S6 is great for boxing, but bute is best at 168

It is true, im not making it up. The fighter has to be standing un-aided (leaning on ropes to stay up) and in a position to continue, which Bute wasnt in either case. He wasnt standing up properley he was using the ropes. You must know thats not in the rules, but the referee let Bute get away with it.
I like Bute and am glad he won, because a loss shouldnt be the end of a fighter but everyone seems to point to it when they lose. If Bute had of lost alot of intrigue i feel would have been lost with him and Andrade would have been the champ and he dosent have the same good style to watch as Bute in my opinion. If Bute had of lost he probably wouldnt have got as much coverage and been fighting lesser opposition for a while (not that its been 1st class, but not awful either) whilst rebuilding which would have been a shame, but I was pointing to the rules and as much as I dont like to admit it Andrade should have had his time as champ

 

You're still making it up. Here is the entire section of the IBF's rule concerning knockdowns.

Nothing whatsoever in there about having to be 'in a position to continue'. Number six says exactly what I told you before - bell should ring as soon as the boxer is up and his hands clear the floor (I believe the timekeeper in the fight in question was in error for delaying this).

 

Its not made up, id have no reason to. I wanted Bute to win and am glad he did but........
The referee made a long count also.
But a boxer isnt aloud to use the ropes to assist in staying upright after a knockdown. I admit it dosent say that in your rules that you have displayed, I guess ill have to do some research myself to find this. I read this in a boxing magazine (think it was Boxing Monthly) when they were talking about the Bute - Andrade fight and the bit about Bute using the ropes and not standing on his own accord was said.
There is an old article on Eastside boxing on the Bute - Andrade fight where it mentions some of the rules you state werent obeyed. Regardless Bute wasnt in a position to continue. But I will do some research for you

 

That's the point. He didn't need to be in a position to continue, the fight had finished.

We don't even need 'rules' here, it's fairly logical. We know that the reason for a referee to stop a fight isn't because he's decided one fighter deserves to win, it's to protect the safety of the losing fighter, because to go on may cause serious injury. Right?

Clearly that doesn't apply to a fight that is over. No possible further harm can be inflicted to either participant. Both logically and based on the rules, a referee cannot 'stop' a fight that has already finished.

 

Ward - who only had one fight and never fought away from home. I sure hope he fights in Europe for the semis if he gets there as it is not fair that Taylor and Dirrell did.

Does Green fight Kessler in Denmark too?

 

It is scheduled to be in the US, but Green has hinted that perhaps he would like the fight in Denmark - if he can get a bag of money.

 

Point 4 from that official regulation says so clearly that if the opponent don't stay in his corner the count will stop till he goes back there. ANDRADE WAS STANDING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE RING WHEN THE REFEREE WAS COUNTING !!!!!!!

ps I'm sick and tired of this subject; I think even if Bute beats Ward, Direll, Kessler, Froch and Abraham haters will still hang on that 12 round fight with Andrade. Simply hilarious.

 

man, Maxime is becoming one of my favorite posters on this site.

This is a guy who LOVES boxing, not just some fighter.


Big props :good


Keith

 

Here the rules contradict themselves.

The fighter must have a standing 8 count, but yet the count ceases as soon as he rises. Which is it.

And what if he gets up, stumbles around and falls again???



Also in rule one, it says that a fighter in the ropes should be ruled down. So if he gets up, but is still leaning on the ropes to stand, is he down??



Those set of rules are not all inclusive it seems. and the fact is the ref threw out all standard accpeted procedures in that fight which benefitted Bute.

Keith

 

Yeah as far as I remember Andrade ****ed that one up for himself being far too eager to finish of Bute should he get up. If he had stayed in the neutral corner he would have won. Actually it wasn't controversial, but he wouldn't have made the count if Andrade had gone straight to the neutral corner.

 

1. Bute was up before the count (the real one) of 10. Watch the fight and STFU
2. I love how everyone forgets that Bute also beat Bika and Berrio, not just Andrade and Miranda.

 

Maybe the one about there having to be a standing 8 count would explain why the referee and timekeeper insisted on finishing the count before ringing the bell.

And rule one doesn't say that if a fighter is on the ropes he should be ruled down, it says if he is draped helplessly over the ropes. It would be a big stretch to interpret Bute as being 'draped helplessly across the ropes' particularly as he had got to the position from being on the floor which doesn't really indicate helplessness. If Bute was to be ruled as down because he was leaning on the ropes referees would be calling knockdowns several times per round every time a fighter got trapped against the ropes.

Don't really see how they 'selected the most favourable rules towards Bute' myself. If they had simply rang the bell as soon as he was up as the last rule implies they could, this would have been before the referee stopped the count to send Andrade back to his corner and so probably would have been seen as much less contraversial.

 

We can also look at it another way..

Picture Bute against the ropes... sliding upwards ... dangling and dingling...

Would he still have been standing if he was hit by some of the heavy punches thrown in the Kessler-Forch fight?

Would he?

 

Kessler beat up Andrade who was undefeated at that time...
Bute has lost one on KO and won one on KO to Andrade

 

I don't see why not. Are Froch and Kessler suppose to be great punchers or something?