Speaking about boxing’s rules, in 1905 the Philadelphia Record lamented the fact that many referees allowed fighters to breach the rule against holding, and not only overlooked it, but often warned the fighters who tried to fight themselves free. It felt that the opposite should happen – that referees should warn the grabber and leave alone the boxer who tried to keep the action going, a point which is timeless and equally valid today: One of the plainest rules among those originated by the late Marquis of Queensbury for the governing of boxing bouts is Rule 2, which reads: “No wrestling or hugging allowed.” This rule is so simple and clear that it would seem to be one of the easiest in the whole catalogue to carry out, but alas! For the good of the sport it seems to be the one which is oftenest violated and which on the part of some referees is scarcely ever enforced and it is the non-enforcement of this rule which causes nearly all the trouble and disturbance at boxing bouts. Some boxers are notorious for holding, and their violation of the rules often leads the other man to be blamed for not boxing according to the requirements. It is a common practice for some boxers as soon as they are stung to clinch the other man and hold on to him for dear life. Then the opponent who is not holding, but who had both hands free, attempts to keep on boxing in order to get loose from the holder. Instead of forcing the man to leave go who who is violating the rules and clinching to avoid punishment, it is often the case that the referee will caution and sometimes even disqualify the man who is punching, claiming that he is hitting in the clinches, against which there is no rule in the list of the Marquis of Queensbury or any other boxing code.[1] [FONT="][1][/FONT] Philadelphia Record, November 26, 1905.
If you call it "Clinching" does it become more acceptable ? it is an element of Defence / Negation....(If only Frank Bruno could have mastered it !!) however of course excessive use should not be allowed. warnings...points deductions may follow before the ultimate sanction...as i recall Henry Akinwande suffered that penalty against Lennox Lewis.
people eventually came to dislike Richard Steele, but he was great at saying no holding and preventing long grabbing and clinching and keeping the fight going. And he was big enough to enforce it, when some smaller referees cannot do it with heavyweights.
Ref Carlos Padilia would simply slap the Holders Gloves down, as in Ali - Frazier 3rd - and it proved an effective method.
That's my least favorite thing to see in a boxing match. I don't need 200 punches a round with kds all around, but clinching/holding is anti-action. Always irks me when a fighter accepts the holding (Tyson had this acceptance at times). I understand if the ref asks them to stop or break, but I like the fighter that does what he can to let the offending party know that it's going to hurt to hold me as well.
One writer felt that the clinch should be eliminated from boxing. One man would land his wallop and then the other saved himself by hanging on, round after round, which “gets irritating to the spectator.” Clinching was a “rather ridiculous way of evading punishment. Either way, it is a thing to be wiped out by boxing law. Without it, fights would not last nearly as long, but they would be infinitely better worth watching while they lasted.” Sydney Bulletin, January 28, 1909.
