The v2 Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

5 posters

Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by TRUSSMAN66 Thu 23 Feb - 12:57

Larry Holmes is a top 5 heavyweight of alltime.....He wouldn't have been with Ben Davison in his corner.....He lost to Ernie Shavers and Renaldo Snipes didn't you know...Well he didn't but he was out on his feet and looked in worst shape than Leigh Wood and had longer left in the round....But he hugged until his head cleared....and came back to win...

History is full of examples like this.....Durelle destroying Moore early.....Perhaps Manny should have stopped Marquez in 1 round....

Yes something could have happened to Wood in the 5 or so seconds left but it was highly unlikely and as a Champion Wood deserved the chance to continue.....Wood could have covered up or held.....

If everybody that rose on semi-unsteady legs got stopped then history would be different and not for the better...

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 40591
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Re: Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by 88Chris05 Thu 23 Feb - 17:14

I didn't have any strong feeling either way at the time of the stoppage, Truss, and still don't think it was a shocker by any means. But I am leaning more towards this line of thinking (possibly in part due to the fact that fights overall do tend to be stopped a little early for my liking on these shores).

There is a slightly annoying trend of some boxing fans these days falling over themselves in a bid to prove they're more compassionate than the next - since when was this a thing? Whenever you argue that a fight was stopped too soon you're often met with a chorus of "He saved his life - another punch could have killed him!" or "You obviously don't care about fighter safety" etc. etc. Very annoying when people act as if there isn't a whole lot of middle ground between a slightly early stoppage and catastrophic (or even fatal) injury, like it's a binary choice between the two.

I'm all for fighters being stopped or pulled out when a scrap has clearly become unwinnable due to a sustained beating, or when they're not responding to instructions or showing any awareness of the situation once they've been hurt, but neither of those apply here. Wood was shaky and clearly in serious trouble, but he got up and responded to the referee's instructions.

I think Lara would have stopped him anyway, be it in those closing seconds of the seventh or later on...But as you reference, we'd probably be saying the same about the Holmes fights against Shavers and Snipes if they'd have been stopped after those heavy knockdowns. On reflection I'd have probably preferred to see Davison give Wood a chance to ride out those last ten seconds, get him back to the corner and then assess him from there...But I can't be too critical of the stoppage, like I said it wasn't a shocker. More just the predictable reaction from some quarters whenever you complain of an early stoppage that you inevitably have to wade through.
88Chris05
88Chris05
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 9659
Join date : 2011-02-16
Age : 36
Location : Nottingham

Back to top Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Re: Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by Soul Requiem Fri 24 Feb - 8:16

88Chris05 wrote:

There is a slightly annoying trend of some boxing fans these days falling over themselves in a bid to prove they're more compassionate than the next - since when was this a thing? Whenever you argue that a fight was stopped too soon you're often met with a chorus of "He saved his life - another punch could have killed him!" or "You obviously don't care about fighter safety" etc. etc. Very annoying when people act as if there isn't a whole lot of middle ground between a slightly early stoppage and catastrophic (or even fatal) injury, like it's a binary choice between the two.


For all the high profile tragedies within boxing it has to be remembered it doesn't happen that often which is why we do remember them all. That might be slightly callous to say but we are people who enjoy watching other men getting beaten up on occasion. There's a line from HBO's legendary nights that I always remember and feels apt here; a doctor in reference to Meldrick Taylor "Meldrick suffered a facial fracture, he was urinating pure blood, his face was grotesquely swollen... this was a kid who was truly beaten up to the face, the body, and the brain"

The ending of that fight is still debated to this day but what can't be ignored is that we three have probably watched that fight numerous times for it's entertainment value and both men's indomitable will to win but the aftermath is tragic. Chavez did systematically ruin his life that night in a rare case of silent beating, it wasn't until late in the fight we started to see the toll it was taking and Lou Duva bears a lot of responsibility for that.

I've digressed a fair bit there and have gone back and forth as I did, there is however a big difference to being dropped by one punch and a sustained beating over the course of a fight.

Soul Requiem

Posts : 6452
Join date : 2019-07-16

88Chris05 likes this post

Back to top Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Re: Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 28 Feb - 11:50

Soul Requiem wrote:
88Chris05 wrote:

There is a slightly annoying trend of some boxing fans these days falling over themselves in a bid to prove they're more compassionate than the next - since when was this a thing? Whenever you argue that a fight was stopped too soon you're often met with a chorus of "He saved his life - another punch could have killed him!" or "You obviously don't care about fighter safety" etc. etc. Very annoying when people act as if there isn't a whole lot of middle ground between a slightly early stoppage and catastrophic (or even fatal) injury, like it's a binary choice between the two.


For all the high profile tragedies within boxing it has to be remembered it doesn't happen that often which is why we do remember them all. That might be slightly callous to say but we are people who enjoy watching other men getting beaten up on occasion. There's a line from HBO's legendary nights that I always remember and feels apt here; a doctor in reference to Meldrick Taylor "Meldrick suffered a facial fracture, he was urinating pure blood, his face was grotesquely swollen... this was a kid who was truly beaten up to the face, the body, and the brain"

The ending of that fight is still debated to this day but what can't be ignored is that we three have probably watched that fight numerous times for it's entertainment value and both men's indomitable will to win but the aftermath is tragic. Chavez did systematically ruin his life that night in a rare case of silent beating, it wasn't until late in the fight we started to see the toll it was taking and Lou Duva bears a lot of responsibility for that.

I've digressed a fair bit there and have gone back and forth as I did, there is however a big difference to being dropped by one punch and a sustained beating over the course of a fight.

No debate to the end of Taylor v Chavez.........Referee was happy to let Chavez destroy Rosario for 11 rounds in a fight Chavez was winning with ease....Took a towel to end that one.....He was happy to let a knocked out Hearns continue against Barkley.....He nearly let Tyson decapitate Bruno on the ropes in round 5....

But seeing red lights shine behind Meldrick to direct the ending of the round and fight....(who was about 10 rounds ahead) Seemed to make Steele unusually interested in his welfare...Taylor had his career shortened and didn't get to enjoy his victory for the pleasure !!..

I agree with the rest......Look at those old Black and white fights and look at the damage....and they weighed in on the day of the fights..

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 40591
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Re: Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by Derek Smalls Tue 28 Feb - 17:14

Didn’t see it, but I think there is a strong argument for more frequent use of a standing eight count.
The old Lewis/McCall stoppage argument was pretty divisive. Two different observers may see very different things when a fighter has taken one right in the breadbin and is taking an amble down Queer Street. I know that i was in the minority with my judgement call on that one. And the truth is, each time I see Froch Groves One I change my mind on the ref’s call.
Ultimately I think a bit of controversy is good for the sport. But also, there are really three inevitabilities.Death, taxes, and bent refs.


Derek Smalls
Derek Smalls

Posts : 318
Join date : 2020-08-19

Back to top Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Re: Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by No name Bertie Wed 1 Mar - 10:02

Maybe the decision is easier to make when there is a rematch clause.
No name Bertie
No name Bertie

Posts : 3597
Join date : 2017-02-24

Back to top Go down

Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped.... Empty Re: Why Leigh Wood was wrong to be stopped....

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum