Clinching needs to be penalized harder to make it fair for shorter fighters

You won't find too many boxing fans who disagree.

You might find fans of certain prolific offenders who don't like it, however...

 

Fury built his career off of it.
As did Wladimir, to be honest.

And both men have/had the skills to succeed without such BS tactics.

Clinching in general should be penalized. But even if you don´t take that approach, then at least let the fighters fight in the clinch. Because right now if you clinch, it´s almost a guarantee that the referee will intervene and reset the action.
Which is BS.

Floyd vs Cotto was so much fun because Tony Weeks let Cotto work on the inside. It created for a lot of fun inside fighting.

This content is protected

This is how you referee a fight.
After this fight Tony Weeks refereed one more Floyd fight which was the first Maidana fight. And it played out similar to the Cotto fight. Maidana found success on the inside and this forced Floyd to fight back.
In the rematch Bayless ran in the moment Floyd initiated a clinch.

 

Clinching is part of the sport and is still an artform. Wlad's clinching and pushing of Povetkin was disgusting whereby terrible referees are giving nonsense knockdowns.

Wlad got badly outclinched by Fury which he has never experienced in his career despite being a serial clincher.

Fury got pretty badly outclinched by Francis which he has never experienced in his career. Forearms tactics, underhook squeezes. So many things that Fury must have been impressed and totally caught off guard by. Do not wrestle Francis even in a boxing ring. It's impressive because size obviously is the biggest dictator but Fury was by far the best physical clincher in this sports history and then out of the blue an MMA fighter comes in an takes that title, it's impressive. Francis is not a joke & people still want to treat him like one.

Jack Johnson never got outclinched but he was an octopus almost always the bigger man. Very strong.

AJ, go and watch how he handles himself in close and the clinch. He's totally useless. Usyk was toying with him. He's a powerhouse strong man in the mid range but without the craft you're just a heavy top useless. Chisora would give AJ problems for 4 rounds then gas out badly. The moment you close right onto him he becomes totally lost and loses his balance. It's painful to watch, Francis is going to do this to him if he gets past the jab.

Joe Joyce pretty poor in the clinch, doesn't like to engage them, he wants to stand in front of you and use his face for defence which is why Zhang killed him. There is always a bigger stronger or tougher man it's the golden rule.

 

And bang on cue

 

Yeah clinching makes fights boring. I dislike a lot of 70's ali fights caise of that.

 

MiniIQ 3... 2.. 1 ))))

 

Agree. Get rid of clinching if at all possible. I'm here to see a brawl not dancing with the stars.

 

I punish it myself when scoring a round. If you clinch excessively I won't give the round, it isn't boxing.

I pay money to watch people punch each other in the face.

 

Death of the marvelous art of inside fighting is the great sin of modern boxing. Older boxers wouldn't shy from finding themselves inside against mixed martial arts as long as takedowns are excluded.

Even the defensive wizards were clearly adept inside. Tunney, Conn, Walcott, Charles, Moore. Roberto Duran's inside game was such a colossal cannon in his arsenal.

Boxing as of now is cleaved in half. And I honestly see majority of modern boxers getting mauled by elite inside fighters of old, and being at disadvantage against outside boxers who had the choice of changing any smothering of punches into a shift of momentum inside. One majority of our era is unfamiliar with. Given proper referee, they would not handle the sophisticated physicality and complex ebb and flow of the inside. Praise the Matrix Vasiliy Lomachenko for being one of the last bastions in that regard. Floyd Mayweather was always surprising fighters presuming he will not handle them up close and personal as well.

 

This is such a good take.
Want any evidence of it? Just look at Fury vs Ngannou. Say what you will about Fury´s preparation, but his clinch game was completely nullified by Ngannou.

 

That’s the point of this thread, it shouldn’t be a part of the sport. This is the game of punching, that’s it. Clinching does nothing except slow things down. You can’t blame the fighters for taking advantage of the lack of enforced rules though.

 

Getting punched in the head for a living everything is fair game. You'd have to start defining what a clinch is and how to define who is engaging it. Plenty of times where BOTH parties are involved in it.

Ali, Ward or Mayweather what are they without clinches?

 

There's a fine line between a overzealous referee breaking up clinches the moment they occur at the expense of action (Cortez in Mayweather Hatton for example) vs a referee breaking up situations when one fighter is holding. If the ref doesn't go in there and break when there is holding then they'll remain tied up for longer and you'll lose action. There are situations where referees need to untangle fatigued fighters who are laying on each other, often Heavyweights, and make them take a step back to return to fighting rather then letting them just lean on each other and do nothing.

But of course to the OP's point there are situations that fighters aren't tangled up, and one guy is trying to work inside and the outboxer (often the taller or rangier fighter) is the only one clinching or holding and benefits from the reset while the inside fighter is prevented from working while inside.

So I agree with the OP's point in the situations he describes, but we need to be careful not to paint all clinching with a broad brush. I like refs who can find a balance between letting some moderate clinching go on inside but then when it's clear that no work is being done, then to step in and break, push the fighters away, to create punching space and more action. In the spirit of this topic, can you name any refs that are good at letting some inside fighting go on as long as work is being done but also know when the sweet spot is to get in there and break the fighters? I think generally Heavyweights do less work while engaged in a clinch than fighters in lower weight classes, Heavyweights generally lean on each other or hold more due to fatigue and need to be broken up and pushed back to create more action more often than in lower weights when often refs are too quick to break up clinches when work could be done inside a clinch otherwise.

As far as penalizing clinches, how do you actually penalize a fighter for excessive clinching? It sounds good when you say it outloud, but does anyone really seriously want to see points deducted or a fighter get DQ'd for excessive clinching? I get the desire to want to see more action or to just let them fight without interfering, but as we know clinching can be used as a defensive tactic and a way for a fighter to survive when he's in trouble. And how many great fighers have used it in certain situations to get to the final bell. Ali in his later years did a lot of clinching, and it can be frustrating both to the opponent and to the fan, but it also can create epic moments of surviving dangerous moments when you don't have the legs to get away. As others have said, it is an artform but so I defintely see the OP's point but at the same time we shouldn't paint all clinching with a broad brush. Good discussion though.

 

I've said that clinching should be viewed the same as taking a knee. The fighter is letting the ref know he doesn't want to face his opponent offensive onslaught and needs a break.