Fifteen Rounds Reexamined
By JE Grant
The blogs were clogged following the Bernard Hopkins-Jermain Taylor fight July 16th. The debates raged as to the scoring of round 12, the inactivity of Hopkins in the first half (and more) of the fight, or how Taylor faded down the stretch. But one question raised in the debates was particularly intriguing: What would have happened had the bout been for 15 rounds instead of 12? Many used the argument that Hopkins was getting stronger, while Taylor was losing steam as the bell rang for the close of the 12th and final round…Read the entire story at Fifteen Rounds Reexamined at the Sweet Science.com
The blogs were clogged following the Bernard Hopkins-Jermain Taylor fight July 16th. The debates raged as to the scoring of round 12, the inactivity of Hopkins in the first half (and more) of the fight, or how Taylor faded down the stretch. But one question raised in the debates was particularly intriguing: What would have happened had the bout been for 15 rounds instead of 12? Many used the argument that Hopkins was getting stronger, while Taylor was losing steam as the bell rang for the close of the 12th and final round…Read the entire story at Fifteen Rounds Reexamined at the Sweet Science.com
2 Comments:
Hmm.No doubt that MANY title fights in the 80's,90's,and so on would have had a different result had they been 15-rounders.I guess as someone who was born in the early 70's,and henceforth made a somewhat 'smooth' transition to the 12-rounders,I'm a tad bit ambivalent on this one.Although I myself do indeed recall some of those 'tell-all' epic 15-rounders of the late 70's/early 80's.It does seem to me to be common sense that 12-rounders would be safer than 15-rounders though,much like 10-rounders would be safer than 12 and so on.But that being said,there is always going to be an element of danger,and I'm certainly not suggesting shortening it further by any means.
P.S. Taylor...Would NOT have made it to the 15th round...:-)
Post a Comment
<< Home