Do you think "running" should be disqualifiable?

It wasn't solely "running" that cost him the fight - it was that he used all of his (significant) natural abilities to avoid getting into a fight.

For a Dirrell fan, that must have been the most frustrating fight to watch. You can argue he deserved the decision but you can't argue he made it a lot closer than it had to be, therefor giving the judges the option of scoring it to Froch.

Dirrell's career (such as it is) suffered badly from this performance. I think that's punishment enough.

 

I think they took care of this problem when they created the "ring".

 

If you are ever going to take a point off/disqualify someone for running, or more aptly, refusing to engage, then this fight is a good example.

As i said in an earlier post, i have no problem with guys backing off and looking to counter, but in this fight, Dirrel, just looked to evade shots, which he did brilliantly, but he rarely countered even though there was plenty of opportunity to.

Andre made Froch look amateurish, but due to his lack of punching, i always looked at this fight more as Dirrel losing the fight than Froch winning it.

 

This^ is the same as my thoughts on the subject.

:good

I don't think something should be allowed when guys are hurt but not allowed at other times.

 

He wasn't attempting to engage either.

This is the problem you get when one fighter is backing off looking to counter and the other is coming forward, but is apprehensive of letting his hands go because of the potential counters. It is a frustrating clash of styles.

It was a similar situation in the May v Pac fight.

 

Meh. Guys are looking to survive at that point. Their brains are scrambled, their body isn't responding.... Sometimes it's the only thing they CAN do. That is part of the process of the fight to me, to see if the hurt guy can do what's necessary to survive, because guess what, if he can't hold, he has to run. Think Mayweather holding vs Mosley, or Pavlik holding vs Taylor. Those are cases of where it would be acceptable to me.

To me the point is to discourage holding as a tactic, not abolish it completely, and not punish it as you would an dq type event. If it happens, treat it as you would low blows. Soft warning, hard warning, point deduction.

 

He landed a lot of clean punches on Froch.

 

I think that they need to make a new rule. All fighters below 175 should fight in a 16 foot ring.

 

I always thought the ring should be uniform. This tailoring the ring by preference makes no sense.

 

It makes perfect sense, at least what the guy is sugesting here rather than "Choose small ring if I'm a pressure fighter and big ring if I'm a boxer" that popular fighters do.

Ring size should be in proportion to the fighters' sizes. Maybe 3 or so sizes in total and use them for differing divisions.

 

How do schedule cards for multiple fights with different size fighters? Would lead to problems.

 

Make the ropes adjustable.

 

Sure Hans.

 

I think too many people confuse running with defense.