Have you ever wondered why? Because the fighters don't need to hold back and pace themselves anymore. Having the fight as 10 rounds just brings those exciting rounds faster, wouldn't that be good for our sport in this attention deficit generation?
With all due respect, this is a stupid suggestion. It all depends on the fighters and their styles. It doesn't matter how much you shorten the fight, because fighters like Floyd and Ward still will stick to their boring decision oriented tactics. Elie Seckbach made this same suggestion to Robert Garcia and the people around him and got laughed at hard. I think we should go back to 15 rounds.
I think 12 rounds is best. . 15 so much greater chances of fighter suffering injuries - brain damage, clotting, bleeding on brain, long term damage, etc. . . But 10 rounds definitely sucks. . . :dead
Wouldn't that give other fighters more of a chance of beating fighters like Floyd and Ward who you find boring? Of course the idea will get laughed at, people don't understand human physiology and boxing has a lot of tradition behind it. Things that are keeping the sport stuck in the past.
12 rounds just feels better to me. Always a risk of a knockout. 10 rounds for non-title fights it fine. I don't disagree with that. Title fights need them extra two rounds for tension.
TS terrible idea and terrible thread. K1 might be more to your liking. Boxing died a little when they killed 15 rounds and now you want to water down the sport even more to cater to attention deficit ******s among the casuals who don't even follow the sport regularly? When you begin a fight you don't say, oh we only fight one minute. Boxing is of course not street fighting but its still fighting and while fights to the finish are undesirable from a safety viewpoint, 15 rounds are a must to truly test a fighters mettle. Your system rewards front runner feather fisted point fighters while penalizing legends such as Arguello, Monzon, Chavez, Saldivar, Marciano. It is a thing of beauty to watch a fighter like Saldivar slowly impose his will as the fight goes on and eventually completely dominate the last 5 rounds as he did against Winstone. Likewise Margarito vs Cotto I. Why not 1 round only, OMG imagine the intensity!
12 rounds means championship ****ing level. Hence the term championship rounds. Ali could go 15 rounds but Haye cant go ****ing 12? And just because a fight is a 10 rounder,dont mean ****. Was round 1 of Haye-Harrison fun? No so basically you are a ****ing idiot? I would have to say yes unfortunately.
I think 12 rounds is the perfect balance between testing a fighter under fire, and when he's completely drained, but also preserving the boxer's health.
Ali pranced around and threw pitty pat punches while laying on the ropes to catch a breath, Haye throws power punches and he's the same size. If a fighter goes hard he's going to tire more easily. If he trains at a higher intensity he'll be a stronger more powerful athlete, if he trains at a lower intensity for a longer time then he'll be a weaker endurance athlete. Personally I like seeing explosive, powerful athletes putting hurt on each other rather than marathon runners playing a boxing match. If a fight is a mismatch then it's always going to be ****. Maybe if Wlad vs Haye was scheduled for 10 rounds there would've been more action. It's an idea presented on a boxing forum for people to think about. Do you understand that? I'm sorry your vagina hurts but I actually don't have the authority to make the change, I'm just talking about it. Go back and sit in the corner with your dunce cap :good
I don't see how the sport is being watered down by improving the quality of the athlete? Each to their own, I don't really care for heart and emotion shown in fighters like a lot of the old time fans seem to. I like to watch top notch skills being performed by explosive athletes without them having to worry about pacing themselves for the 'championship rounds'. It's really ridiculous if you actually think about it. Boxing needs to change with the times or it's going to keep going down and become more of a niche sport. **** pro boxing could learn a lot off amateur boxing, the best fighting the best and high quality action for the duration of each bout. A happy medium would be ideal, 10 rounds is still a long time.
So you begin a fight, do you just fight for one minute? Just throw hay makers at each other for the minute, imagine the intensity and fighters hurting each other. In a real fight, the last man standing wins not the guy who gets off to a good start just like in a race. Unfortunately fights to the finish are too dangerous and unsuitable for a spectator sport on TV. So they came up with the compromise of 15 rounds to truly test fighters, you can't just throw flashy feather fisted punches and pile up points in that situation because a guy like Marciano might KO your ass even in round 15 while behind on points. A true test of grit, stamina, and skills. As I said why 10 rounds, some might want just 3 rounds like K1. Where does it stop? You don't have much room for skills when you stack the time limit in favor of one style of fighter, I didn't see much skills in those 3 round K1 fights. They were throwing bombs at each other but that's not all I want in a fight.
I don't think less rounds equates to less skills, 10 rounds isn't a huge change but it's enough to improve the tempo of the fight, eliminate feeling out rounds and breaks in the middle rounds. I don't know what k1 is, isn't that kickboxing? The only combat sport I take seriously is boxing. 10 rounds of boxing is 30 minutes of action, isn't that more than enough to determine who the better fighter is? 30 minutes instead of 36 minutes just improves the intensity of action, that isn't going to favour certain styles or make fights less skilled. All it does is give the athletes the opportunity to be more explosive and busy. Marciano is a good example of a guy who couldn't do much today, a small cruiserweight who had to rely on outlasting someone to win despite getting his ass kicked all over the place in the early rounds. I don't find that impressive, congratulations for being tough and withstanding your asswhooping. Some people call that heart and enjoy it, I call it a poorly skilled fighter winning because fights go for 15 rounds and you're a hard headed marathon runner.
I think we have very different viewpoints so let's call it a day. One last point about Marciano, it shows he was the better fighter. In the real world outside a sporting context the victor is not someone who wins on points in 2 minutes but someone who stops the other man from fighting. A fighter who wins on points for a few rounds and then starts tiring and gets KO'd is inferior, it shows that he did not have the stamina or the heart to keep going through adversity. He is what we call a front runner, eye catching and flashy at the start for people with short attention spans but full of glaring holes once the going gets tough, then he just melts away like ice under the sun. In the end it was Marciano's opponents who were unable to get up from the floor not him and that says it all.
THis is quite possibly the dummest idea I have ever heardatsch Boxing is not some premature ejaculation sport like MMA. The point isn't to get it over and done with as fast as possible. The awesomeness of the sport is when in the 4th or 5th round the underdog starts to close the distance and you all of a sudden realise that a marathon of skill, will, heart, and stamina is about to unfold. No sport tests the full spectrum of athletic vertues (strength, stamina, skill and will) the way boxing does. Shortening the length of a championship fight will only lessen the emphasis on stamina, strength and will. I am not for this. If anythign we shold go back to 15 round fights where badasses like Froch would regin supreme.