If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

With MMA gloves and throws allowed, but otherwise identical to Queensberry boxing (3 minute rounds, 10 second knockout, 12 rounds), would you want to watch the sport?

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Yeah.

But sometimes I need to watch boxing so bad that I have to ditch whatever it is i'm doing.

It would never be like that I don't think.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

I would love it.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

'Twould certainly hasten the development of very sophisticated clinch-fighting, wouldn't you say?

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

I don't think so, Ruiz would be the heavyweight champ for the forseeable future.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Guys like Jeremy Williams could throw him to the turf every time he attempted a clinch, though.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Williams would have trouble getting good leverage, Huggy bear would beat him to the clinch everytime, and would surely develope some rudimentary throw defence in preparation for that bout.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Agreed, and as I said in a similar thread, I would like to see holding and hitting allowed (a must) and possibly elbows and maybe even headbutts, although the headbutts would be a low priority for me. Maybe even standing submissions.

Maybe make a rule regarding the throws not allowing the attacking of the legs with the arms, but allowing the attacking of the legs with the legs (for trips and throws, not kicks) sort of a half version of greco roman rule. So as to encourage throws and suplexes, but discourage shots.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Not really, because the idea would be to encourage action in the clinch, Ruiz could get it there, but he wouldn't be able to use it as a saftey zone as he would be just as, if not more, prone to being hurt in the clinch as out of it.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

I'd like to see fights to the finish, or at least 15 rounds, small gloves - never more than 8 ounces, clinching not allowed (loss of round, points, or dq - with strict enforcement), or if allowed, then to allow the other fighter to fight out of the clinch, without the incessant breaks (and to be allowed to wrestle and use otherwise illegal blows to work his way out of the clinching fighter's grasp - contributory fouling), no fights ever stopped on cuts, unless it would potentially lead to long-term blindness.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Mmmm...no. I like boxing just as it is.

If they want to add other stuff like throwing, head-butts, elbows and all that then cool....but call it something else.

Besides, can you imagine the field day the AMA would have? They think boxing is too violent as it is.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Nobody appreciates the hug master :bart

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Take out the throws and yes. Throws would just disrupt the game. I am all for smaller gloves though.

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Not throws. Part of boxing's lore is the ability to keep one's feet. ("The legs are the first to go.") The premium on being able to remain upright is currently the biggest major advantage boxing has over MMA.

There were a couple things I liked about occasionally watching the PKA way back in the day. Clinches were limited to a duration of two seconds, and a minimum number of hard kicks per round were required to avoid being penalized. (Perhaps boxing should likewise mandate a specific number of punches attempted as scoring blows.) Being able to meet these stipulations required a high quality level of conditioning, and guaranteed a more sustained level of action than could be allowed by an action stalling hugfest.

The boxing came to naturally evolve into 15 three minute rounds, and ten seconds in which to get up from a knockdown. Those are essential to boxing.

I have no problem with mandating thumbless gloves for the sake of preserving a boxer's eyesight.

No three knockdown rule. Ten point must scoring system is good. Neutral corner rule is good.

If boxing is to survive as a spectator sport, it might be best that a boxer can be saved by the bell in any round, EXCEPT the last (the exact opposite of what is currently standard).

I would also not object to a return to smaller gloves, if accompanied by the abolition of handwrappings.

Should a boxer get knocked out of the ring legally, a 20 second count ought to be allotted for returning into the ring and getting back on the feet.

Originally, I agreed with Arthur Mercante Sr.'s adamant opposition to a standing eight-count without following a knockdown, and I remain ambivalent about it. On one hand, it would interrupt the delivery of multiple punch combinations which can draw a match to a riveting conclusion (and undermine combination punching as a boxing art), and also deprive boxing of the feigning of distress as a strategic ploy.

On the other hand, a standing eight count would provide for the opportunity to continue action that would be more marketable to the paying public, action in a match that would need to otherwise be stopped without offering the standing eight count as an option for the referee.

The mandatory eight count following a knockdown is a positive for boxing.

Perhaps a minimum level of fitness should be mandated, such as being able to run a certain distance in a specific minimum of time, or being able to skip rope nonstop for 15 minutes. (Muhammad Ali was barely able to run a slow two miles in training before getting retired by Trevor Berbick.)

Re: If old-style pugilism was revived...
 

Very interesting points. I will add, though, that throws were once an essential part of the older rules--boxing is indeed about keeping your feet, and always has been...which is why they did not permit grappling on the ground under LPR (the guy just dusted himself off and got up...throws, as in Muay Thai, were solely to cause damage).