Meant to be a serious discussion, despite the historical background tensions around this subject. If we view boxing as a metaphor for a real, war-like fight, then the ring should be as large as possible. In real world when two warriors have faced each other on a battlefield or two tribes have went for it for food, both sides have the possibility to avoid the confrontation for as long as needed and wear the counter part out. So if we wanted boxing to be as "real" as possible, we should have huge rings. Also, if we look at the roots of combat sports, gladiators fought on stadiums where there was plenty of room. Part of the reason was that the stadiums were used for other purposes too. If we go back to the roots of this particular sport, first the rings were circus stages, the theaters, then "natural" rings created by onlookers. If we instead focus on aesthetics of the sport, smaller ring provides more action (but as a downside also more smothered punching and clinches), larger rings brings out bit more possible tactics (and possibly lack of exchanges). If we want to see boxing as a display of heart and courage, in a smaller ring the fighter has to face the danger all the time. It isn't a "real" situation but is boxing even supposed to be "real" So how, IYO, should the size of a boxing ring be defined. Is it a matter of some kind of a principle, or should we concentrate on what creates good fights? And how large, approximately, would be the best ring size?
As is the Case w/Any Business Venture, You Want Your Customer to Be Satisfied With/Entertained By Your Product, In Hopes They Become REPEAT Customers... In Boxing, We KNOW How That's Typically Achieved... Granted, REED Doesn't Think "Slick Movers" Should Be Subjected to Phone Booth Sized Rings Henceforth, But They Don't Need an Olympic Swimming Pool Sized Ring Either...There's a Happy Medium Somewhere... REED Actually LIKES The Fact There's No Defined Parameters for the Size of a Ring...That Said, if a Fighter w/Cinder Blocks for Feet is Facing the Aforementioned "Slick Mover", a SMALLER Ring Would Obviously Make for a Better Customer Experience... The Onus ISN'T On the Fighter, Necessarily, to Accommodate the Customer, but it IS on the Promoter/Network... REED
The size stipulated from amateur boxing internationally is 20X20 they range generally from 16x16 all the way to 24x24 i think they should just stick to 20x20
I don't agree at all that circumstances of ancient battles between warriors should be a guide for how to conduct boxing. Also, I think it is weird that the ring size is not standard. I guess it is a little like baseball in that sense.
Baseball, or car races, or golf. Also in hockey there are maximum and minimum limits for the rink size but not a set measurement. I can see both sides of the argument there. Personally I agree that the "reality" shouldn't be a factor, although many approach boxing from that view. If reality were important, unlimited clinching should be allowed too. But should we decide the ring size based on entertainment value for the viewers, or by some other scale, that I don't know
That's true but it's the same with hockey too, teams can vary the rink size based on their preferred tactics. Also in basketball the conditions can be adjusted to favor the home team. In track-and-field you can fuck with time tables to enhance your chances. It is a part of sports
Many arenas/stadia that have been built have a few design "features" that are intended to help the home team even if the field itself has the same measurements. Once they're in place and approved they can't easily be changed for obvious reasons. A ring can be designed to any dimensions in much quicker time, but they're only going to have one available. It's not like the undercard can request one ring and the main event have another. There's probably more bullshit in boxing than any other other sport. Venue, gloves, ref, judges etc. The ring is just another factor, although an important one. The "right" size is a matter of opinion. One solution would be to have something similar to unified rules for scoring. Have an approved size signed off by the various commissions. It has to meet the criteria, not what a promoter/fighter wants.
Double Bubble, I agree, who cares what warriors and gladiators did in 2 zillion BC? this is a sport and lets have a flippin standard
The basket rings can be loosened, or one of them can be more loose than the other. A loose ring is easier to hit, a shot that is a bit off goes in easier than to a firm ring. The team that gets to shoot to the loose basket on the second half gets an advantage, as the players get tired their shots become more inaccurate, so the ring helps them a bit Also the lights of the arena can be adjusted some, so that one of the baskets is more difficult to see. Again, shooting gets more difficult the more tired you are. Air conditioning is one too, a hot arena wears you out faster, especially if you aren't used to it. There were also the stories about giving the visiting team a room without air conditioning for the half time All these have been discussed a lot in the memoirs of 80s-90s basketball. I have read the books of Jackson, Riley, Bird, Magic etc some I don't remember which of them said which, but this was the message
Agreed with much. Boxing is a unique sport in the sense that unless they fight till one guy drops dead, the element of interpretation will always be there. Defining which fighter deserves to win a round is always going to be less clear than defining if a goal is a goal or not. About reffing and judging, plenty of the same stuff goes on in football. When is it a foul and when is it a fair tackle is a matter of interpretation as much as 'excessive clinching' is. In football they have much more education for the international referees than in boxing but still a week doesn't go by without bitching about the referees. Also, how much extra time the ref gives and is he going to finish the game when the attacking team is near the penalty area or not, all of it is a gray area. I do agree that the gloves should have a clear standard. About ring size I'm not sure, in a way I like it that fighters have to prepare for different tactics
I consulted the google for 'correct ring size' and found the answer: Your ring should fit snug around the base of your finger without any bulging or leaving indent marks. To see if it fits right, push your ring up from the underneath and see if there is a small space between your ring and your finger. This means there is enough room.
Lennox Lewis claims that ring size was a sticking point in negotiations for the mercer fight...then in the run up to the fight Don King tried to reneg by claiming no 20 foot ring could be sourced. Lewis threatened to pull out. So they sourced one, Lewis had his run-around it the night before the fight and declared himself fully satisfied. He THEN claims that King switched the thing overnight and that it ended up being about 16 feet
I think either 18 or 20 is fully legit; no downy dwarf or capacious clown rings ought to be sanctioned
