A theory on why refs tolerate so much clinching

No it's saying that clinching isnt dangerous, rabbit punching is. How do you stop a guy from hitting you when you're hurt. You can clinch which is why it's allowed.

Hearns should've clinched Leonard in round 13, Hearns should've clinched Hagler and Barkley and he didn't. Clinching is not illegal. If it was, it would be listed.

And Birm, the "that's what you're teaching at your gym over here to your students" quip was flat out a stupid thought frfr.

 

It isn't clinching its holding-boy.

 

If clinching is ruining a fight they deduct a point. If your in with a ref that knows the rules and has balls, he will pull u apart straight away and give you a warning if it happens enough, if you don't adhere he will take points away. Did you see Rigo loma ? If you don't fight your way out of a clinch the ref will or should be on you. The rules are bent with the popularity of the fighter from what I see ! Hearns didn't have the strength to clinch Hagler once he was hurt, he was done. lol Blizz, what gym you coach at ?? I could pop over, iron out some mistakes their picking up

 

You can clinch and hold. You never seen a ref struggle breaking two fighters from a clinch ?? Its because they are holding on bro !

 

Thank you. I thought this would be simple and agreeable with all boxing fans. There's no room for opinion, its a physical fact !

 

Never gets that far, mate. The boss man weeds those refs out before the fight even begins. They get to shop around for friendly referees and pay them out of their pocket. The fighters get to express their "concerns" before the fight and basically give the refs their walking orders.

 

The only time I've seen two fighters not clinch and just stand there waiting to be pulled apart shoulder to shoulder was Eubank Jnr v yildin, or what ever his name was. Weird aint the word, just throw or move ffs.

 

People are over looking that refs have to travel and book hotels.

They get lonely a lot and when in the ring envision hugging their wives so the more they see it the closer to home they feel.

 

I don't think I've ever seen a point deducted before the sixth round for excessive holding. It's like the rule is "Half a fight and NO MORE!" Of course, if your tactic is to weaken and tire an opponent through wrestling, until they aren't as dangerous, six rounds ought to be enough to get the job done.

Some people on this thread have talked about letting a fighter clinch three times before giving them a warning, but I wonder what the real number is. Like, how many clinches can you typically get away with before the first point is taken away? It's got to be at least fifty. I bet that guy who makes the compuclinch videos would know.

 

Rigo's clinching wasn't terrible, I've seen much worse in boxing, including Wlad. Esuebio Pedroza, yes Ward and a few other guys, but Wlad was the worst.

The Lomasexuals will come out in force on this one, apologize in advance, but Chenko probably did more clinching against Salido than Rigo did against him.

The difference in Rigo-Chenko is that there was a huge difference in upper body stregth and Rigo counldn't control him in the clinch. All of that tossing and bucking made the ref overreact. That's about it. And not, it's not like I love Rigo or hate Chenko either.

 

It's usually when a guy commits another foul when holding, wrenching the neck, pushing it down, holding and hitting, torquing a guy's elbow, etc. that it gets the ref's attention.