What should be done to heavyweight division?

I think we can all agree on that heavyweight division at the toplevel, barring very few exceptions (like Povetkin-Chambers) has produced very little drama and shitty fights in the last few years. So I was thinking is there anything that could be done to help it. After all, heavyweight division, no matter how bad it is, is the one that gets publicity. So instead of trying to forget about it, maybe some changes could be made.

Here are some possible ways of reacting that I thought of. Are you for or against these?

*Shorter rounds. 12x3 minutes is a long distance for 240+ lbs guys and for whatever reason smaller guys with better stamina and speed have not taken over. So could it be that rounds at heavyweight were two minutes? It still demands stamina and tactical skill, but perhaps fighters would take more chances. Or would they just train their stamina even less?

* Longer fights. If the fights were 15 rounds again, just maybe it would enable the smaller, more stamina-having fighters do better again. Of course, it could be that we would see just longer leaning contests (imagine 15 rounds of Rahman-Ruiz).

* Changes in scoring system. If the fighters were rewarded for throwing more (quality over quantity) or going forwards, the fights might turn more fan-friendly. However, that could mean that we'd se more toughman-style fighting and even less traditional and aestethically pleasing boxing skills

* Zero tolerance in holding. Self-explaining. The problem with this is that the bigger the fighters are, the more easily they get tangled up close. So if the fighters had to fear that all the time, the fights could get worse. Also some kind of dirty tactics are often seen as tradition of boxing: few want to see pros fighting like ammys.

* Weight or body fat limit as there is in wrestling, since it is impossible to lift a 500 lbs guy. Again, it could make for better, more fast-paced fights, but I think it is against the idea of heavyweight boxing (which is to find out the toughest guy in the world despite his size and shape). Also, if fighters are too big or fat, better fighters should easily take over.

* Reduce the salaries. If only legit world champs would earn big money, maybe the challengers would remain hungry longer and give their all every time out. Or, maybe even more talented guys would take up basketball.

* Let's do nothing - maybe the next generation will be better and some new Tyson or Ali type of guy will bring back the excitement

Discuss

 

Agree with the holding issue and longer fights, but no more so for the heavyweigths than for the rest.

Bodyfat % tests are the answer for the heavyweights. If you're over 15% you lose 50% of your purse. I'm deadly, deadly fucking serious there, it's THE panacea solution.

Fatness is the root cause of all of the maladies you mention for the heavyweights. Even forgetting the stamina, balance and speed issues that come with fatness which probably account for barely 25% of it's impact, it's the lack of commitment that comes from knowing you haven't trained properly. You have a ready built excuse in the recesses of your mind before you even step in there. If you've given your all in training you better fucking win because you ain't gonna get any better tomorrow, this is the acid test of what you've got. If you've mosyed through training with plenty in the tank, hey, tomorrow is another day to do better.

Having more estrogen in your system than a fucking blue whale in heat probably effects performance as well. Get every fighter in that division in proper fighting shape and you make it 3 times better over night, guaranteed.

 

So do you think that being fat somehow helps fighters or why don't the harder-training guys take over naturally? I agree some kind of body fat % limit might actually be the simplest way of making good fights, but I just think that kind of limiting breaks against the principles of the sport

 

Nah, turning up in shape helps guys that much is clear from looking at who's careers end up being successful. It's one of the absolute mysteries of our time why heavyweights have been getting progressively fatter the last 25 years. I think it's just a self perpetuating culture at this time, turning up with a couple of rolls is the expected prottocal now, it doesn't even elicit comment. Expectations are such a huge influence on behaviour in any situation, it's just a cycle thats NEEDS breaking.

If it breaks any fundamental principals of the sport (and Im not sure it does) then it's a price I'm very, very, very fucking happy to pay for the manifold benefits it'd bring.
:bears:

 

I agree with the lack of physical shape/body fat is THE number factor in the lousy performance by HW these last decade. I remember a period (70's) when it was RARE to see a fat heavyweight. Sure there have always been boring fighters, but not on a top level. The reason Mike Tyson, a disciplined boxer at the time, cleaned the HW division was because at the time most of the boxers were not only not that good, but were extremely out of shape. But i also need to throw this: most of the fat boxers are americans. European boxers, as bad as they are, are usually in better physical shape than the american counterparts.

