bother to penalize it? The sore kidney is his penalty. The problem comes when he stays in that position long enough to discourage another right from being thrown. Frankly even that wouldn't be a problem if the ref made it quite clear that his opponent had carte blanche to keep throwing to wherever was open to hit when he was in the illegal position. It would permanently correct itself within 30 seconds, ideally by knock out.

Lastly, I think most people have acknowledged that you make a good point that allot of what Floyd and Hopkins do is illegal and needs to be addressed. It's just that most don't wanna throw the baby out with the bath water like you seem to.

[cdogg187]

If Floyd takes the shot on his back it's because he's fucked up the move! But he certainly doesn't gain any advantage by fucking up the move and taking a kidney shot instead of taking it on his elbow, so why bother to penalize it? The sore kidney is his penalty. The problem comes when he stays in that position long enough to discourage another right from being thrown. Frankly even that wouldn't be a problem if the ref made it quite clear that his opponent had carte blanche to keep throwing to wherever was open to hit when he was in the illegal position. It would permanently correct itself within 30 seconds, ideally by knock out.

Lastly, I think most people have acknowledged that you make a good point that allot of what Floyd and Hopkins do is illegal and needs to be addressed. It's just that most don't wanna throw the baby out with the bath water like you seem to.


:mj: Precisely

[KaukipRrr]

If Floyd takes the shot on his back it's because he's fucked up the move! But he certainly doesn't gain any advantage by fucking up the move and taking a kidney shot instead of taking it on his elbow, so why bother to penalize it? The sore kidney is his penalty. The problem comes when he stays in that position long enough to discourage another right from being thrown. Frankly even that wouldn't be a problem if the ref made it quite clear that his opponent had carte blanche to keep throwing to wherever was open to hit when he was in the illegal position. It would permanently correct itself within 30 seconds, ideally by knock out.

Lastly, I think most people have acknowledged that you make a good point that allot of what Floyd and Hopkins do is illegal and needs to be addressed. It's just that most don't wanna throw the baby out with the bath water like you seem to.


But Hut Hut,... the rules are there to rid the sport of any foul play at all, and a foul has still been comitted here, as Oscar has hit Fraud in an illegal zone,... it isnt his fault, as Fraud clearly turned his back to him,..but the only way to prevent any foul in coming to fruition in this fashion again,...is to penalise Fraud for initially turning his back, which has resulted in this chain of felonies,....

It's also 'risky' ...from the aggressors point of view,.. to take the law into his own hands you see, and smack Fraud in the spine or the brain-stem,...because afterall,.. it is illegal in kind to do that,.. aswell as it being more 'blatant and detectable' in appearance, due to the fact that people tend to naturally be concerntrated on the action, 'the aggression' instead of the illegal defensive maneuver.. so as a result, you may draw an incompetant biased hypocrit like Joe Cortez, in a REAL scenario,.. taking points away from the aggressor, without realising the fact that there was a foul commited resulting in this secondary foul. Im referring to the Fraud - Hatton fight ofcourse,..(Hatton is far from an angel,.. but that's for another thread),...

You know,..I can vaguely see what your trying to say about 'legally' rolling with a shot,.. .. but... lol... it is still on the extreeeeeeeeeeme far edge of the 'turning' spectrum,....as you'd have to be touched by the glove from a legally square stance,..and virtually absorb a bit of it before you can twist with it to lessen the impact,...(this could be defensively solved by simply blocking the shot with your conventional left glove)..but anyway...if you turn away from the punch before it lands.... it's still on the very extreme 'edge' of the 'turning' spectrum... and as petty as it is.. it would still have to be classified as illegal as the softest brush to your opponent's balls.

Also you know if the rules were enforced,.. can you imagine the amount of points the aggressor could take away from his 'shoulder rolling' opponent,.. just by feinting the right hand?.. 'the twisting' to roll with the speed of a punch would have to be a little pre-emptive (which is why it's on the far end of the turning spectrum)....thus if the rules were indeed enforced for 'turning',.. the 'legal' shoulder roller,.. could result in outright disqualification before the second round. *Feint, twist, :nono: uh!,..*feint, twist, :nono: uh!.. that's it... one point..

