Tyson vs Douglas - the ref should have counted Douglas out

Yup, and he put his gum shield in back to front, with it hanging out of his mouth.

 

This piece of boxing nonsense seems to crop up every few decades.

There is no rule in boxing that a count has to be ten seconds, and there never has been.

It is a verbal count from one to ten, given in a clear commanding voice.

Once it is done it cannot be undone retrospectively.

 

In the fourth round of Fury-Wilder 3, it took the referee 19 seconds to count to eight, wipe Fury's gloves off and restart the fight ... after the first knockdown ...

And it took him 21 seconds to count to eight, wipe off Fury's gloves and restart the fight after the second knockdown in that round.

By that point, the round was over.

It shouldn't take anyone 40 seconds to issue two standing eight counts.

When even the announcers are immediately saying "that was a REALLY long count" ... it isn't good.

Just start a clock. The ref can call time and stop the clock if it's necessary and then point to the timekeeper to restart it.

There's a timekeeper/official 'counting for the knockdowns' for every fight. Seems like a simple fix.

 

Nope.

I think only Don King would agree with this premise. He was the one who started it, after all.

 

Right, but the radically different amount of time it takes for counts is why people get bent out of shape.

Rounds are three minutes. (180 seconds)

There is one minute between rounds. (60 seconds)

So why does a 10-count get to take place at whatever leisurely pace the ref wants to do it?

No one is sitting at ringside counting to 180 as quickly or as slowly as they like. And if the round goes six minutes, well, that's how long it took him to count to 180.

That wouldn't fly.

Give them 10 seconds to get up. That's the intent of a 10 count, after all

 

yes, buster was down. he got up though and finished it. for one night, buster would have given ANY heavy weight in history trouble.
btw, the signs were there early on how to beat tyson. even early in his career the VERY few (even though they lost) opponents who took him the distance were TALL men with a good jab. tyson, as short as he is, for a then heavy weight, had a hard time with that.

 

Practicalities.

It is not realistic to expect the referee to time their count, while keeping on top of their other many responsibilities, such as ensuring teh safety of the fighters.

Throw a cushion on the floor, and then give it a count, as if it were a human being.

It will almost certainly be more than ten seconds.

Even if a count was the worst in history, the fallen fighter woudl have to be able to assume that it was what they were bound by, and therefore it could never even hypothetically be overturned retrospectively.

At best you are suggesting that some new technology, akin to VAR, could be introduced to regulate the process.

 

No I'm not. For every fight, there is an official counting the knockdown seconds.

That person is ALREADY there sitting next to the timekeeper.

They announce the person before every fight along with the other officials. "alternate referee whomever."

That official starts the count. Just let that official "finish" the count.

The referee can spend his or her time looking at the downed fighter.

In the Tyson-Douglas fight, it was the Asian official counting ONE TWO, THREE holding up his fingers in the background at ringside.

You don't need new tech. You need a stop watch.

Start the watch when the guy goes down.

Some officials at ringside have a microphone and you can hear them counting in the arena before the ref in the ring picks up the count. Just let the other person with the watch looking at the time continue the count.

 

Yes ad that is exactly what a count should be.

The most important thing is for the fallen fighter to know where they are with it.

 

Except it isn't what a count is currently, because the person with the watch lets the person in the ring pick up the count and go as fast or slow as they want.

Just give the fallen fighter 10 seconds. That's what a 10 count is supposed to be, like a three minute round.

Let the person outside the ring with a microphone continue the count.

They're already counting anyway. Just keep going.

 

Then Mike Tyson would have then challenged Evander Holyfield before visiting the slammer. It would have been difficult but I do think that Tyson emerges as the winner having handled a boxer like Douglas.

 

Of course you can’t reverse the applied count.

It is left up to the ref as to how he tolls it (not at all ideal - potentially open to misuse and abuse -but that’s how it is) - and the fallen fighter defers to that count and, in many instances, no one will ever know if the fighter could’ve arisen earlier if required to do so.

