Iole: Stop one-sided fights sooner
Yahoo! Sports boxing analyst Kevin Iole's latest focuses on the Darchinyan-Arce fight from the other night, and his feeling that fights as one-sided as that one should be stopped sooner due to the fact that getting hit in the head a lot can lead to problems down the line.
It's insensitive to disagree, but I think it's too much to generalize every "one-sided," "all but over" fight as one that should be stopped sooner. Darchinyan was giving Arce a schooling, but really didn't beat him up all that badly. If you want to argue that it WAS too bad, that's your opinion, but I think going by "punishment taken" is kind of a weird grey area, too.
What about a great, back-and-forth war like the Vazquez-Marquez fights or Gatti-Ward or Barrera-Morales? Do those fights, because they're competitive, become less dangerous to the fighter's health? In every one of their fights, both Vazquez and Marquez took way more brutal punishment than Arce did the other night.
It's a tough discussion, and referee Dr. Lou Moret has been criticized by some for not being able to keep up with the fight, but I think he did OK for the most part. Fighter safety is very important, but the harsh truth is nobody walks away from a productive boxing career in great shape, and that's just kind of how it is. Arce has been beaten around far worse in fights he's won than he was against Darchinyan.
If you start painting with too broad a brush, you're gong to have some really bad decisions. That's my only concern.
I think this was the most interesting thing Iole covered, though, which is Bob Arum being upset with the Arce corner:
“I wasn’t concerned about [the number of punches] he was taking, though I will admit he clearly lost the fight,” Arum said of Arce. “He doesn’t know how to fight a left-hander. Someone has to teach him. He didn’t do [well] with [Cristian] Mijares, and he didn’t do it here.
“He’s a gutty guy, and considering he has no clue how to fight a left-hander, I think he did well to stay in there. … I talked to them about it before the fight, and they told me they were teaching him and this and that. But he was moving the wrong way. It’s basic boxing. Give him a training camp with someone like Freddie Roach, who I think is the best trainer, and it’s a different fighter.”
0 recs |
9 comments
|
Comments
I think the difference between fights like Vasquez/Marquez and Morales/Barrera compared to Arce/Darchinyan comes down to the outcome still being in doubt. In brutal, but even fights, while there’s a risk of injury to both men, there’s still a reason to let both men fight – to find a winner. After about round 7 or 8, it seemed very clear Arce had almost NO CHANCE to win. Why let a fighter get punished when his chances to win have completely gone?
by A.F. on Feb 10, 2009 1:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
because stunning late knockouts do happen
Shannon Briggs drilled Sergei Liakhovich late and Oleg Maskaev did it to Hasim Rahman. I agree Darchinyan was dominating the fight and Arce wasn’t going to knock him out because Arce couldn’t do anything to him, but where do you draw the distinction? Do referees become analysts and determine who has enough knockout power?
"I was trying to rob him. And he took my gun from me. And the gun was full of blanks. And he shot a blank into my eye. And now I cannot see from this eye ever again, the doctors say."
"Well to be honest it sounds like it's all your fault."
by SC on Feb 10, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There have been great comebacks, but those examples are few and far between, especially in cases where the fighter that came back was taking a bad beating. Briggs was losing, but he’d barely been hit. Rahman was losing, but the fight was still reasonably close.
At some point, the ref needs to say, “What’s the point of this?” If the point is only to see whether or not a fighter can go the distance, then there’s no real reason to keep going. And yes, that’s a judgment call I think the ref should make.
by A.F. on Feb 10, 2009 2:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I generally do agree with this
But Arce didn’t take such a horrendous beating that I think this fight in particular needs to be the one to inflame the topic, you know? He really wasn’t that banged up. Yes, there was no point in continuing (99.9999999999999% sure he wasn’t going to deck Darchinyan in the 12th) and I agreed with the stoppage. But to say it should’ve come earlier? How much earlier? Eight rounds is not far enough into a fight to declare anyone a winner, I don’t think, unless the guy is getting killed in there like a James Kirkland-Brian Vera situation, which is a fight that should have been stopped earlier. That was brutal to watch. I mean yeah Vera’s tough and wasn’t hurt, but nobody’s brain is tougher than anyone else’s.
I just don’t see how this fight specifically got Iole’s ire up. It’s not an indefensible positio or even close to it. It’s a good position. But why this fight? If you get overly aggressive about fights not being stopped soon enough, eventually there is going to be more than the rare horribly early stoppage. It’s sort of a mercy rule idea but you have to decide what fighters get mercy’d and which guys don’t, and then you’re asking the referees to make an even tougher judgment call than they often do already.
"I was trying to rob him. And he took my gun from me. And the gun was full of blanks. And he shot a blank into my eye. And now I cannot see from this eye ever again, the doctors say."
"Well to be honest it sounds like it's all your fault."
by SC on Feb 10, 2009 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Had Arce been allowed out for the 12th round, I think it would have been very irresponsible. Since that didn’t happen, I agree that this fight in particular shouldn’t necessarily be the one to inflame the topic.
Chris Byrd also took some unnecessary punishment at the end against Shaun George in a fight he was getting dominated in, even after he was knocked down. Not much was said about that though, but it was probably a more valid example of a fight going on too long. Same with the last few moments of Margarito/Mosley.
I agree, it’s a tough call and each situation is different, but in general I would prefer refs erring on the side of caution.
by A.F. on Feb 10, 2009 2:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think every boxer who matter what… wants to say they went the distance.
I think each fight is different and the circumstances that lead to the stoppage are different.
Iole has an opinion but I don’t think you can say that about all fights that are onesided.
by Zocalo on Feb 10, 2009 3:34 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Fights that could have been stopped;
But weren’t, therefore resulting in a big (ie- potentially career defining, not meant in this case as ‘explosive’ or ’convincing’) win for the fighter who could have been stopped……
Eubank/Watson (it was Eubank who potentially should have been stopped, for those who haven’t watched it)
Byrd/Vitali
Damn, I had about 3 more that I was going to mention, and I’ve now had a massive mental block…….
I’ll post more when I remember.
Does the fact a boxer doesn't switch weight divisions during their career detract from their overall P4P ranking?
Cos I'd take Hagler over most heavies in history, P4P, and also over "6 weight world champion" Oscar De La Hoya, and Marvellous Marvin never really messed about with his weight, did he?
by Chaos100 on Feb 11, 2009 8:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Corrales-Castillo I
"I was trying to rob him. And he took my gun from me. And the gun was full of blanks. And he shot a blank into my eye. And now I cannot see from this eye ever again, the doctors say."
"Well to be honest it sounds like it's all your fault."
by SC on Feb 12, 2009 1:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 
















