I never understood why championship bouts have to be longer than regular main event bouts. The Super Bowl is a 60-minute game. I don't even know why main events are 10 rounds - because we have 10 fingers? Olympic gold medals are awarded after 3 round bouts. I don't know how long bouts should be, (although three round bouts would be disappointing to pay per view customers). Should rounds be two minutes rather than 3? I'm just saying that some science should be part of the determination. How long do fatal fights or those with permanent injuries last? At what point had the injured fighter gone on too long? How many punches is too many? Should there be a 'halftime' where the fighters could be examined medically? Can we implant sensors in the gloves to determine how many punches have landed and with what force? Could that or the punch count be used to determine when fights should end or who won them?
Some of those may be good ideas or bad ideas but at least they would be the product of research on what happens to fighters, not how many fingers we have.
Forgot about Sugar Ramos/Davey Moore. Another high profile tragic example.
I think allot of scientific study (over the last 30 yrs) has gone into TBI in the sport. While there’s allot of debate and difference of interpretation, it seems (to me) that a few trends are obvious - number of forceful blows taken to the head accumulate bad effects on the fighter’s health (especially long term - no duh) and systematic dehydration (weight cutting) reduces vascular and central nervous system resiliency to absorb the impacts. Many post fight autopsies of boxing TBI victims revealed that the fighters were already suffering damage before they got in the ring (sparring, series of tough fights in a short period without time to rest/heal) and severe dehydration (so bad that it affected organ function and reduced brain fluid). Allot of guys don’t spar as much today (shadow box, work the mitts instead). And IV like crazy after the (now) day before weigh ins. Days of 6 oz gloves (sometimes even 8 oz for the bigger guys) are long gone. Refs don’t allow a fighter that is losing to “get beaten into unconsciousness” as often as they used to. Pre and post fight medical includes allot more than just the old-timer BP check. Not perfect, but some adaptation to scientific/medical research.
I’m a traditionalist (it’s my own bias and I recognize it), but also very open to improvement. I support anything that creates fairness of outcome, fighter safety and fan experience. Technology can make sports better (instant replay as an example, even with it’s warts). I think sensors in gloves (to inform scoring, data for referee/ringside doctor and also to document long term accumulation of punishment to a fighter over a career/period of time) is feasible today and a great idea. Maybe a chip in the mouthpiece as well. As long as it doesn’t change the “fundamental nature” of the sport - impose your skill and/or will on the opponent, I support it.
I agree that boxing is an outlier from other sports in that duration has changed over the years. And different for one champion (sometimes) than another. Believe Queensberry established the 3 minute rd and 1 minute rest standard (not exactly sure why this time limit was adopted). Think Tex Rickard (Dempsey’s promoter) ushered in the “10 rd” fight in the 20’s. Louis “standardized” 15 for a championship in the late 30’s/40’s. Amateur 3 rd distance since first Olympics in early 20th Century. Amateurs are dropping the headgear requirement again (which I agree with - headgear does little to prevent TBI). I’m with you - many of the “accepted” standards for the sport were/are based on precedent and not necessarily science, efficiency or safety. Allot of these “precedents” developed thru historical fight negotiations - one side angling for competitive advantage (ring size, glove size, neutral corner) over the other….. Some of the ”old ways” should be questioned and relooked at - for safety, standardization, even audience demand.
I just didn’t agree that reducing world championship bouts to 12 rds was necessary because of the tragic Mancini/Kim fight. The decision wasn’t based on “data” or “science,” it was emotion and PR by the Nevada State Athletic Commission at the time. Vegas panicked IMO. They assumed (incorrectly) that their audience would stop watching and they’d lose money if they didn’t “do something“ that looked like they were addressing this tragedy. Their resulting zero defect safetyism compromised the Weaver/Dokes Heavyweight Championship outcome the next day. Public outcry was so great (from that quick stoppage) that they fought an immediate rematch and beat each other’s heads in during a bruising distance draw. Didn’t make much sense if Vegas was so concerned about health and safety…. Saw an old interview with Flip Homansky (Nevada State Commission at the time) and Suliaman (WBC at the time) and they admitted that “optics” was the reason for the duration reduction decision. Because Kim was fatally hurt in the 14th, we’ll just limit the sanctioned distance to 12… Problem solved…. Except, other than Kim, I cannot recall any boxer collapsing with TBI during the old “championship” rds (13-15). Not in my lifetime. Looking back thru history, it has happened post 12th rd, but rarely. Most occurred before the 10th. A few were early, but most mid fight. Most involved what we call today “shop worn” vets in grinding, high contact fights. Against stronger, younger, superior opponents who were beating them up. But not all…. Moore/Ramos was just the opposite. Kim/Mancini was a competitive barn burner until the sudden ending. Sad to say, but the number of ring TBI/fatalities in pro boxing has remained pretty consistent - about the same per year during the 15 and 12 rd eras (slightly fewer in the 12 rd era, but not much). Dr. Margaret Goodman (still see her at times during big Vegas fights) published a good think piece in Ring Magazine about 15 yrs ago on the subject. Thought it was fair and outlined many of the modern safety and medical safeguards utilized today. If I recall, she was an early proponent of measuring concussive impact of punches during a fight.
Bottom Line - boxing had an established standard for a pro championship for a long time - 15 rds. Unlike other sports, you had to perform longer (potentially) if you wanted to be a champion. Tennis Grand Slams (for men - 5 sets) are the same. Not scientific, but a precedent. History of the sport would (probably) be very different if that long term precedent was only 10 or 12 rds instead of 15. If there is a factual reason to change, I’m on board. My real problem with today’s 12 rd distance is that there’s no medical evidence that it reduces TBI. I guess you can argue that shorter fight equals fewer punches taken, better (potential) long term health outcome, potentially a longer career. I support all of that. But that wasn’t why Vegas/WBC did what they did...
If “absolute zero” head injuries is the mandated outcome, then we need to fundamentally change the rules and nature of the sport. Or outright ban it…. If rendering your opponent unconscious or helpless constitutes “winning,” then we’re not gonna eliminate (potential) head injury. Olympics and international amateur competition tried to do that for the last 20 yrs (no scoring benefit from a knockdown, punches only score with white portion of glove, tap scored the same as a big punch, refs stop action for standing 8 if they thought a hard blow landed, etc). People stopped watching and the best talent stopped participating in amateur boxing…. I think that’s why the IOC is shifting their “rules” towards the other side of the pendulum so-to-speak (no more headgear, no more white portion of glove, ring generalship and effective aggression added back to scoring criteria). It’s business. Until someone gets hurt. And then they’ll “over react” emotionally again.
Long winded diatribe. My opinion is my own and I therefore value it highly - Lol. Think today’s TV and PPV “like” 12 rds better because a distance fight “fits” more neatly into an hour-hour and a half broadcast period. Doubt the sport will ever go back to 15. Promoters would force a reduction to 10 (or lower) if they could make more money doing so…. That is, unfortunately, the only important “science” or “rationality” applied to the sport today….
