I don't. It was limited to 12 because of the Mancini vs Kim controversy, so that implies they think limiting a boxing match by three rounds will save lives. ...It won't. Kim didn't die because the fight was scheduled for 15, he died because he took an unreal amount of punishment in a sport where guys are hitting eachother. Bring back 15 rounds, it'll separate the men from the boys.
Nice. I said the other day in a different thread that fight distance is something that doesn't get mentioned nearly enough when assessing the greatness of a fighter.
Good point, Teeto. Many of today's fighters probably wouldn't even have the stamina for a 15 round fight...most notably the Heavyweights.
EXACTLY. Arguello said it best when he said that any good fighter can go 12 rds. But the champions go 15. If people don't want to see fighters get hurt, then watch Amateur boxing. Boxing was RUINED when they went to 12 rds. in a kneejerk reaction to Kim's death by the crook Suliaman in 1982.:rasta
A solution to that, which is both safe and guarantees that the boxers weigh the same, would be that there are two weigh-in's: one the day before the fight and one in the dressing room, hours before the fight. As for open scoring: it sucks. The idea that you know one is cruising to a decision takes away all the anticipation and tension. Really, i don't see any advantage. Corrupt scoring will still be there anyway.
12 is better for the fighters. quite enough. what is holly about 15 ? so why not 20 ? 25 ? 40 ? 15 may even prolong borefests. imagine a 15 rounds of hugging and butting. i'd even say immediately before the fight. and this will require a new shw limit/division at 220 so why not bareknuckle ? my remarks are also for you