My recomendation? Go back to the old school heavyweight limits when there wasn't a cruiser weight division and put a limit weight (like in all the other divisions) on how much a boxer can weight. If any boxer exceeds that limit, if he is a champ, will lose his belt. If it a challenger, fight must be called off. Period. That way we will see HW boxers training at the gym more and less at McDonalds.

 

What the hell are you talking about? Heavyweight has always been unlimited in the pros.

 

I honestly think the BF% idea is better. Why punish a really BIG guy who happens to weight more than say 250lb? And at the same time setting a top weight doesn't effect the majority of guys who are naturally 215lb but lard up to 245lb odd. It has to be a BF%, IMO.

 

Body fat % is a red herring. You guys are wasting your time.

We currently have two guys who are at worst in the league of Tyson and Lewis. Just because you don't think they are exciting doesn't mean we need to go off and change rules to change your perception.

And watching the 1984 flashbacks on FNF, if you think today's am heavies are worse than Tyrell Biggs, Francesco Damiani and Henry Tillman, you are nuts.

 

I completely agree that the Klitschko brothers are a match for any heavyweight who have ever lived, but that said, I must also say that fights now are worse than ever, for whatever reason. So just maybe changing the sport somehow would be benefit

 

What I am talking about is about eliminating the cruiserweight division(like in old school divisions) , let all those 190 lbs and up be considered heavyweights and (new rule) put a limit to what a boxer can weight per height stature. The taller the guy the more pounds he can be allowed to a certain point. There should be a limit though. IMO no boxer should weight more than 235 lbs. More than that it should be called 'The Fatso Weight division".

 

If the Klitchkoe brothers were both fat you'd have an relevant point. But since they're both in fantastic shape (as Tyson & Lewis both consistently were and ever other heavyweight ever worth half a shit), bringing them up just reinforces my point.

And yeah, Biggs and Tillman were probably both better than just about any current American heavyweights.

 

WTF kind of shitty idea is this to limit body fat % ??? As if this can even be accurately calculated. If a fighter can be succesful with rolls of fat then so be it. Leave it to the fighters to decide how "in shape" they need to be to win the fight and get the big money, instead of pushing this retarded "heavyweight stimulus package".

 

I just think it's due to our having a boring yet dominant champion, basically. Wlad. And let's not forget that Wlad, when he wasn't boring, was not dominant. So it's been through holding primarily (illegal) that Wlad has managed to become dominant. We can't forget that. Steward basically taught Wlad how to become a stinker and how not to lose.

Look at what holding allowed someone as fragile and as unskilled as John Ruiz to achieve.

I think holding is at the heart of the issue. The whole, "fat and out of shape" issue would work itself out if fighters weren't allowed to hold and rest two minutes of every round because fat and/or out of shape heavyweights would run out of gas and get beaten if they weren't allowed to hang all over their opponents.

The state of the heavyweight division is a perfect demonstration of why holding is illegal in boxing. It gives rise to boring champions like Wlad and has even afforded bums like Ruiz the opportunity to hold multiple championship belts. Does anyone doubt that Ruiz would not have been knocked out by Golota if he'd not been able to hold, for example? Unfortunately, it's also a demonstration of how rules are not enforced in the sport. And what's worse is that not only are they generally not enforced, but holding in particular is dealt with inconsistently by referees. Some deal with it by breaking the fighters immediately (RJJ/Ruiz) giving guys like RJJ the advantage. Some deal with it by letting them fight through it giving fat, lazy and/or unskilled fighters the advantage (the ability to rest and also to compensate for defensive liabilities).

So not only is the rule against holding not enforced, but it is allowed to manifest in different ways in such a way to benefit different strengths and weaknesses of fighters. Can you imagine a mainstream sport being conducted in such a way?

