Do you think "running" should be disqualifiable?

No, Peterson wasn't the one running in that fight. Khan was flat out running away from Peterson. I mean, turning his back and running across the ring, and in circles.

The other examples are guys trying to either protect a lead, or to use their own physical advantages over a fight. Again, you are trying to move the bar to accommodate a certain fighting style, to make it easier on them by forcing opponents who have a different style, and skillset to fight in a style that does not suit them.... and plays into the hands of their opponent. Should a guy open himself to a KO, so that he doesn't lose points or be DQ'd for not engaging?
What would be the justification for that?

There are different styles in boxing, and it is a good thing.

If you'll notice, I agreed with the idea of a uniform ring size, so as not to let one type of fighter or the other use it to a strategic advantage. I'm not looking to cater to, or take away from one style vs another. I'm objective about it. There is more than way to win a fight. I'm ok with that.

 

I think you can chose the styles.Like runner division, brawler division and authentic boxer/puncher division. Ivoid and rungundeaux can stay in their runner division and fight each other!

 

Weird video Ingo gets the point taken doesnt seem to care doesnt change his approach the American doesnt seem to really press Ingo runs runs runs then clinches in close no real punches either way then the ref calls it

Ingo doesnt protest or even look mad and the american doesnt even celebrate. strange fight looked almost like they both agreed before hand not to hurt each other

 

If a guy is trying to win a fight, I don't think he should be DQd. Again, to me, all styles are equal under the rules, and are awarded appropriately. The scoring criteria, when applied correctly, address the rest. Fouls are different. Excessive holding, wrestling, etc. are not styles, those are fouls that go unaddressed.

Don't know enough about the IJ situation to comment really.

The overall point is that it is hard dictate HOW a guy should fight, when they are the one in the ring who know what is what. Their own tactics may be directly related to what their opponent's approach is. You can't force engagements by legislating it into the rules. The things that happen in the ring should happen naturally based on the fighters.

In cases where 1 guy has a tremendous footspeed advantage (and not much else) over another fighter, you may get those stinkers, but you get stinkers in all sorts of situations as well.

Such as Fury vs Wlad. Neither guy engaged alot. How do you handle that? Deduct a point from both?

Rigo doesn't engage, his fights are humdrum affairs, but how do you deduct a point when he is in the pocket, in harm's way, looking to counter.......and nobody can hit him?

Mayweather doesn't engage, but more often then not he is winning rounds because his punches are cleaner, and more of them.

Which is the reason I ask for the examples of runners winning. If there were notable examples, in all likelihood they'd be outliers. For the most part guys who refuse to engage for long stretches lose those fights. (DLH, Khan). Effective aggression is already a facet of scoring, and is rewarded.

It's cliche, but regardless of style, it boils down to hit and don't get hit. As long as they aren't fouling, we shouldn't be dictating how the fighters go about doing it when it comes to their physical attributes.

I love a good brawl, nothing provides excitement more than good trading center ring. But it isn't sustainable for any length of time.

 

good post

 

I like this post for the most part

I wouldnt be against a rule change that punished fighters who run with warnings but its so hard to define it and thats laid out in the points above

I feel like it would only add more controversy and involve refs way more than people would like

 

Well the fighters have to agree to it...

 

Bizarre to say the least. If that is the entirety of the fight, I don't know what to say. I think the ref was trigger happy. Ridiculous to pull the plug so quickly. Different times back then I guess.

 

Sort of, boxing has got to the point where one guy has all of the financial clout and calls all of the shots

the lesser guy has to "agree to it" to get the fight in the first place or he will just look for the next guy who will

not a direct knock on any one particular fighter and yes this has been on going in boxing for a while

my gripe is that i think there should be a one size fits all ring size

 

I just found it odd that Ingo didnt really seem to protest or anything. Neither guy really threw anything or looked interested in hurting the other guy almost like an exhibition or something

no protest by the fighter or corner no celebration from the winner