Is The Argument Against 15 Round Fights Still Valid?

?

I don't think it is. The pedigree of the decision to change the schedule from 15 to 12 was ostensibly that it made things safer. We all know of course that 12 round fights just happen to fit inside a scheduled TV hour nice and neat.

Guess what....if fights were 1 round longer, we would have guys getting seriously injured inside of one round.

I say bring back 15 round fights.

 

I'd rather see same day weigh-ins but neither is going to happen.

 

I'd be cool with 13.

 

Yep, good call on same-day weigh-in. We would soon see what was what with these weight cheats.

If I was a billionaire, I would set up my own sanctioning body and launch my own boxing-centric TV station. It wouldn't be too long before we would see improvements.

Same-day-weigh is a good call, if I had to chose between 15 rounds and the SDW I would go with the SDW.

 

Happened once and they got rid of it immediately.

 

Really? Do you know what fight?

 

Cannot remember, but its in one of my old Ring magazines, a footnote entry. It was way back, 1920's, maybe earlier, maybe a little later, but it was MoQ rules, not bareknuckle or anything like that.

 

Back in those days the scheduled rounds were pretty random.

They didn't have to go all the way to 12 from 15... an even number of rounds doesn't make any sense anyway.

 

The sport is in a long streak of few ring deaths so it's an ideal time to try to get it to happen if you want to.

The hour long time slot is a non-factor these days. There simply aren't any live telecasts that are only for an hour. That is from the glory days when they would only show one fight on a Saturday afternoon. Now, everything is scheduled for 90 (telefutura, telemundo), 120 (espn2), or longer (tyc, azteca) minutes and it's easy enough to counteract a 15 round fight with an 8 or 10 cofeature if you are aiming for 120 minutes.

There aren't enough draws in 12 round fights to use that as a factor in going to odd rounds.

 

I actually agree Mike. In any case, short fights are fought at intense levels. Suppose Hearns had keeled over and died in the 3rd round vs Marvin Hagler. Would we be calling for 2 round fights? :dunno:

What about guys who have completed the distance and then died? Bradley Stone. There was another kid with an Italian name who completed the distance, then collapsed and died after a fight with a prominent Ghanaian {Tetteh or Attah} around the time of the Golota vs Tyson fight. Johnny Owen, who died after being stopped in the 12th.

 

word

The odd number of rounds means that DRAWS would be far less likely.

 

Are there too many draws in 12-round title fights now? No.

 

well I rather see 8 original divisions....

 

hmmmmmmm

I'd draw the line here. Super Bantam has been very good. Super Feather, Light Welter, Light-Middle, all very productive. Maybe it would be better to redefine the lines rather than scrap the divisions?

You could actually argue that we get rid of 175lbs, one of the traditional 8, because it has become so redundant and so far removed from its original premise.

Cruiserweight might be melted into Light-Heavyweight with a limit of 210lbs. Then We could have proper Lt-Hvy vs Hvy fights.

I would bump Super-Middle up to 170 and move Middle to 165 and move Light-Middle to 157.

So.....

HeavyWt: 210 and over.

Light-Heavy: 180-210. Anybody not making 180 is told to fuck off back to 170 and stop eating. Anybody who is a natural 210 can bulk up to an acceptable 225, that's hardly too big an ask in this "Modern Era"

Super-Middle: 170 limit.

Middle: 165 Limit.

Lt-Middle: 157 Limit

Welter: 147 Limit.

 

I debated this in the old debate forum, I had the pro-15 side of the argument and I was judged to have won it. I do recall using a statistic that emphatically showed that the loss of the three rounds had not changed the mortality rate much... it was a stastically insignificant difference, really. Of course, that was as of 2004 or what have you, might be different now with an additional 7 and a half years.

Contraction of the weight classes would be something I would be much more gung-ho about. I think knocking it down to even a non-trad 10 or even as many as 12 divisions would do wonders for the sport, create more compelling competition.

 

Theoretically, it can't change the mortality rate. If the fight was 40 rounds long, guys would pace themselves, then go for it down the stretch. If the fight was 10 rounds long, guys would fight at a faster clip, wear down sooner, then get hurt. Its a nonsense argument, once the fight takes place, theoretically there is every chance of an injury in the first round as there is in the last. Sure, fighters are tired and susceptible at the end of the 14th round, but they are at their most powerful from the 1st to the 5th.

When Spencer Oliver collapsed in England during the 10th round of an EBU fight, the damage had already been done much much earlier in the fight. Its a recurring theme.

 

I argued a similar point and used the statistics when challenged by my opponent, who missed that point, LOL

 

It's like saying...."every morning somebody falls and gets hurt while running for the 9:00AM bus, we need to change it to 9:05" :scratcher:

Fine. Change it to 9:05. The bastards will get out of bed later and guess what? They'll start running and get hurt.

 

:: basically

 

This is a true statement.

If someone has trouble getting into work on time for 9Am and they change it to 9:30...he'll still have trouble getting to work on time.

If a man is going to die in 15 rounds, he'll die in 12.

 

15 rounds is too long. I'd rather they made gloves as small as they were in Joe Louis' day. What we are craving is clearer , decisive ending. Smaller gloves would mean more kayos and more tkos because of hand injuries.

 

I don't know if I agree with that. You can take a lot of punishment in 9 minutes. On the flip side, it's extra time to take a fatal blow or combination.

 

That's super duper not going to happen.

If anything we'll get more divisions.

 

You don't have to hedge. Of course it is more likely that a fighter will die in a 15 round fight than in a 12 round or 10 round or lesser numbered fight.

Is it 50% more likely that a fight will die in a 15 round fight compared to a 10 round fight? I doubt it, but to think that it is no more likely is retarded.

 

How about 4 round fights

 

Erich Esch Likes This

 

times have changed...we have athletes doing crazy shit to their bodies, dieing like flies...issues like death and nudity and censorship aren't cared about like 20 years ago



so basically, in this day and age, fuck the health of the athlete :dunno:

 

And, ironically, we are now approaching the true Olympic Spirit. :bears:

 

I agree with this. I'm OK with 12 round fights. I think many modern fighters would probably pace themselves excessively and make for more boring fights over 15 rounds, especially for the first decade or so after implementation.

I would prefer to see a two weigh-in system, one the day before and one the day of the fight.

 

You should have pasted the thumbs up icon.