Let me start by saying I didn't watch the Khan-Peterson fight. So lets start by forgetting about that fight and just focus on Smoger's statements with regard to pushing in general. First and foremost, pushing is an ILLEGAL act in boxing. but Some of you might argue so is holding, and very rarely if ever is a point deducted for holding. And I would have to agree with that statement, but here is why that is wrong in both cases. Anytime you have a fighter who is utilizing an illegal tactic such as holding, pushing, or lets say something as drastic as turning his back to his opponent consistently throughout the round and round after round. And is doing so with the intended purpose of neutralizing his opponent's offense; the Ref has an obligation to warn and take points and even ultimately disqualify the offending fighter. We all know that a boxing round is only 3 minutes long, and that provides very little time for both fighters to get their work done. So under no circumstances can you allow one fighter to break the rules to the point in which he is neutralizing his opponents offense. Smoger implied in his interview, that one of the reasons he doesn't and probably would never penalize for pushing, is that fighters are often trying to fight for room to punch. In the case of Khan-Peterson, I don't know if this applies as I didn't see the fight. From what I have read I don't think it does. It appears to me from 2nd hand accounts that Khan wasn't pushing to have room to punch, but was in fact trying to create distance to thwart Peterson's inside offense. But in my opinion it doesn't matter and here is why. Lets use the Foreman-Frasier fight as a frame of reference. In that fight Joe wanted to be close to George where he could do his best offensive work and smother George's punches. George wanted some distance for the exact opposite reasons. In that fight George got away with BLATANT pushing, in which he would also punch right after pushing Frasier. How many of you would have been ok with Frasier holding Foreman like an octopus? Now imagine, you got one guy trying to push and another trying to hold, what are you left with? That's right, a wrestling match. And this isn't MMA. Foreman should not have been allowed to push, just like Ali should not have been allowed to hold his opponents heads down. What is a fighter to do then when another fighter gets on the inside, one might ask. Well you can use your feet and side step them, utilizing lateral movement, you can back them up with punches, or you can fight them on the inside. But for the life of me I don't know how anyone can argue for allowing a fighter to hold, push, or any combination thereof. You should care about the application of these rules because, if you are interested in "who is the better boxer" then the rules have to be enforced so you get indicative outcomes. So again, I don't know who won the Khan-Peterson fight, because I didn't see it. But if you have one fighter who is either pushing the other fighter, or holding the other fighter every time, or nearly every time they are close to stop his opponents offense; I don't see how any fair minded observer can argue against taking points away, and or even disqualifying the fighter.
:good:deal Agreed with everything you said BUT i still think smoger is the best ref in the sport right now and Khan appeared to push Peterson while Peterson was attempting to clinch, i thought one deduction was good enough, Khan was still a dumb ass to keep pushing tho so i could see the argument going either way and a rematch should answer all the questions
You're right, both pushing and holding are rarely called and even more rarely penalized, however, when a ref is warning you about it - and he has every right to do so, because he's enforcing the rules as he interprets them - your job as a fighter is to adjust to the refs expectations. Khan failed to do so and payed the price. What good are countless warnings when you don't take points eventually? The ref would have been inept if his warnings didn't everntually have any teeth on them in the form of a point deduction. What surprised me is that Khan - a pure highly skilled boxer which everyone presumed had a high ring IQ - and his trainer failed to adjust to the refs warnings. That tells me that Khan has no inside offence or defence and has to resort to primitve pushing (he didn't even try to disguise his pushing...it was just overt shamelessly large pushing motions) when he needs space. Khan fought a very brave and entertaining fight, but he was exposed for having no inside game at all. Peterson just drew the real blueprint (the blueprint before was to go for the KO but Khan has since redeemed his chin, making that blueprint less relevent ) for how to beat Khan.
Khan was pushing Peterson not only to deter the clinch but to avoid the uppercut, which he was eating all night long.
very true, khan is a ***** too for making such a fuss about the decision, his ego does not match his skill, not even close, he is way too hyped,
Smoger's right, but Khan was still wrong for failing to adjust in the fight. That doesn't mean Cooper did a good job or was unbiased, but Khan should've adjusted better. If a ref is looking to screw you, you can't keep giving him an excuse to do it. There's a valuable lesson to be learned there if Khan's not dumb or pompous enough to ignore it.
I'm kinda surprised the OP wrote all that without having watched the fight. It's an argument of academia at that point, but this isn't an entirely academic situation. It's a fight. Watch it first with no bias, then make a statement regarding your opinions on Smoger's thoughts. Academically, you have a great argument imo. But you really gotta watch the fight.
