Age limit?

[tony3]

With Evander Holyfield making what is in the eyes of many, a fruitless and dangerous bid to become the oldest ever HW champ, it seems an appropriate time to raise an issue I often consider. A mandatory retirement age.

The most obvious reason of course is to prevent participants of the sport from becoming victims of their own obstinacy. I can think of few things more appalling than watching a once-good fighter, or even a great one, being completely humiliated because their skills or resistance have deserted them. However the most important consideration by far are the risks that an overindulged career poses to an individual participants long-term well being (there's no point in me making a list of the complications that can materialize on a site like this because the majority of you are extremely well-informed).
Secondly, if an age restriction were imposed it may encourage managers to match their fighters more aggressively and more competitively because at the moment, recognition and financial reward seem to be the exclusive territory of top-flight Americans past their sell-by date. There would be less chance for someone like Joe Calzaghe for example, to be left on the shelf until the twilight of their career and less motivation for actively staying there.

However, it has to be raised that many of the greats would not have been able to establish their legacy if barred by an age limit. George Foreman is the most blatant example, winning the linear world title at the grand old age of 45 (a great advert for his grilling machine), B Hop was in his late thirties before his career defining victories had been fought and ‘Ancient’ Archie Moore just seemed to improve with each passing year. Retrospectively, it would seem nothing less than a cruel exercise in discrimination to deny these men their place in history because of a mere number. The abovementioned trio are also a testimony to the fact that the durability of constitution and reflex, range greatly between one man and the next. Don Curry, Mike Tyson and Wilfred Benitez by comparison, were arguably past their best before reaching the age of thirty.

Finally, if you think an age cap is necessary; at what age should a pro be forced to hang them up?

All opinions welcome.

[Horse]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

[BigEars]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

No lower age limit ?, so you think 14 year olds should be allowed fight professionally ?

Personally I think 17 should be the minimum age to fight and 50 should be the maximum.
No fighter, not even the exceptions to the rule(Archie Moore etc), are able to fight to a high level at 50.
The majority don't even try to fight at that age anyway but imo it's the age where I'd start to feel very uncomfortable with having the fighter in the ring(no matter what their skill level or previous damage incurred)

Anywhere inbetween is good once he/she is medically approved to fight.

[Horse]

No lower age limit ?, so you think 14 year olds should be allowed fight professionally ?

Yes, if they are good enough then they are old enough.

Personally I think 17 should be the minimum age to fight and 50 should be the maximum.
No fighter, not even the exceptions to the rule(Archie Moore etc), are able to fight to a high level at 50.
The majority don't even try to fight at that age anyway but imo it's the age where I'd start to feel very uncomfortable with having the fighter in the ring(no matter what their skill level or previous damage incurred)

Anywhere inbetween is good once he/she is medically approved to fight.

How many fighters are told that they should quit because they are too old? Fighters are almost always told to quit because they are on the slide, and are nowhere near there former level.

If they don't decline and they still remain a good fighter, then why should they be forced to quit at a mandatory retirement age?

Our freedom is being taken away from us slowly but surely, and I find it hard to believe that so many people are encouraging this sort of loss of liberty.

[Asterix]

Regarding an upper age limit, I think health should be the determining factor.

[banjo]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

No lower age limit ?, so you think 14 year olds should be allowed fight professionally ?

Barrera and Benitez turned pro at 15(Benitez was a champion at 17), Morales and Sanchez were 16, infact I'm pretty sure there's hell of a lot more

[Poncey]

Duran was also 15 or 16, as I thought was Chavez. It's common i Cebtral and South America to debut at around that age. It helps to put food on the table.

And no, there should be no blanket upper limit. The onus must be on the Governing bodies to ensure every fighter is fit, healthy and reasonably competitive on a case by case basis.

[banjo]

Duran was also 15 or 16, as I thought was Chavez. It's common i Cebtral and South America to debut at around that age. It helps to put food on the table.

Duran and Chavez were 17.

As for an upper age limit? No, if you're fit enough you're young enough.

Edit - Corrected - Duran was 16

[oliverfennell]

As much as it saddens me to see old, used-up fighters futilely fighting on, there is no way to enforce an upper age limit, as some guys are finished by their late 20s and others can still compete in world class in their 40s.

Recent cases in point: Graham Earl unable to get out of the way of shots and getting blasted out in a round in back-to-back fights at 29 and 30, and then we see a 43yo Hopkins whip Pavlik and a 46yo Holyfield push Valuev to a controversial MD.

[Shirow]

I think these days medical technology should be up to charting any decline in boxers cognitive abilities, reaction times etc. As someones year of birth is no indication of decline on it's own.

If this is checked every year on licence renewal and if the results show a dip of say prescribed % since the first ever test that should do the job. The extra cost is probably the reason this won't happen though.

[funso banjo baby]

its up to the fans to stop this happening

dont watch Khan pay per view

dont watch valuev v holy


then they'll just go away

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

Hopkins at the age of 50 will probably take far less punnishment than Gatti would take in his prime. Should defensively weak fighters be banned too?

[BigEars]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

No lower age limit ?, so you think 14 year olds should be allowed fight professionally ?

