A top jab, a top chin, and a height advantage = tough to beat at HWY

What some posters are actually saying is,

" I think they should adapt the rules so that my favourite fighter wins. "

Pathetic.

 

If it sounds like that I'm sorry but all weight classes are invented in order to match guys of the same size to determine the best man win. Heavyweight has no weight restrictions so the weight and size can be used as an advantage. I accept that. My argument is the rules, uniform training habits and equipment of the past used to ensure that the weight restriction could be EITHER an advantage or disadvantage. In this era it's often only an advantage. The duration of the bouts, the modern strength training, the officiating, the size of the gloves favour the biggest man. It's just how it is.

 

You also need to face the kind of opposition which actually puts those attributes to the test.

 

It's quite a combination...a real advantage in any weight division..

 

Clinching, i.e., artfully holding, stymieing opponent's effective advances, is a fundamental boxing skill...some fighters are more skilled at it than others...maybe if Thomas Hearns was more skilled at it than he was in that first Leonard fight, he would have survived to the bell.
Hell, for those casual fans with fruit fly attention spans, let's just get rid of all of boxings defense maneuvers and techniques, cut the distance to 8 or 10 rounds and have boxing "fundamentally transformed" into a "rock 'em sock 'em" , dumbed down type of sport.

 

"No wrestling or hugging allowed"
That's rule 2 of the original Queensberry rules.

 

Well, that was at the inception, and boxing progressed since then. Clinching was/is very fundamental and necessary to boxing, as has been proven innumerable times.

 

I think you've got it backwards.
The rule against clinching has been continually ignored dumbing the sport down from the intended art of pure fist fighting and nimble self-defense.
The "skills" of hugging and smothering are what you'd rather have, it's what you've got.
It's not the noble art though. :nono

 

Well, then I guess all FOULS have been shown to be "necessary", as watching all the "great" fighters will show.

 

There are many forms of ring defense, inherent to the noble art...some block better than slip, being admittably less "nimble" than some other practitioners....Check out Muhammad Ali as opposed to Cassius Clay for instance. When youthful agility and nimbleness subside due to the aging process, alternate means of defense are used. Just try outlawing clinching and see how you're changing, or attempting to change the very DNA of the sport.
Might as well have never had a Sammy Angott by your reasoning, and as for fouling, well it's inevitable...part of the DNA again....might as well never have had a Fritzie Zivic either.

 

Look no further than gentleman jim