Was Holmes-Snipes stoppage premature ?

After that big right landed though, Snipes didn't do anything except take more punches. He didn't throw anything back in return, apart from one weak half-speed right that was aimed about six inches above Holmes's head.

Championship fight, I do agree that you should give a fighter every chance.
But reeling in a corner, taking hits while offering nothing back, is going to get almost any ref stepping in.

Perhaps a standing-8 would've been a fair compromise...but were they allowed for this bout?

 

This is how I see it too. I think the ref could have let this one go on for a few seconds more though.

 

Holyfield had a standing 8 against Cooper (even though he wasn't meant to!), Tyson against Lewis...there have been a fair number over the years in the pro ranks. Some bouts have rules against it, some don't.

As to the point of it, maybe it would've given Snipes the few seconds he needed to clear his head a bit and get through the round. Just a second after the stoppage he's complaining, same with Ruddock against Tyson in their first fight.

I thought you felt it was a premature stoppage, now you're saying what's the point in prolonging a further beating...? So you think the stoppage was fine, then?

 

I thought the Holyfield-Cooper thing was mainly because Holyfield sort of fell into the ropes and looked as though he would have gone down, but was saved from falling, meriting an official knockdown in spite of his never having hit the floor.

No, I think one can infer here that he thinks the ref should have neither stopped it nor given a standing eight-count, but simply let it go on a little longer.

 

No doubt in my mind Holmes had Snipes but yes it was a little premature. Holmes wanted longer too as it had been a spiteful fight and he wanted to put away Snipes conclusively.

 

I don't think it would have lasted more than 10 seconds longer. It wasn't very premature, just a bit disapointing. IMO the ref pretty much had no choice to do it. Snipes was just standing in the corner getting hit and showing no signs of mounting an offence, or a succesful defence.

Spinks made a bigger deal out of it than it really was (even flicking jabs at Larry when Cossel was with Larry). Larry complained after it because he was disapointed (he didn't like Snipes) and he wanted to drop Snipes for the count, and nearly did. After Snipes's moment of glory he did nothing.

 

I think so, but arguablly so was Tyson- Ruddock I and countless (literally) others!

 

I'm right with you, here. Snipes was hungry that night and had proven he could take a beating for 7 rounds and suddenly land a tide-turner. He deserved a last chance; the result was most likely not altered, but Snipes still had some life. As Chicky Ferrara said after the Lyle stoppage (which in contrast I believe proper because of the volume of punches and Lyle's many-seconds nonresponsiveness): "Is this any way to stop a world's chamPEENship?"

 

No, the stoppage was not premature. Snipes walks around today pretty much with all his marbles, all things considered, from what I've read. This may not have been the case if they let this fight go on. Holmes had been caught sleeping in the seventh, but he was way revovered by the time the last round began, Holmes was a cruel, purposeful fighter, and had some bad blood for Snipes after that knockdown, and I bbelieve he would have been more than happy to punish Snipes unnecessarily for revenge. The referee did the right thing in stopping it.

 

I dont think it made a difference really however I do think Snipes should have been afforded the same latitude that Larry was given after he was dropped. Larry was given every possible opportunity to continue, Im not sure Renaldo was

 

I think the main reason Larry was allowd to continue was because he was nailing Snipes just after the knockdown, he didn't just lay in the corner.