 

If a fighter is not allowed to clinch at all (nor lean on his opponent, nor get tangled up when trying to fight), doesn't that give a huge advantage to the inside fighters who can not fight from distance? The thing I fear here is that short-armed fighters can simply bull-rush at their opponents and stick their foreheads against their chests, because the taller guy according to these rules has to exchange punches from there

 

That's why fighters learn foot-work, counter-punching, parrying, etc.

Not to mention, as it stands, doesn't it favor the long-arm fighter? Since in general he's able to keep the fight on the outside by holding everytime the fight goes inside? There's other, legal ways (see above) to keep a fight outside.

I hate PBF but let's face it. The guy has brilliant foot-work. This is why he's able to box the ears off guys like Hatton. You didn't see PBF hold on the inside. You saw him not only keep the fight outside when it suited him, but also beat Hatton at his own supposed game - inside fighting.

I think if the holding rule were truly enforced you'd see a lot more well-rounded fighters emerge at the top, guys who can handle themselves whether their arms are short or long.

 

The only one that has a chance of being enforced is stricter penalties on holding.

I think that alone would force lazy fat heavies to either get in shape or get beaten up, as they can't just slow down the action whenever they feel like it by leaning on their opponents or holding their arms.

 

"No better said."

-George Foreman

Also, it would bring the spot-light back on skills and punching power, in addition to endurance.

 

I just pray that a modern Foreman or modern Tyson comes to the rescue of the HW division before the sport is completely killed by the media.ray:

 

Ban it, delete it, make it a seperate entity from boxing. Just get it out of my life. It hasn't been remotely interesting since Lennox Lewis retired.

 

I thought when whitey came along that the third reich was supposed to rise and boxing was to profit from z'billions in iconic interests for racial supremecy? Seems like the same people who made those predictions, are now the ones crying the hardest for change,.. :crafty: Thus, I think I know what's 'really' up. :crafty::crafty::crafty:

 

That is true for all weight classes though. If a fighter is badly hurt and he holds for 10 seconds, I´d deduct a point. Holding is basically taking a knee without losing points. It also hurts the entertainment value of boxing. Imho it´s the biggest problem in boxing and has somehow become accepted over the last ten years.

 

Agree 1000%. As I've said before 3 initiated clinches in around should be an automatic point off, no questions asked.

 

Yah but it's not the tactic of holding when hurt that is the real problem.. it's the strategic holding done throughout the careers of certain fighters.. the holding that they use in every part of the fight to their unfair advantage.

 

Banning David Haye would be a start.

 

Yeah, punch and hold has become a legit mainstay strategy somehow. Holding is basically used to deny the opponent a chance to reply in the absence of any actual defensive skill. Other times it's used as a way to allow guy to overcommit to shots wildly knowing they have the safety net of a grab at the other side of it. It's fucking bullshit and should be exterminated.

 

Haye's literally the only chank of light the division has seen for a decade.:doh:

 

Well of course holding isn't exclusive to the heavyweight division, but it's certainly more prevalent there. It's also more difficult for fighters to prevent it when their opponents might outweigh them by 30-40 pounds.

Holding while hurt to avoid losing a point for KD is an interesting point. It's basically an accepted practice and has been for as long as i can remember. I think the solution to that is scoring more 10-8 rounds.

I've always found it ludicrous that a guy can batter his opponent from pillar to post, have him out on his feet and only get a 10-9 round. At the same time a guy slips, but takes a grazing jab before barely touching one glove down, action is stopped and it's a 10-8 round.

 

His disgraceful ducking suggests otherwise.

 

That's a good point. How is a fighter supposed to counter-punch if every punch their opponent throws is followed by holding?

 

I don't think banning holding would automatically solve the problem although would be a step to the right direction.
First of all, when two tall guys are in the ring they get tangled up easily even though neither actively tries to hold (see for example Lewis-Grant or Lewis-Vitali early moments).
Second, when one guy attacks with short hooks and the other guy does not step back, they easily tangle up too, which gives the impression that the defensive guy is holding.
Third, even when a guy does not hold up close, he can still prevent the other from throwing shots by leaning on him or burying his head under other guy's arm.
And fourth, if bigger guys can't hold at all, in fear of getting tangled up I think we'll see more pushing and shoving which is equally bad