wlad kitchko, bhop, holyfield...would they be as successful with unbiased refs???

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by highguard, Nov 21, 2014.



  1. highguard

    highguard Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    6
    Apr 12, 2010
    this is an interesting topic


    you have wlad with his clinching and holding
    and the refs never doing a thing about it....
    which ofcourse wears down his smaller foes,

    of course the old school way of dealing with this
    was to low blow or head butt the guy but if you do
    the ref will ofcourse take action against you


    with bhop its headbutting and low blow and sometimes holding
    but the ref always always calling it an accident while his oppentent is cut open
    if his oppentent does it to him, its almost a war crime against society

    the same goes for holyfield before with everyone from tyson to lewis to vaugan bean lol talking about his headbutts and the refs pretending not to see it...
    and when he got fouled its a big crime lol


    so its interesting how would these do without the refs helping them???

    wlad having points taken off him and knowing he might get dq'ed soon for holding

    holyfield-bhop knowing they cant cut open guys and not even get a warning for it
     
  2. highguard

    highguard Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    6
    Apr 12, 2010
  3. Nonito Smoak

    Nonito Smoak Ioka>Lomo, sorry my dudes Full Member

    53,089
    6,658
    Sep 8, 2010
    Every ref shows bias one way or another. They interpret and enforce the rules different from one another and that will always seem to help one fighter more than the other depending on how their style pushes the boundaries...
     
  4. OvidsExile

    OvidsExile At a minimum, a huckleberry over your persimmon. Full Member

    31,011
    31,554
    Aug 28, 2012
    I don't know why Floyd Mayweather and Andre Ward weren't included in that list of clinchers and stallers but oh well.
     
  5. lordlosh

    lordlosh Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,647
    5,967
    Jun 4, 2014
    Ali, Tyson, Lennox, why not there? Dont think is that easy to clinches and to cover in clinches. Also this guys master the clinches know when to go for it and when they will get point red.
    But how you see World Champion for 8 years get DQ in a title fight ?
    Should Povetkin get point reduction for playing low all night vs Huck and Wladimir ?
    BTW, watch Boytzov vs Leapai and see how many clinches there was, more then 100 probably. And see how many clinches was in Wlad - Leapai, no more then 5 ....
     
  6. highguard

    highguard Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    6
    Apr 12, 2010
    they should be included but they dont do so much holding
     
  7. highguard

    highguard Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    6
    Apr 12, 2010
    clinches are one thing, holding on to your foe
    and making him carrying your weight is another


    and yes a champion of 8 years can and should be dq'ed like anyone else

    you keep doing the same fouls over and over again
    dq
    end of story

    does not matter if your ali or wlad

    or some guy in his 4th fight


    and holding is a type of foul
    that shows you dont want to fight-engage


    but yeah many "great" fighters have the refs on their side
    throughout history

    the point was
    would they be as great if the refs didnt pretend not to see
    their fouls due to the fight that the famous "great" fighter
     
  8. Brighton bomber

    Brighton bomber Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    29,095
    24,482
    Apr 4, 2005
    Referees are only human. Often with some fouling they simply do not see it. We have the advantage of multiple camera views and replays, referees can only see what is happening from one angle.

    Fighters like Hopkins and Holyfield were smart with their fouling they hide in very well. The referees in general are not being biased they just don't see it like we can.

    The clinching is more blatant and that will come down to how the referee perceives the rules. Fact is too many referees these days allow clinching to occur without any reprimand it just seems to have seeped into the game. But fighters will do what they can get away with.
     
  9. highguard

    highguard Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    6
    Apr 12, 2010


    i both agree and disagree,

    your point about holyfield and hopkins being smart
    is true but you mention our view and how the ref sees

    1, the ref right beside whats going on

    2. with stars those guys the ref has seen their fights on tv before
    and knows about what they are famous for,
    so he should watch out for them trying their tricks again and again

    3. there is a huge difference between clinching and holding on and making your foe carry your weight

    which is probably the easiest foul to see from any view point,
     
  10. lazarus20000

    lazarus20000 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,246
    3
    Dec 7, 2008
    All three are smart yet dirty in different ways, they use their tactics to gain an upper hand and derail their opponents concentration and stamina.

    Holyfield - was a serial head-butter and used it to rough his opponents up.

    Hopkins (older version past physical prime) - uses excessive clinching to close the distance and nullify his opponents attack. He also uses headbutts to rough his opponents up and affect their composure and concentration.

    Wlad (current Steward version) - Uses excessive clinching to pace himself and nullify the opponents attacks. He also regularly pushes down on his opponents to sap their energy.
     
  11. Brighton bomber

    Brighton bomber Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    29,095
    24,482
    Apr 4, 2005
    Even if the ref knows a fighter regularly cheats should he penalize a fighter for a foul he actually doesn't see? Yes he should look out for the tricks and fouls but that's why Holyfield and Hopkins get away with it the ref simply doesn't see it because they are so good at disguising it depending upon the position and view of the ref. So he can't warn or deduct points for fouls he hasn't actually seen. Otherwise he'd be biased against one fighter.
     
  12. highguard

    highguard Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,792
    6
    Apr 12, 2010

    i can see what you mean but the mere fact that holyfield
    didnt even get many warnings says the refs were not trying hard to see
    what he was doing


    with wlad, its another story, you cant hide what he is doing
    its plain to see even for a blind guy lol


    i wonder how much of the refs trying not see what these doing
    having to do with

    "hey if i harass him for fouls, i might not work any big fights
    in this area again"
     
  13. lion

    lion Active Member Full Member

    1,489
    2
    Mar 24, 2007
    wlad and hopkins would have a lot of more losses i am very sure of that, couple of welldeserved DQ's each without a doubt. wlad might have been that ultimate fighting machine knowing that he can't cheat his way to a W he would have to fight and evolve i the right direction instead of this boring and cheating huggybear.
    in boring hopkins the cheataah case i think a white boy would whip his sas and he would been retired 5 decades ago.
    wlad is just worst of them but vs Pulev he was OK.