I've been a boxing fan a very long time. I don't see why the boxing commissions (such as they are) don't insist refs start taking points for holding early on. The Haney fight's last 3 rounds were unconscionable. The ref should've taken a point away in the 11th early on and another one later in the round if he didn't stop. Max Kellerman (who I like) said he showed courage, no he acted like a ***** and the ref should've have DQ'd him if he didn't stop holding. That goes for a lot of fighters. If you're hurt bad and hold, ok, but you should still lose a point if you don't stop.
Those who clinch excessively essentially don't know how to box and use it because it's a convenient bail out for actually engaging in boxing. Granted clinching is a skill in itself, but when used to the extent we see the likes of Wlad do it's just pathetic and it needs penalising. Jab, *oh no they're throwing punches back* clinch
Ali Ward Fury Floyd Wlad (big stiff idiot) etc etc Clinching is just part of the game. Ref's basically resign to the fact the main part of their job is to break clinches.
I agree. I've always thought excessive holding showed a lack of confidence. One fight where an early warning really impacted the outcome, I believe, was the rematch between Oleg Maskaev and Hasim Rahman. I haven't watched it in years but early on I recall Oleg not doing so well, and he was also holding a lot. And the ref kept warning him to stop holding. And Oleg consciously tried to stop holding and just let his hands go, and he not only started doing better, he stopped Rahman and won the WBC belt. Guys who constantly hold are the worst. Many are taught to do that. I think it kills the excitement. Many just grab and hold out of habit. Instead of finishing a combination with a hook, they seem to finish every combination with a hold. Points should be taken. If more let their hands go, many might realize they don't need to do that so much.
It's very, very, very, very, very, very - bear with me - very, very, very, very difficult to decide upon who is guilty of inciting clinches. More, making it look like the other guy is invoking a clinch will become a skill if it earns points. I know it's annoying but we're pretty much stuck with it.
No complained that Floyd clinched the **** out of Pac every time he was close. He even dove at Pac's waist when Pac wasn't even throwing.
Okay maybe I exaggerated with the don't know how to box generally speaking. But when it is used excessively that is exactly what it is : a bail out for not knowing how to deal with punches coming back...and it's often the bigger guys it benefits. Although clinching is a skill, at its core its the big guy having to almost effortlessly lean their weight on a smaller dude (Wlad - Pov, Wlad-Haye) Punch thrown > panic clinch
I don't think you'll ever get rid of it completely the rules are pretty clear already that it shouldn't be done but it's simply not enforced. If it won't be properly enforced then I'd at least like some consistency in the implementation. For example Hatton broken from any inside work vs Mayweather but Maidana was doing all types of rough stuff inside vs Mayweather and wasn't getting told to break for ages.
When I started watching boxing, working out of the clinch was a thing. If your opponent held you, you were free to punch. I remember guys getting warned for holding and punching. But now it´s just a tool to reset the action, which is absolutely ridiculous.
The ref in the second Ali Frazier fight allowed holding and Ali to push down on Fraziers neck constantly. But the fight I recall where a fighter should have been penalized then disqualified was Bonecrusher vs Tyson. A horrific job of referring