Question: About a fighter holding his/her arm out . . .
The Sanity Cruzer
Larry Holmes used to do in order to 'measure' his opponents, which makes it
illegal to use in the ring? I know I've seen referees warn fighters for
using this tactic, but I've never really known what specific rule there is
against it. We saw it again last night when Valley did this against Wolfe
on FNF's. Does anyone know specifically which rule makes that illegal to
use? Oh, I'm absolutely NOT referring to amateur boxing rules.
Peter G Dellys
gloves' whereby you might be able to poke with the thumb rather than punch
with a closed fist. That's just a guess. Whatever the reason, it's a dumb,
redundant rule.
Peter
"The Sanity Cruzer" <sanity...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:af2gal$shg$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.361 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 7/05/02
Melanie Ley
<pde...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>Perhaps it's not considered a punch per se and is a throwback to 'thumbed
>gloves' whereby you might be able to poke with the thumb rather than punch
>with a closed fist. That's just a guess. Whatever the reason, it's a dumb,
>redundant rule.
It's illegal for two reasons - (1) fighters use it to hold off
their opponents so they can't get "in" or close and, (2), in so
holding them off, sometimes unfairly hit them when they can't
retaliate. It could be considered "holding." It is not considered a
punch.
Mel
Amateur Boxing News at
www.amateurboxing.com
The Sanity Cruzer
news:af2gal$shg$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
Doesn't anybody know of the rule which would make the above tactic against
the rules? I wonder if there is actually a rule which bars one from doing
this. Or, could it be the "Laurence Cole: I Don't Like That" rule?
'Dashing' Nick La Rosa
> h, I'm absolutely NOT referring to amateur boxing rules.
>
> Doesn't anybody know of the rule which would make the above tactic against
> the rules? I wonder if there is actually a rule which bars one from doing
> this. Or, could it be the "Laurence Cole: I Don't Like That" rule?
I know you weren't talking about the amateurs, but the Russians were experts at
holding their lead arms out without making it so obvious as to get warned about
it - they would even throw hooks of this). Amongst other things, t is a way of
limiting your opponnent's view of you and makes it difficult for them to see
follow up rights which when thrown correctly travel further than the lead arm
extended (due to hip rotation).
Nick
===--->> Exit, stage right even!
Mr. Cody
Cody
Melanie Ley
I wouldn't offend anyone with an amateur rule. Here is his response.
> Regarding the rule for sticking your arm at length into a boxers face. To
>the contrary, it is not a dumb, redundant rule. If a boxer uses his arm as
>Larry Holmes so adeptly was able to do they are able to take advantage of a
>"blinding the vision" of what is to follow and that is a right hand that is
>not seen.
>
>I personally will not allow a boxer to use this tactic and caution them
>against doing it.
>Hope that gives you something of a creditable answer.
>
>Thanks for asking,
>
>Elmo Adolph
Peter G Dellys
and hit, well that's a different story. If you've got a big problem with an
arm in front of you, get out of the ring before the opponent actually throws
a punch!
Peter
"'Dashing' Nick La Rosa" <n.la...@latrobe.edu.au> wrote in message
news:3D17E06D...@latrobe.edu.au...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.361 / Virus Database: 199 - Release Date: 8/05/02
Melanie Ley
<pde...@bigpond.com> wrote:
More from Elmo Adolph on the subject in the pros:
>Whether it's a rule or not! I have a few different sources of rules that I
>have compiled for a clinic manual that I have put together. It is not in all
>but most of the demonstrated fouls. In the manual I have a descriptive
>drawing of just that foul. "Measuring of the opponent". It's a practice
>and act that can be disconcerting, unfair, unsportsmanlike and I guess a
>number of other things. It has nothing to do with the art form of boxing.
>It can be especially harmful and dangerous if it is allowed to be used
>especially when it touches the face of an opponent. I won't allow it! Of
>course I'm only one person. Would love to hear from someone who is a
>proponent of allowing it and the rationale and reasoning why they would.
The Sanity Cruzer
news:Z8eS8.21195$Hj3....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> That's my take, too Nick. An extended arm per se is not illegal. If you
hold
> and hit, well that's a different story. If you've got a big problem with
an
> arm in front of you, get out of the ring before the opponent actually
throws
> a punch!
I too wonder if it's against the rules to put your extended arm out there
into your opponent's face. I wonder if it's just something certain referees
do not allow and they don't allow it based upon their personal feelings, not
an official rule.