I’m one of the last people to afford Mike excuses BUT, it’s more than fair to address the inconsistencies.

It’s already been said here and I’ve said it before - everything else is timed to real seconds, or that’s the intention at the very least - everything BUT the all important count applied to KDs - arguably, the most important, “timed” event in a fight. A real make or break moment subject to less than consistent officiating.

The intention IS to toll real seconds - and real seconds are often picked up from time keepers.

Buster was down for about 13.5 seconds.

Some have timed it to an exact 13.65 seconds. Per Octavio’s meter, a completed “10” count was going to equal at least 14 seconds.

Octavio did not “pick up” the count - he began his own count from “1”.

Yes, the actual time keeper in Tokyo was out to lunch tolling “1” as soon as Buster hit the deck.

Octavio later said that, having refereed so many world title fights, he felt he didn’t need to pick up from the timekeeper.

Suffice to say, Meyran wasn’t exactly a human atomic clock. Over a mere 10 count , his completed count would’ve been about 40% longer than a real 10 secs.

Merchant states that the ref admitted to blundering but then recanted. What exactly did the ref admit to, only to recant?

An important feature that hasn’t been noted is that the ref’s meter appears to slow upon and after the count of about “6” - he’s looking around and not always looking at Buster. Note also that his call of “nine” is very drawn out.

When Mike went down, sure, the applied count was slow also BUT obviously, two wrongs don’t make a right - “timing” again being important in so far as IF Buster was counted out in the first instance, then of course Mike doesn’t get KD’d later.

To Mike’s count - the ref counted but Mike looked to be in no shape to continue even before he arose, like everyone else, I’m sure the ref notes this. - all the same, the ref kept counting to “9”, notably a short sharp vocalised toll of “nine”.

Mike arose just after that “9” - he wasn’t actually counted out but the ref immediately waved the fight off - as Mike was in no shape to continue. It was technically a TKO not a KO.

Personally, I don’t think Buster arose easily and he certainly shaved it very fine in getting up before a potential “10” was tolled - and tbh, the ref didn’t appear too interested in tolling that possible “10” - which was a mere 1/2 sec or less away when Buster got up. Buster wasn’t steady when he arose.

But like everyone else, that’s just my opinion on Douglas’ condition - we will never know for sure. Even if one believes the ref erred, Douglas could not, in any way, suffer for that.

Zack Clayton actually tolled a perfect real 10 seconds on Foreman which many thought appeared “fast” - which might well suggest how many counts otherwise do exceed a real 10 seconds - Zack’s count being “seemingly” long by comparison but, in fact, right on the button.

Suffice to say, given Clayton’s Zaire count, Buster would’ve been required to arise roughly by Octavio’s toll of “6” - which could’ve seen Buster on even more unsteady legs and with more time left in the round for Mike to possibly get at him again.

However, to be consistent myself, the ref’s count was more “off” (relative to a real secs) in the latter half of his count - so it’s not possible to pro rata his count exactly.

Further food for thought - an LA Times article that, in light of Tokyo, addresses long counts that were apparently applied to Tyson’s fallen victims previously.

The angle wasn’t to suggest that Mike was always shafted, rather, it was to suggest that the Tokyo count applied to Douglas wasn’t so much out of step and something that Tyson had been exposed to previously.

Most of the counts exemplified are still at least 1.5 to 2 secs less than 13. 65 secs.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-02-13-sp-628-story.html

 

My God what an excellent post. I’d send you another check, if you and JT1 didn’t publicly humiliate me regarding my ONE bounced check.

 

Haha - cheers.

Man, due respect, but that last cheque bounced so hard, it ricocheted all over the place, not only taking out several bank clerks but also the Bank Manager, who’d just walked in to see what all the commotion was about.

 

They also almost universally count 1 before a full second after a guy hitting the canvas has elapsed. And we’ve known numerous instances of them getting it wrong.

It’s a 10-count. Not a 10-second count. You know this. Don’t see why it’s difficult for you to accept rules that have been in place for decades … because you happen to want a different outcome.