I think it's pretty clear that going to 12 instead of 15 rounds was never really about boxers safety, as it was to accomodate network profit. Lots of controversial outcomes over the years could have been avoided if there were 3 extra rounds, and fights could have gone the other way entirely. edit: Basically how longer the fight takes, the lesser fights end on the cards and bigger differences emerge at the later rounds. Everything that takes outside influences out of the equation (crooked judging for instance) only benefits boxing imo. Not saying they should go back to 20+ rounds though, because that can become boring pretty damn fast.
Well there’s some fights you wish were over in a few rounds,imagine watching Andre Ward for fifteen rounds lol. Twelve is enough imo though it would separate the wheat from the chaff
depends on how you see boxing. if you are just interested in the technical side of it then 12 rds is sufficient to separate the skill levels. if you see it as a simulation of actual combat, then 15 is closer to real combat which has no style points or time constraints to establish a winner.
if someone cannot win a fight in 12 rounds, why do they need 15? In a way 15 is a long fight. I remember them and they were long, and sometimes even if a guy won easily. some guys wore out in those amount of rounds. I think 12 in someways was better as far as skill. But if you like stamina, than 15 would be good.
I don't know the numbers, but there have been deaths and serious injuries many times after. Sometimes it suddenly peaks, and sometimes it's years between incidents. In my opinion they only used a tragic incident to justify putting their titlefights neatly inside network timeslots.
Ya know I never considered it myself. I can't vote because Rodney made a good point and I dunno what I reckon yet.