On a slightly different tangent,...................Im also interested to know..and we havent discussed this yet,..but is it even legal to hit your opponent on the back of the shoulder and arm?.. the rules state that you simply cant hit your opponents 'back'.... somebody said 'you can hit Floyd's shoulder and it counts as a scoring blow' .. that may all be good and well with your left hand... .. but once again.. the right hand has nothing but illegal zones to hit,.. inlcuding PERHAPS,.. the back of the shoulder...and consequently,.. now the 'chin tuck'.. may come in to the question of 'illegal zones'.. aswell,.. ..:doh: ..christ,...the more we talk about it, the worse it seems to get for Fraud, Hopkins and Toney...

[Hut*Hut]

But Hut Hut,... the rules are there to rid the sport of any foul play at all, and a foul has still been comitted here, as Oscar has hit Fraud in an illegal zone,... it isnt his fault, as Fraud clearly turned his back to him,..but the only way to prevent any foul in coming to fruition in this fashion again,...is to penalise Fraud for initially turning his back, which has resulted in this chain of felonies,....

It's also 'risky' ...from the aggressors point of view,.. to take the law into his own hands you see, and smack Fraud in the spine or the brain-stem,...because afterall,.. it is illegal in kind to do that,.. aswell as it being more 'blatant and detectable' in appearance, due to the fact that people tend to naturally be concerntrated on the action, 'the aggression' instead of the illegal defensive maneuver.. so as a result, you may draw an incompetant biased hypocrit like Joe Cortez, in a REAL scenario,.. taking points away from the aggressor, without realising the fact that there was a foul commited resulting in this secondary foul. Im referring to the Fraud - Hatton fight ofcourse,..(Hatton is far from an angel,.. but that's for another thread),...

You know,..I can vaguely see what your trying to say about 'legally' rolling with a shot,.. .. but... lol... it is still on the extreeeeeeeeeeme far edge of the 'turning' spectrum,....as you'd have to be touched by the glove from a legally square stance,..and virtually absorb a bit of it before you can twist with it to lessen the impact,...(this could be defensively solved by simply blocking the shot with your conventional left glove)..but anyway...if you turn away from the punch before it lands.... it's still on the very extreme 'edge' of the 'turning' spectrum... and as petty as it is.. it would still have to be classified as illegal as the softest brush to your opponent's balls.

Also you know if the rules were enforced,.. can you imagine the amount of points the aggressor could take away from his 'shoulder rolling' opponent,.. just by feinting the right hand?.. 'the twisting' to roll with the speed of a punch would have to be a little pre-emptive (which is why it's on the far end of the turning spectrum)....thus if the rules were indeed enforced for 'turning',.. the 'legal' shoulder roller,.. could result in outright disqualification before the second round. *Feint, twist, :nono: uh!,..*feint, twist, :nono: uh!.. that's it... one point..

On a slightly different tangent,...................Im also interested to know..and we havent discussed this yet,..but is it even legal to hit your opponent on the back of the shoulder and arm?.. the rules state that you simply cant hit your opponents 'back'.... somebody said 'you can hit Floyd's shoulder and it counts as a scoring blow' .. that may all be good and well with your left hand... .. but once again.. the right hand has nothing but illegal zones to hit,.. inlcuding PERHAPS,.. the back of the shoulder...and consequently,.. now the 'chin tuck'.. may come in to the question of 'illegal zones'.. aswell,.. ..:doh: ..christ,...the more we talk about it, the worse it seems to get for Fraud, Hopkins and Toney...

Look, as with all things, the rules in boxing are there for a reason beyond their own existence - that being to avoid one competitor gaining an unfair advantage over the other or in so doing harming the other competitor. Since neither is happening in the instance we're talking about, I see no reason for any intervention at all. In fact, frankly, I think you're being anal as hell.

And yeah I think it is or should be legal to hit your opponent on the back of the arm or shoulder, especially if it's the defend-ee who causes it to land there, since there is no significant danger in doing so. I don't really think it would be considered a 'scoring blow' as such, at least not in the same way a head shot of body would be, since it would do much less damage (hence the reason for that defensive style), which is the measure by which we score professional boxing.

[KaukipRrr]

Look, as with all things, the rules in boxing are there for a reason beyond their own existence - to avoid one competitor gaining an unfair advantage over the other or in so doing harming the other competitor. Since neither is happening in the instance we're talking about, I see no reason for any intervention at all. In fact, frankly, I think you're being anal as hell.

