Was Kovalev/Pascal A Bad Stoppage

I re-watched the stoppage and I think on the other hand it might of been a rushed one by mere seconds, but Pascal was pretty much on another planet in the situation even he got to catch a breath just moments before because of the slip. Even if stopped a second too early, I don't see the huge deal about it. Kovalev would of continued to punish the pretty much defenseless Pascal for an extra punch or two before it would of been over anyway.

I have utmost respect for Jean Pascal after this one. He came to fight, showed unbelievable heart and truly challenged Kovalev at times. I started watching the fight looking to see Kovalev go for the early KO, but ended up rooting 100% for Pascal. The man's a definition of a true warrior, and would of continued to try and fight even if knocked out on his feet.

 

Of course not. It pure nonsense to suggest that fighters were injured or killed more often when refs let fights go to their natural conclusion. The data don't support it. The article below looks at deaths over the history of boxing and presents a table by decade:

http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_svinth_a_0700.htm

While the raw number of deaths have declined slightly, the percentage has not (there are fewer participants in professional boxing today that in the middle years of the 20th century.

in sum, it is a myth that fights need to be stopped more quickly to somehow prevent injury. Boxing has its risks, its participants know this, and there is no reason fights should not simply be allowed to go to their natural conclusion.

 

So you're saying the only bad thing that can happen is death when someone gets hit flush with a power bomb from the likes of Kovalev when already on the verge of unconsciousness?

I just think sometimes it's plain unnecessary.

 

Not bad but not good.

If you think it was a great stoppage for the sake of Pascal's health, then you probably should think it should have been stopped sooner.

Kovalev doubled the hook then stepped back. Pascal wasn't particularly dead in the water. I would have liked to see the ref wait an extra second to see if Kovalev hopped back in and landed again and if Pascal would move out of the corner. Because if Pascal blocks the next shot and slides down the ropes from the turnbuckle, you have yourself a less extreme moment than rounds 3 and 4.

 

This Manuel Velazquez Collection discusses deaths in bare-knuckle pugilism, amateur and professional boxing, and Toughman-style boxing.

How is that study you linked relevant to professional boxing?

 

Did you not see Pascal drunkenly wobbling all over the ring? Did you want him to die?

 

This seems reasonable. Pascal could of, even a fighter like him would never do it, taken a knee at that point and get to catch his breath and try to bounce back.

What I see troublesome is the body position Pascal is in. It looks very much like the body position of a newbie sparring the first time, cowering because they are completely unable to properly take a punch or defend themselves in any way — just simply ready to fall forward on their head. Pascal is a guy known for his ability to take a punch, so that's why I think it was a worrying sign.

 

This is exactly right, when we judge whether or not a fight should be stopped we are judging the ref that made that decision. So it is his shoes that one needs to put their self in. They now have to be that lone man that chooses the very difficult and fine balancing between entertainment and safety. The whole ball would change on many of these people if it were them that would greatly to be to blame in the case of a life changing injury or death. People can debate it with the help of instant replay and such but that is not what the ref has.

He has one chance to make the right choice and I think in this instance if you really know how to put yourself in one's shoes, you would have no problem with this stoppage after witnessing everything you did. Could another shot or two have been safely squeezed out for us to see that "natural conclusion" maybe, but when you consider the risk of what it possibly means it was not worth it. In this instance if you think it was a premature stoppage then you probably don't believe in ref intervened stoppages at all, and should just say so and quit pretending you feel like there is something to debate.

 

:nut

Uh, because professional boxing is included in the ****ysis.

 

he was all over the place... the ref let him have 1 last chance and he just got nailed with a hard shot, keep in mind he had taken alot of punishment in the fight and wobbled many times.. sorry but this fight was over

 

Pascal has taken a lot of punishment in his career , he reminds me of the Arturo Gatti style of defence aka I will block your punches with the temple area of my skull

Early in the fight it looked like Pascal was off , his left eye was out of focus with his right eye .

Pascal is done . probably has a good chance of being a garbage collector until the pugilistic dementia kicks in around 2020

 

Someone in the RBR thread was arguing this doesn't prove Kovalev is a dangerous puncher, simply because deaths in the ring are so rare that it must automatically indicate some preexisting condition on the part of the guy that died. :-(

That person obviously didn't see Kovalev vs. Simakov, which I had the misfortune of watching unfold live as it happened.

I've been sold on Kovalev as being an incredibly dangerous puncher ever since. :!:

 

Only if you wanted Pascal to die.

 

I'm amazed that this is even up for debate. It was a good stoppage. I don't need to see the opponents brain exit the back of his head to enjoy a boxing match

 

No. Pascal couldn't even walk to the corner when Kovalev slipped. His daughter didn't need to see her father get permanently damaged in the ring.