Shrinking ring in Shakur vs Zepeda fight... WTF?

Turki is abusing his power here.

When you are poverty stricken and losing your mind they commit you to a mental asylum.

When you are wealthy and have money they say you are "eccentric".

 

Do you think varying ring sizes generally are healthy for the sport? Should it be a part of negotiations? Are there instances in which a larger ring makes more sense vs a smaller riing and vice versa? When you say larger rings favor outboxers you also couple that with grabbing or holding or using tactics to force a referee break. Can't grabbing also occur in smaller rings, and wouldn't a smaller ring cause even more grabbing than in a bigger ring because they are at closer quarters? What is less desireable, excessive retreating and moving, or excessive grabbing and holding? It's also important to keep in mind that only a small amount of boxers have the skillset to be able to effectively stall round after round by having rare foot speed. This is not the norm.

Anotherwords, if a fighter is intent on using such tactics, i.e grabbing or excessive cliching and such, he's likely to do so regardless of ring size. And maybe even would do it more with less room to maneuver. I just don't think you can blame normal sized or bigger rings for grabbing or holding. Fighters are going to do that anyway.

Lets also keep in mind that the size of there ring is also related to the size of the fighters and the speed they are moving at. Heavyweights are biggest and would need more room to maneuver if they weren't so much slower than lower weight fighters. Fighters at lowerweights generally are more fleet footed and move faster, and would by and large be better at staying away from an opponent coming forward, than heavier fighters who don't move as easily. But on the other hand, each step they move at covers more ground since they are bigger so we have these two aspects working against each other which provides balance.

To have a Tom and Jerry type of a fight, you not only need someone who is unwilling to engage or throw punches, but you would need someone with fast feet, highly skilled, preferably with a long reach combined with an opponent who is more of a heavy handed plodder. This dynamic may never have been as exaggerated as it was with Canelo Scull. Of course there are plenty of other examples. But to get back to my original question, do you think it is healthy for the sport to have varying ring sizes?

It seems that the most common types of ring sizes are 20x20 or 18x18. In Mexico 16x16 is also common but you don't see rings that small in America. In Britain if I'm not mistaken the maximum ring size of 20x20, which made Saunders demanding a 22x22 curious considering in his home country that size isn't allowed. And he originally demanded 24x24 before settling on 22x22.

Ring size is one of these things that is constantly thrown around but sometimes it's hard to tell even what the exact size of the ring is. The sense I get that is they only happen in even numbered 2 feet increments. Anotherwords, either 20x20, 22x22, 18x18 etc. Never 19x19 or 21x21.

20x20 still seems to be the standard. And if you are a boxing historian, you'd know how common larger than 20x20 rings have been throughout history. If low action fights are being more of a problem now, is this possibly related to our attention spans, and having some blood thirsty desire to see more action packed fights? More action packed fights, means less skill, and more potential for injury.

If we're against 15 round fights because they are too brutal, then how are we cool with forcing more action and more injury by reducing the size of the ring. If grabbing is a problem, is it fair to blame that on ring size? I personally don't think so. That's a seperate problem and should be treated as such.

 

I definitely understand the criticism and agree with it…

…but are we really gonna pretend this isn’t kinda bad ass though?

lol!

 

He should make the ring spin while it's shrinking.


Make Boxing Great Again.

 

Lets have them fight on a Merry Go Round while we're at it.

 

Oooo, just like fortnight! This is gonna be great….NOT!

 

And so it begins... The beginning of the end of boxing after it sold it's soul to the Saudi's.

 

Let's have a boxing Battle Royal where the last man standing gets a "Baddest Man on the Planet" belt.

 

Now yer cooking with fire!

 

Boxing is as much a martial art as it is a sport though. If Turki keeps shrinking rings, then at what point does boxing just descend into a tough-man competition that favours fighters with a chin, engine, and power instead of any kind of finesse or ring-prowess? There's a time and a place for slicksters and I worry Turki is setting a dangerous precedent and is openly biased against movement-centric boxing, which is a bit worrying for the future of boxing imo and for how it affects the careers of fighters who are most effective and are natural back-foot boxers imo. To a certain extent, you can't really choose your style anyway, it's largely determined on in-built traits like your dimensions and natural aptitude for fighting going in either direction.

 

Damn. I was hoping they fought in a bouncy castle.

 

Turki is the boss he is paying the bills so he can say whatever he likes. These young sensitive fighters need to stop being so emotional and handle criticism like men. They all go crying on social media whenever somebody says anything negative about them it's pathetic. Whatever happened to getting in the ring and proving your critics wrong?

 

Maybe have an alligator ref the fight?