Art or Fart of Clinching

[The Old LefHook]

90%+ of the time I do not like clinching. To know how to fight out of a clinch is one thing, to make it part of the strategy of the fight to shut your opponent down and pinch the action off is another.

No one can say the words John Ruiz without painful memories of boredom. But Ruiz is not alone. It was a big part of Holyfield's strategy in the first Tyson fight to tie both arms up and walk Mike backwards. Hardly a sensational tactic. It works only in a sport where it is allowed, therefore there are too many examples to cite.

I want a sport where holding is penalized fast and frequently. When the possiblility of basing a winning fight strategy on the two-armed clinch is eliminated, then I will finally be satisfied in that regard.

There is not a necessary reason for a sport like boxing to remain a monolith of tradtion. Technically, the sport is no longer evolving. Many, including myself, say it is devolving. Where is the evolution some like to tout?

True evolution in boxing will never happen until the rules and procedures are overhauled. They can start by re-defining what a legal clinch is and penalizing universally for blatant holding, no matter the importance of the contest.

The fat cats and corporations scooping in the money, they don't fix it 'cause to them it ain't broke. But I say its broke and needs some serious fixing.

[Scott9945]

My take on clinching is that it is a part of boxing and will always be tolerated. But excessive clinching is illegal and should bring point deductions or even disqualifications when necessary. If the referee sets a high standard early in the fight, usually the fighters will comply.

[The Old LefHook]

My take on clinching is that it is a part of boxing and will always be tolerated. But excessive clinching is illegal and should bring point deductions or even disqualifications when necessary. If the referee sets a high standard early in the fight, usually the fighters will comply.

Part of boxing. This is what I am talking about, fer chrissakes, when I say there is no necessary reason for boxing to remain a monolith of tradition, and you turn around and blithely say it must be so, as if boxing and clinching were biologically joined at the hips. Don't you get it? It is a matter of re-defining what legal clinching is, nothing more. Momentary clinches and entanglement are inevitable, the entire rest of clinching is not, and if you define it away it will go away, simple as that. Such techniques as spinning your oponent by the elbow are illegal anyway.

Believe me, my dear, clinching can be done away with almost entirely, and it will be done away with if boxing is going to survive. If fat cats like Al Haymon think the everyday world is going to tune into his boxers' overexposure on television to view clinchfests, their empires are going to crumble sooner rather than later, because TV execs are interested in ratings and ratings alone.

[Scott9945]

Part of boxing. This is what I am talking about, fer chrissakes, when I say there is no necessary reason for boxing to remain a monolith of tradition, and you turn around and blithely say it must be so, as if boxing and clinching were biologically joined at the hips. Don't you get it? It is a matter of re-defining what legal clinching is, nothing more. Momentary clinches and entanglement are inevitable, the entire rest of clinching is not, and if you define it away it will go away, simple as that. Such techniques as spinning your oponent by the elbow are illegal anyway.

Believe me, my dear, clinching can be done away with almost entirely, and it will be done away with if boxing is going to survive. If fat cats like Al Haymon think the everyday world is going to tune into his boxers' overexposure on television to view clinchfests, their empires are going to crumble sooner rather than later, because TV execs are interested in ratings and ratings alone.

There was plenty of clinching 100 years ago, and there will be clinching 100 years from now. You can be as mad about it as you want. But I don't appreciate being scolded.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

If a guy is hurt, or stunned, I don't mind the clinch, but when repeatedly used as a tactic I think the ref should deduct points and even DQ in some cases

[The Old LefHook]

There was plenty of clinching 100 years ago, and there will be clinching 100 years from now. You can be as mad about it as you want. But I don't appreciate being scolded.

Do not make blase though innoccuous replies to serious matters, my dear, that is all. I wouldn't blow hot smoke up my lil' darlin's pipe organs fer nothin'. People talk about for the better of the sport...blah, blah, blah...

I am talking about for the better of the sport too. I say we have to draw a new line, for the better of the sport. It would be a better and more viable sport if a new line were drawn on clinching. Boxing could be more competitive in the market.

I don't want to argue with you, ma, like two people with a semantic difference on gun control. I say new laws, you say stricter enforcement of current laws. I don't mind tryin' it your way, as long as that enforcement is fast, firece and universal, and those three words are to be taken literally.

But here's the shot. This could not be done by "passing the word" along by bulletins and whisper. Enforcement that firece, fast and universal could only come about as an official exercise in a sport bogged in its (oh, our beloved) traditions. I have tried to explain that something is not good just because it is an old tradition.

It will require a big effort not a small one, as all referees will have to be retrained and reinstructed, for the better of the sport, my dear, for the better of the sport, exclusively, indubitably and indisputably for the better of the sport.

All of these official acts and retraining programs can only, therefore be constituted as drawing a new line. They are a biger deal than mere stricter enforcement. They would have to be, to get the job done, to move boxing's pillars from the quicksand where it is so comfortable.

[Scott9945]

Do not make blase though innoccuous replies to serious matters, my dear, that is all. I wouldn't blow hot smoke up my lil' darlin's pipe organs fer nothin'. People talk about for the better of the sport...blah, blah, blah...

I am talking about for the better of the sport too. I say we have to draw a new line, for the better of the sport. It would be a better and more viable sport if a new line were drawn on clinching. Boxing could be more competitive in the market.

I don't want to argue with you, ma, like two people with a semantic difference on gun control. I say new laws, you say stricter enforcement of current laws. I don't mind tryin' it your way, as long as that enforcement is fast, firece and universal, and those three words are to be taken literally.

But here's the shot. This could not be done by "passing the word" along by bulletins and whisper. Enforcement that firece, fast and universal could only come about as an official exercise in a sport bogged in its (oh, our beloved) traditions. I have tried to explain that something is not good just because it is an old tradition.

It will require a big effort not a small one, as all referees will have to be retrained and reinstructed, for the better of the sport, my dear, for the better of the sport, exclusively, indubitably and indisputably for the better of the sport.

All of these official acts and retraining programs can only, therefore be constituted as drawing a new line. They are a biger deal than mere stricter enforcement. They would have to be, to get the job done, to move boxing's pillars from the quicksand where it is so comfortable.

I'm sorry my blasé but innocuous comments disappointed you. It sounded like common sense to me and I didn't expect to be the target of a loud rant. I'm not your dear, your darlin, or your miss and I'm tired of the references to my avatars or whatever.

[MRBOOMER]

as long as there not doing it because there getting hit but won't hit back and decide to just hold I'm fine with it. I think it pretty cool to see a fighter break another fighters rhythm and establish their own off a clinch. I don't mean let me me 1-2 hold you all night I mean steady action bring elusive and using your clinch almost like a jab to off set their offense and timing and then get your self back to work. But that broner Porter type of holding no way.

[Tom Cruise]

I dont mind it in small amounts. Its actually an interesting part of the game when its done well.

The double arm lock down everytime the opponent gets close is what should be more harshly enforced.

Having said that, if the refs arent going to intervene, fighters need to be more intelligent and not let themselves be clinched so easily. Better hand position, better head position, and better control of distance would all help stop a fighter like Klitschko having his way everytime on the inside

[Tom Cruise]

Too many fighters are able to use it when they are unable to compete on the inside.