What do you guys think about the use of the standing eight count in the pro game. When I began watching pro boxing around 1979, it was not used widely if at all. At the time, I only saw it used in amateur boxing. The first pro fight Isaw it being used was the Marvis Frazier - James Tillis fight. Tillis trapped Frazier in a corner and rained unanswered punches on Marvis. Right after Tillis jolted Frazier with an uppercut, which was about the 10th unanswered punch, referee Joey Curtis interceded. It appeared he was stopping the fight. Frazier was not throwing back at the time. Instead, he gave Frazier a standing 8 count. Frazier survived the round then outworked Tillis and won a decision. Curtis undoubtedly saved Frazier from what appeared to be a certain KO. I think if you render your opponent helpless, you deserve to win the fight. I know the standing 8 count is supposed to be a safety measure and in most cases the figher receiving the standing 8 count goes on to lose the fight. If he comes back to win many would say well the fight shouldn't have been stopped, he came back to win. But it penalizes the fighter who had the other badly hurt. I personally think it should only be used when the ropes prevent a knockdown, for example the Bert Cooper-Evander Holyfield fight. Otherwise, I think it should strictly be a rule in amateur boxing used as a safety measure.
Think that there was no standing8count in effect and that Marvis took a knee. My suggestion is to cancel rds system and breaks. A fight 2d end. Like in real life. Either a stoppage or a time limit of like 6-30 minutes stop fight. Think of occasions when a fighter was saved by d bell. Not when he was counted, but when it was obvious that a break between rds saved him. Why is it better than a standing8count ?
Because the bell rings at the same time for BOTH fighters. whereas a ref may benefit my opponent with a standing count just as im about to kayo him, but I don't get the same benefit when I get clean kayoed in the next round.
