Would different rules produce different outcomes?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Hookandjab, Jul 10, 2016.


  1. Hookandjab

    Hookandjab Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,618
    552
    Feb 19, 2014
    Would Corbett beat Jeffries in a 15 round fight? Would Bonavena have beaten Frazier in a 20 round bout? Would bigger gloves have prevented Demosey from stopping Willard? The three knockdown rule would have awarded Durelle a win over Moore. Comments? Other examples?


    [CODE][/CODE]
     
  2. foreman&dempsey

    foreman&dempsey Boxing Addict banned

    4,805
    148
    Dec 7, 2015
    Of course... jack johnson even past his Prime would have beaten willard in a 15 or 20 rounder. Walcott would have won vs marciano in a 12 rounder
     
  3. Hookandjab

    Hookandjab Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,618
    552
    Feb 19, 2014
    But then how can we rate all time greats if the rules are a major factor? If Johnson would have won in 15 or 20 vs Willard, can we also say that Willard would have always won in a longer war of attrition? Would Rocky always flatten Walcott in a 12+ fight? Or would fighters apply different strategies? Would Marciano work with greater urgency in a shorter fight with Walcott and render him unconscious sooner? Hmmmm.
     
  4. BoxingFanMike

    BoxingFanMike Member Full Member

    442
    397
    Jul 13, 2014
    Didn't fighters tend to pace themselves in extremely long fights, like a 45 rounder or whatever Johnson v Willard was scheduled for? That's 3x15 round fights, would have to pace themselves.
    Would expect that in a shorter fight, the fighters would fight with a greater urgency, but I suppose it is also true that the opportunities would be less, so the chance of a come from behind victory would be lower.
     
  5. foreman&dempsey

    foreman&dempsey Boxing Addict banned

    4,805
    148
    Dec 7, 2015
    You have too much imagination