Strange statement. I suspect not many have been saved -- but a lot of damage has been prevented. I would like to see 15-rounders again, most fighters know the risks and I'm not one to tell a man what he can and can't do, but the final few rounds, when a fighter is tired, emotionally spent or physically hurt are almost always the most damaging.
Fighters of this era are not used to hard fights, they have it too easy on the way up and when things start getting rough, they lack the mileage of toughness needed. If 15 rounders were brought back, fighters would need to prepare better, respect their weight etc... And by doing so, surely this would lead to less, not more injuries?
I do agree with this point -- a lot of fighters drain excessively and are not in their natural weight-class. I do disagree with the notion that toughness prevents braindamage -- it's precisely the tough fighters we love so much that usually end up paying the bill. Getting used to it is not a good thing from a medical standpoint. That said, it's a slippery slope. Boxing, at its core, is damaging and unhealthy. We're always negotiating with our conscience when we implement these kinds of rules -- and the effect is always limited. Men will find a way to test their limits no matter what rules you give them -- they will adapt, and give their all. I shudder when I think of Erik Morales having a 15-round career.
No..the 12 rounders havent saved any lives, all they've done is to undermine the tradition and significance of the sport of boxing...like split titles, too many "jumior titles" (except juniorwelter)..and the like...oh..and these "catchweight" fights...bring back 15 rounders.
Not in a direct sense, but obviously it's less damaging to the brain to be pounded for 12 rounds than 15 rounds.
Ill bite. Chavez might have killed Taylor with 3 extra rounds. Robert Quiroga would definitely killed Akeem Anifowshe; the man showed no signs of slowing down and more pounding would have turned a coma into a life ending coma.
Chavez/TaylorI was stopped before the end of the 12th, so it would of made no difference other than taking any so called 'controversy' out of the decision.
I agree with many here, the number of rounds is irrelevant, poor refereeing has more to do with it. Of course naturally some people are more easily affected by punches than others. Fighters who lack some sort of defense are more likely as well.
hard to say. i don't think they will ever go back to 15 rounds. Hagler thinks they should, but I don't think they will. it would be hard on some of the guys now to go 15.
The 12 round limit is an abomination to boxing. Bring back the 15 round limit and let it be shown who are the worthy champions today. The 12 round limit hasn;t saved any lives. You want to save lives other than have better officiating and more conditioned, in-shape boxers? Make headgear a requirement (sarc).
TBooze, I think you're half right. Preparedness is one thing, but someone here mentioned how come there wasn't many or any ring deaths in the 50s or 60s. To that I say there was one champ not four. In order to get that title shot one had to go through his apprenticeship. By the time he got his shot at the brass ring he was ready. Today you have four guys looking for work. They have bled the top ten dry. One can get a title shot after ten fights. That fighter hasn't learned his trade. He's going to get hurt when he goes against the champ. Also, for example, Kiko Beijenes and Jimmy Garcia weren't prepared for their respective shots at Albert Davila and Gabe Ruelas. Kiko hadn't fought in a year and had lost his last fight. Why was he getting a title shot? The same for Garcia. I don't have his record in front of me but he had lost a title fight against Genero Hernandez about six months earlier, so why was he getting another shot? If memory serves me he was completely outclassed by Hernandez and hadn't won a fight in a year. We need less champions so our contenders can grow and grow properly, not plucked from the vine before ripe.