And yeah I think it is or should be legal to hit your opponent on the back of the arm or shoulder, especially if it's the defend-ee who causes it to land there, since there is no significant danger in doing so. I don't really think it would be considered a 'scoring blow' as such, at least not in the same way a head shot of body would be, since it would do much less damage (hence the reason for that defensive style), which is the measure by which we score professional boxing.

Well I guess we must finally agree to disagree then Hut Hut,...but we DO AGREE on 5 of those 6 frames in the very least^^^, and during the course of this discussion, neither threatenned to fly over to fight the other?...:dunno:

It is of my opinion, that the rules are there, direct, set and structured without compromise, as in thier fundamental and literal elements, the rules keep both defense and offense legally square of one another, so that blows are either landed or deflected without illegal zones being incorperated into the exchanges.

I must disagree about the bit of 'no harm could be caused'... as there is a real life example of it,.. I mean, yes James Toney had it coming, it was his own fault for turning on Hasim Rahman and abandoning the rules that were already there to protect his lacerated kidney region, but it should not have even got to that stage,..Toney should not have had the choice to abandon the rules at all.

[Hut*Hut]

Well I guess we must finally agree to disagree then Hut Hut,...but we DO AGREE on 5 of those 6 frames in the very least^^^, and during the course of this discussion, neither threatenned to fly over to fight the other?...:dunno:

It is of my opinion, that the rules are there, direct, set and structured without compromise, as in thier fundamental and literal elements, the rules keep both defense and offense legally square of one another, so that blows are either landed or deflected without illegal zones being incorperated into the exchanges.

I must disagree about the bit of 'no harm could be caused'... as there is a real life example of it,.. I mean, yes James Toney had it coming, it was his own fault for turning on Hasim Rahman and abandoning the rules that were already there to protect his lacerated kidney region, but it should not have even got to that stage,..Toney should not have had the choice to abandon the rules at all.

Didn't actually see that fight mate. But at least we can agree that allot of what Floyd and Hopkins do IS illegal and should be rectified. :cheer:

[cdogg187]

Well I guess we must finally agree to disagree then Hut Hut,...but we DO AGREE on 5 of those 6 frames in the very least^^^, and during the course of this discussion, neither threatenned to fly over to fight the other?...:dunno:

It is of my opinion, that the rules are there, direct, set and structured without compromise, as in thier fundamental and literal elements, the rules keep both defense and offense legally square of one another, so that blows are either landed or deflected without illegal zones being incorperated into the exchanges.

I must disagree about the bit of 'no harm could be caused'... as there is a real life example of it,.. I mean, yes James Toney had it coming, it was his own fault for turning on Hasim Rahman and abandoning the rules that were already there to protect his lacerated kidney region, but it should not have even got to that stage,..Toney should not have had the choice to abandon the rules at all.


That was a good line, man:bears:

[Hut*Hut]

Hey Kaukip, bit late now obviously, but this was the video I meant to post as a demo of a shoulder roll. :lol: It's got almost the exact same title and has the same two people in the ring together as the one I posted....you can kinda see my confusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWbYhbDwwCM&feature=channel

[KaukipRrr]

Hey Kaukip, bit late now obviously, but this was the video I meant to post as a demo of a shoulder roll. :lol: It's got almost the exact same title and has the same two people in the ring together as the one I posted....you can kinda see my confusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWbYhbDwwCM&feature=channel

Thanks Hut Hut,.. I'll have a look at that tonight,... and if as a result I dissapear with "internet problems" ... you'll know that I've seen that the shoulder roll can be performed without breaching the rules on any part of the 'turning spectrum'... and that I have fled bitterly.

[LOK]

this shit is part of boxing.. it's only Euro obsessed guys who jock some euro and don't wanna see Floyd whup 'em.

in reality a lot of fighters have fought in this style.. some of Pea's fights he did WAAAAY WAAY more of this stuff than Floyd.. I think Floyd does it a bit but not excessfully, he is just a master in there and haters gotta find some way have an excuse or something

[Hut*Hut]

Thanks Hut Hut,.. I'll have a look at that tonight,... and if as a result I dissapear with "internet problems" ... you'll know that I've seen that the shoulder roll can be performed without breaching the rules on any part of the 'turning spectrum'... and that I have fled bitterly.

:lol::lol: