Why didn't the losers of the semi-finals fight for the bronze medal?

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by MaceTheDon, Aug 12, 2012.


  1. MaceTheDon

    MaceTheDon Member Full Member

    231
    0
    May 27, 2012
    I know this a bit late to be asking this, also sorry if there is already another thread for this.
     
    MaceTheDon, Aug 12, 2012
    MaceTheDon, Aug 12, 2012
    #1
  2. sosolid4u09

    sosolid4u09 4 8 15 16 23 42 banned Full Member

    12,433
    3
    Jun 21, 2008
    Great avatar
     
    sosolid4u09, Aug 12, 2012
    sosolid4u09, Aug 12, 2012
    #2
  3. hobgob21

    hobgob21 Active Member Full Member

    966
    89
    Jul 17, 2009
    it's just the way it is. saving the boxers who already lost from further punishment has something to do with it. in amateur boxing they are quite strict like that (e.g. holyfield in the olympics). if a boxer takes a beating it is unnecessary to put him in the ring the following day. better to give out 2 bronze.
     
    hobgob21, Aug 12, 2012
    hobgob21, Aug 12, 2012
    #3
  4. lefthook82

    lefthook82 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,649
    724
    May 1, 2009
    They should fight for it. Its a ridicolous rule to me
     
    lefthook82, Aug 12, 2012
    lefthook82, Aug 12, 2012
    #4
  5. stuey

    stuey Never bet on England Full Member

    3,568
    0
    Aug 13, 2004
    The 28 day stoppage rule. If one semi ends in a KO or RSC that fighter would be handed a28 day suspension rendering it unfair that he/she could not contest bronze.
     
    stuey, Aug 12, 2012
    stuey, Aug 12, 2012
    #5