Implications for boxing post Blackwell tragedy...

Brain scans are done as little as once a year as part of your licence review.

 

Bit late I know. You raise some good points about the duty of care (easy to be brace when you're not taking the punches) and corners stopping fights. Afraid I completely disagree with the last part.

One of the best things about boxing, that sets it apart from other sports, is that even when a fighter is way behind on the cards there is always the chance of that KO punch. If we did things that way then some of the great come from behind KOs in history would never have happened. Also, a fighter being down on the cards doesn't necessarily mean that he's getting the snot beaten out of him (see just about every Paulie Malignaggi points win in history).

The classic example is Froch-Taylor. Under the above system Froch would have probably been stopped after about 7 rounds as unable to win the fight on points (obviously in my view the two judges who had it by four points to Taylor going into the last round were serious homers but that's by the by). But there was no reason for that fight to be stopped, Froch wasn't hurt or getting beaten up and look what happened.

 

The commentators were talking about Nick's early life, how he'd fought unlicenced and been a bit of a wild youth. The initial damage could have been done any time in the past ten years.

 

[QUOTE="TKO";17856278]Bit late I know. You raise some good points about the duty of care (easy to be brace when you're not taking the punches) and corners stopping fights. Afraid I completely disagree with the last part.

One of the best things about boxing, that sets it apart from other sports, is that even when a fighter is way behind on the cards there is always the chance of that KO punch. If we did things that way then some of the great come from behind KOs in history would never have happened. Also, a fighter being down on the cards doesn't necessarily mean that he's getting the snot beaten out of him (see just about every Paulie Malignaggi points win in history).

The classic example is Froch-Taylor. Under the above system Froch would have probably been stopped after about 7 rounds as unable to win the fight on points (obviously in my view the two judges who had it by four points to Taylor going into the last round were serious homers but that's by the by). But there was no reason for that fight to be stopped, Froch wasn't hurt or getting beaten up and look what happened.[/QUOTE]

But there is going to be a need to compromise if the sport is to have a 'viable' future, so maybe them sort of rare thrills will be lost to the sport.

As I have written previously my ideas are far from perfect and if nothing else need fleshing out. But what worries me is that boxing this time seems to be patting itself on the back suggesting there is no problem. For me the sport needs to continuously evolve or else a third party will come along and revolutionize it to the point that many fans will not recognize it and lose interest.