Comments on: No Need for Holding

By: Rob

Rob — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:30:09 +0000

Strange thing is I never tought of it! But you’re absolutely right, I always hated the clinching, grabbing, holding tactics of some ‘fighters’. That’s one of the reasons I never liked Ali for instance. But the people who say ‘you probable never boxed’ and things are missing the picture here… It means you’re in trouble if you are the fighter who HAS to hold, so it should be regarded as a faul. I don’t mean the standard tactical holding but the really ‘I’m in a corner, and that bully is hitting and hurting me’ kind. It’s wat boxing is about! If he HAS to hold the other guy is doing a better job! I never boxed at high level but I can’t remember EVER holding my opponent, even losing. Maybe I did, once or twice but I can’t remember. Maybe it is because of the karate upbringing I had where holding is a direct warning and the second time a point for the opponent, 3rd a second point, 4th DISQUALIFICATION. So it can be banned from the sport of boxing, and I really think we so a whole lot of more knockout victories in the process. Bat what are we talking about, it will never change…

By: owenspud

owenspud — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:19:42 +0000

Was trying to say that boxing should be about punching not holding as it is usually the less skilled or weary boxer who does the clinching!Also if you watch Mayweather vs Hatton (not a Big Ricky fan) you can notice that early on Floyd holds Ricky’s arm and pulls him in,cleverly nullifying his advantage on the inside and bluffing Cortez.Joe knowing Ricky’ reputation blamed him,frustrating him and favouring PBF!

By: owenspud

owenspud — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:11:44 +0000

AM I alone on the above opinion guys,or have I a complex lol?

By: owenspud

owenspud — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:10:29 +0000

Tempted to quit this site guys-Every time I make the effort to post a clean,articulte and legitimate opinion I am blocked.Yet,some of the bad stuff I keep reading……!

By: ROOTS

ROOTS — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:45:35 +0000

BRITS ONLY SEE WHEN THE OTHER FIGHTERS HOLD.BUT IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT THERE IS NO FIGHTER WHO HOLDS MORE THAN HATTON,BUT THEN HIS FANS CHOOSE TO CALL IT IN-FIGHTING.

By: William walton

William walton — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:54:43 +0000

Ladies/gents: I don’t know what fight the judges were watching but, At the very least it was a draw, And if i had to give winner it would be dirrel!

By: mark

mark — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:25:32 +0000

The thing is, when your entire “inside” technique is to grab the other guy and throw no punches then you should be disqualified. I’ve no problem with a fighter trying to tie an opponent up, as Long as he’s fighting. Watch calzaghe vs lacy, joe took lacy left hook out of the equation up close. To me that’s technique. Dirrell never once tried to hit froch on the inside, as soon Ashe was close he wrapped both arms around him. That isn’t technique, it’s an improvisation to cover up a glaring lack of technique, or worse, it’s a sign he doesn’t want to fight.

The devil is in the detail, and when done properly it’s not an issue. It’s when used excessively that holding ruins a fight. Defining what is excessive? Well when it’s consistant in a certain scenario I suppose, or when the referees spend more time pushing fighters apart than watching a fight.

By: ty b

ty b — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:58:48 +0000

writer that obviously hasnt ever boxed.

By: Glenn

Glenn — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:27:29 +0000

This article is spot on – holding ruins boxing. The amateurs are far stricter on holding and it works, (you get 2 warnings and you can get thrown out a third time if you continue to hold), so why not use their system. In K1 holding is strictly regulated and the ref officially warns fighters with a card and they lose a percentage of their purse – that would stop a lot of holding.

Boxing is far too conservative a sport, reluctant to change and when you have people here saying holding is a legitimate tactic no wonder there are so many poor fights. There needs to be some kind of world convention on boxing as the sport is in a slow decline.

Despite the author dissin MMA, you can have some great stand up fist-fights with less holding than many boxing match, e.g. Griffin v Bonnar.

By: M

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:51:57 +0000

Its hard to look back and agree whole heartedly – so many great fights have involved holding to great tactical advantage. If confronted by a more skilful in fighter the oft best option is to smother and hold until you can move back out to range and lots of fighters styles are based around this. Its up to the ref to keep it to a minimum. The problem is with inconsistent refereeing not with fighters employing the tactic which is what it is a tactic. Even the best fighters hold when they get tagged.

By: Glen Anglin

Glen Anglin — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:28:06 +0000

I am not disputing that holding is a wise tactic in certain situations. As I said in the article, when a fighter feels at a disadvantage, holding is an option for him. But that is precisely my point. I dont want the tactic of holding to be available to him just because he is at a disadvantage. I want to see boxing, not holding. He can move in tight to smother the punches, move away out of range, slip….any number of things. But I wish holding was not one of his options.

My career as an ametuer: 4-2-0. And my last fight was 30 years ago. Maybe if I had held more, I would not have incurred those 2 losses!

By: Dennis Broadhurst

Dennis Broadhurst — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:17:29 +0000

May I ask do you box? If you do then you will know at if you find your self at an angle where you cannot punch your opponent or you are tired or even hurt then clinching is your best option.

By: Glen Anglin

Glen Anglin — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:40:51 +0000

I agree it would change things. But I hope that in the long run it would be a change for the better. I am certain that there would be a lot less ambiguity from inexplicable judges decisions if there was no (or almost no) holding. I just hate to see such a sloppy ‘gray area’ diminish our great sport.

By: M

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:15:09 +0000

On an equal score some fighters use it to huge advantage – to nullify an opponents attack. Shane Moseley against Margarito for example. I agree to the point that there should be a limit and more consistency with refereeing, but to ban it altogether would turn boxing into something different altogether. By the same token some Refs break up clinches too early to the advantage of one fighter – Mayweather Hatton stands out. Its a shame as the moment a ref seems to favour one or other fighter you loose all respect for them. If I was a British fighter I’d point blankly refuse to let Joe Cortez ref any of my fights period.