A theory on why refs tolerate so much clinching

Ali grabbed just like Wlad purely because neither had an inside game ! Make no mistake Wlad was very technical, your selling him short a bit !

 

I thought Wlad, Mayweather, Ward, and Hopkins were all exceptionally gifted boxers who never had to learn certain parts of the game because they were allowed to exploit unenforced rules like clinching. I think they all would have been awesome to watch if the refs had been more stern with them instead of letting them get away with breaking every rule. They wouldn't have been nearly as dominant, but they would have been more complete as fighters, and more entertaining to fans.

 

Clinching IS the same as holding and it often IS the same as hugging.

I have been watching boxing for over 30 years and until recently I was in denial about this too. In denial, and indoctrinated by the widespread acceptance and widespread denial of the truth.

Clinching is holding. Clinching in boxing involves holding or gripping or trapping part of an opponent to stall and stifle the punching. There should be no debate over this. We all know it to be true.
I understand why people are in denial or find it hard to accept.
As dedicated boxing fans, it's so much easier to live with the lie that clinching is a legitimate and legal tactic.

 

We are talking about clinching.

 

If im a ref i give you a warning after your third clinch. Id clearly let the fighter know on the next clinch hes getting a point taken. On the next clinch i take the point. Then i take a point every other clinch after. Now this would seem crazy because clinching is so engrained in boxing that guys just automatically do it unconsiously so itd be a major issue for a while until all refs start enforcing it and it becomes the norm. Fighters would have to adjust. Now dont get me wrong if a guy is clinching and working on the inside id let that go but if hes just holding and waiting to be separated hed lose points.

 

Yoire the one that's hiding behind semantics. You have no argument. What part of clinching don't you understand?

 

so am I...Is there different types of clinching now ?? I thought a clinch was where your holding an opponent so they cant get shots off??? Ali would pull their heads down while holding an arm

 

It's too late to complain about what Ali and others have done in the past.

 

What Ali did was illegal but it wasn't clinching.

 

I wish fighters would lose points when they are holding on because they are hurt too. You are holding because you are about to get knocked out and you can't defend yourself. Holding is a foul. If you need a couple of seconds to recover, you may take a knee. Taking a knee costs 1 point. Therefore, clinching to avoid taking a knee should cost 1 point.

You know what I'm talking about. We've all seen a guy get wobbled and then cling to his opponent like a shipwrecked sailor to a piece of driftwood. Then the ref has to break them up repeatedly for up to a minute until the round ends. That is bull****, and it shouldn't be permitted. If you do that, you should lose a point, plain and simple.

 

what was it then ??? Holding ???? its the same damn thing boy !

 

Yes.
Clinching = Holding

People can try to seem clever and find a way to deny that, but it's blatantly obvious.
Wherever there's a clinch, someone or something is being held.