Barrera and Benitez turned pro at 15(Benitez was a champion at 17), Morales and Sanchez were 16, infact I'm pretty sure there's hell of a lot more

You'll find loads from Mexico and central America, the age limits I'm talking about are what I believe should be enforced by the BBBofC.
The skull is much less developed at 14 than it is at 17, even if a fighter is skilled enough putting them into the ring with a fully grown man has serious potential health risks(sure boxing itself does as a whole), but I just don't think it's right to be a pro at 14.

Barrera was almost 16(2 months off), and I think there's an age limit of 16 in Mexico it's just easy to by pass.
As said fighters there have to turn pro early for financial reasons.

[Captain Hook]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

Every post only confirms more and more what a total plank you are.

Do you have children? No lower limit?

And you would have 75 year olds box pro?

[banjo]

Personally I think how a fighter is defeated should be more important than the age, obviously you have fighters like Hopkins who at 43 and after numerous world title fights seems perfectly healthy but you also have fighters like Wilfred Benitez who was pretty much shot to shit by his mid-20s. Take a look at Graham Earl and the wars he's been in during his career, he's still relatively young now but he can't take a punch anymore and needs to retire. It's alright saying "he's an adult, it's up to him" but when he takes one punch too many and ends up brain damaged not only is his life ruined but it would give the sport yet another black eye.

[Captain Hook]

Personally I think how a fighter is defeated should be more important than the age, obviously you have fighters like Hopkins who at 43 and after numerous world title fights seems perfectly healthy but you also have fighters like Wilfred Benitez who was pretty much shot to shit by his mid-20s. Take a look at Graham Earl and the wars he's been in during his career, he's still relatively young now but he can't take a punch anymore and needs to retire. It's alright saying "he's an adult, it's up to him" but when he takes one punch too many and ends up brain damaged not only is his life ruined but it would give the sport yet another black eye.

Exactly, if we're being realistic and you can fight at any age, a precedent will be set - ie some fit 57-year-old guy boxing pro, or a Tyson-like 12-year-old knocking out adults - and the floodgates will open....

[flash11]

I think that AIBA should increase the age that Amateur boxers can box from 35 to 40. After all they are wearing 10oz gloves and head guards so why make them stop at 35 if they are fit and enjoying it.

[Horse]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

Every post only confirms more and more what a total plank you are.

Do you have children? No lower limit?

And you would have 75 year olds box pro?

Charming as usual, Captain.

Just because there is no lower limit, it doesn't mean that 3 year olds are going to be able to get a boxing license. Do you understand that, Captain Hook?

[Cannibal]

It is too subjective to place an age limit on it. Some guys are old at 25 and some can still trade in world class at 50.

Holyfield won that fight, just the judges robbed him. I do agree that he should be retired, but the fact is, at 46, he is still good enough to be a world champion in the current division, and the likes of Bernard Hopkins could probably still school people at 50.

[AngryGoon38]

Duran was also 15 or 16, as I thought was Chavez. It's common i Cebtral and South America to debut at around that age. It helps to put food on the table.

Duran and Chavez were 17.

As for an upper age limit? No, if you're fit enough you're young enough.

Edit - Corrected - Duran was 16

Yup.Apparently,according to the boxrec stats,Duran was 16 being that they list the date of 2/23/68 as being his pro debut vs Carlos Mendoza at Bantamweight.He was 4 months away from turning 17 according to boxrec stats.

However,in an ole 1980 issue of "The Ring" magazine,they list Duran's pro debut against Mendoza as being March of 1967.
Which would've made em a mere 15-3/4 years of age.

[AngryGoon38]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

No lower age limit ?, so you think 14 year olds should be allowed fight professionally ?

Barrera and Benitez turned pro at 15(Benitez was a champion at 17), Morales and Sanchez were 16, infact I'm pretty sure there's hell of a lot more

I do have that ole ring mag somewhere as i do indeed distinctly remember them stating that Duran's pro debut was in 1967.I know it was listed as being in March of that year as well,which would've made em 3 months shy of turning 16...Pro Debut Opponent was listed as "Carlos Mendoza" in "The Ring" mag,just as The BoxRec Stats show as well.

I'll have to go and dig it up amongst the basement stash.

[banjo]

I've just checked my copy of "Hands Of Stone" and it lists his debut on 23 March 1968

[Asterix]

Manny Pacquiao turned pro at around 17. Antonio Margarito at 16, I think.

[gobbles]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

No lower age limit ?, so you think 14 year olds should be allowed fight professionally ?

Barrera and Benitez turned pro at 15(Benitez was a champion at 17), Morales and Sanchez were 16, infact I'm pretty sure there's hell of a lot more

Benitez is in a care home now and he's only 50

[Captain Hook]

There should be no upper or lower age limit.

Every post only confirms more and more what a total plank you are.

Do you have children? No lower limit?

And you would have 75 year olds box pro?

Charming as usual, Captain.

Just because there is no lower limit, it doesn't mean that 3 year olds are going to be able to get a boxing license. Do you understand that, Captain Hook?

You bring out the worst in me Horse, you really do.

BTW Why can't a three-year-old get a license if there is no lower limit? If there's no limits surely they could? That's just unfair......

Ask 2 Unlimited....

PS If you were a horse you'd have been shot in the paddock for being so fornicating lame.. :)