I did see Elmo Adolph's response, and it did not cite a rule, just how he
handles it. I've seen how individual referees handle such situations, such
as Laurence Cole, the other night, but nobody has yet to mention a specific
rule disallowing the practice of a fighter placing an extended arm into an
opponent's face, generally as a measuring device.
'Dashing' Nick La Rosa
If there is a rule in the pros against this I would venture it could be born
from the shady past when it would have been felt maybe they put something on
the gloves that they were trying to 'place' onto the opponent's face?
It *definitely* disadvantages the guy who has the fist in their face and it can
be hard to get around because the guy with the arm sticking out can see what
you are trying to do to avoid it and you have to guess a way to 'clean vision'
that isn't temporary.
My solution is to not try and press forward but actually back off and circle
the opponnent and attack at your own leisure. Very difficult to use the
extended arm technique on someone who circles you.
SkippyPB
<n.la...@latrobe.edu.au> enlightened us:
Concerning "measuring", I've not been able to find any professional
rule against it. The best set of rules I've found on the internet and
the ones that seem to be in effect for any fight anywhere are detailed
at www.canadianboxing.com. Herewith from that site is the list of
fouls:
Fouls Major
67. The following are considered MAJOR FOULS and upon the occurrence
of any major foul in a round the referee, if he deems the foul
committed was deliberate, shall either disqualify the offending
contestant and award the contest to the fouled boxer, or award the
entire round to the fouled boxer:
(a) hitting an opponent who is down or who is rising from down;
(b) using the knee against the opponent;
(c) purposely going down without being hit;
(d) failure to heed the referee's warnings concerning low blows
or other minor fouls;
(e) use of a pivot blow or rabbit punch;
(f) any dangerous or unsportsmanlike conduct in the ring; and
(g) deliberate butting.
Fouls Minor
68. The following are considered MINOR FOULS and upon the occurrence
of a minor foul in a round the referee shall determine whether the
offending boxer should be warned or should lose points. However, upon
the occurrence of the same minor foul three (3) times in a contest,
the referee shall automatically order points be deducted:
(a) holding an opponent;
(b) deliberately maintaining a clinch;
(c) hitting with the inside or butt of the hand, the wrist or
elbow;
(d) backhand blows;
(e) low blows;
(f) hitting or "flicking" with the open glove;
(g) wrestling or roughing at the ropes;
(h) deliberately striking at that part of the body over the
kidneys; and
(i) hitting on the break.
Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-
Micro$oft Haiku Error Message #101:
Your file was so big.
It might be very useful.
But now it is gone.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Remove nospam to email me.
Steve
'Dashing' Nick La Rosa
> (f) any dangerous or unsportsmanlike conduct in the ring; and
>
>
I think this foul could cover a lot of things including "measuring" or "blinkering"
your opponnent. It would depend if you considered it dangerous or unsportsmanlike.
The Sanity Cruzer
news:3D1B9DC6...@latrobe.edu.au...
> > (f) any dangerous or unsportsmanlike conduct in the ring; and
> >
>
> I think this foul could cover a lot of things including "measuring" or
"blinkering"
> your opponnent. It would depend if you considered it dangerous or
unsportsmanlike.
It could read, "And any act deemed to be inappropriate by the referee." In
the world of law, these are the rules which lead to Supreme Court decisions
to define them.
'Dashing' Nick La Rosa
It could also be the 'leverage' rule for the referee's discretion. In all the
years of boxing there seems to be a new case popping up every year where the
rule book doesn't specifically cover something that happens (or doesn't
happen) in a ring. If they don't have a rule 'open to interpretation' it could
make it hard for the referee in situations that aren't specifically covered by
the rules - other than deeming the event a no-contest. If it was a law it
would definitely be a badly drafted one. However, it could have been designed
by the same people that draft Accounting Standards. (-:
'Dashing' Nick La Rosa
"Maynard G. Krebs" wrote:
> Sean O'Grady said one time on the Tuesday Night Fights that the way he
> was taught to stop an opponent from sticking his hand in Sean's face
> was to slip inside the opponent's hand and hit him on the elbow with a
> hook.
> Mark
It all depends on how good the 'measurer' is at doing it. A good measurer will half
step back when you start ducking or have an uppercut ready for your troubles. You
have to remember that he *can* see what you are doing while you can only guess what
he will do when you do it.
You can keep swatting the offending hand away if you want to stay close but again,
if you are tailgating and want to see the road ahead, sometimes you just have to
pull back to get a view of when it's safe to overtake....
RPM (Personal Email)
PS: Patrick was here :^)
Emanuel Berg
> yo yo its the future here, 1/20/23
>
> PS: Patrick was here :^)
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal