Are we overreacting to boxers that get KO'd easily

[watson748]

Just reading through some of the posts here and also on other forums and there seems to me a fairly glaring question that needs to be asked and answered. (I apologise if it has already been discussed or answered. If it has could someone put the link up and a mod delete this )

Do boxers who get sparked more easily than others receive more or less damage short or long term than those who don't?

When you look at say the beating Thompson took in the Haye fight as opposed to the actual KO loss for Haye...who was the more physically damaged after the fight? In the Peter/Wlad fight the other night, was the accumulative and prolonged beat down Peter took from Wlad worse than Enzo's one punch destruction? You could almost make a case that Peter took more punches to the head in that one fight than Enzo has ever received in his entire pro boxing career.

Should Enzo retire when the possibility is there that his brain is just better at defending itself than others? It could be that he and guys like Khan have a more sensitive/efficient shutdown mechanism that activate as soon as it perceives trauma. Could fighters like Khan, Wlad and Enzo be the safest fighters on the planet with their supposed glass jaws?

What is the medical data to support that Enzo is now in a more dangerous state than someone who seemingly has the ability (from the outside anyway) to get pummeled with punches all night?

I understand these questions may be the naivest ever asked

[Newport Daz]

I've never been punched in the head by a boxer, but I thought the general consensus was that a slow, heavy beating like the one Peter took is worse for you than a KO, unless you take a long beating before being KO'd. Oscar and Hatton have both said that taking a beating - Oscar against Pac and Hatton against Floyd - was worse than a quick clinical KO. Then there's times you don't even need to be Ko'd to have a concussion. In Calzaghe's book, he talks about a fight where he didn't warm up at all and the guy caught him with a big shot in the first round and his memory is fuzzy of that fight, even though he won in the next round he'd suffered a concussion. I suppose everybody is different. Beatings or KO's aren't going to be good for you in the long run either way.

[hurlock]

beating's end career's as some stuffing never get's refilled.

but to get banged out like enzo, fighter's have to be unlucky in the career to have that happen once let alone 5 times

anthony farnell had a good chin but got caught cold & was stunned against takaloo in rd1. enzo was warm & winning a tough fight.

[oliverfennell]

Just reading through some of the posts here and also on other forums and there seems to me a fairly glaring question that needs to be asked and answered. (I apologise if it has already been discussed or answered. If it has could someone put the link up and a mod delete this )

Do boxers who get sparked more easily than others receive more or less damage short or long term than those who don't?

When you look at say the beating Thompson took in the Haye fight as opposed to the actual KO loss for Haye...who was the more physically damaged after the fight? In the Peter/Wlad fight the other night, was the accumulative and prolonged beat down Peter took from Wlad worse than Enzo's one punch destruction? You could almost make a case that Peter took more punches to the head in that one fight than Enzo has ever received in his entire pro boxing career.

Should Enzo retire when the possibility is there that his brain is just better at defending itself than others? It could be that he and guys like Khan have a more sensitive/efficient shutdown mechanism that activate as soon as it perceives trauma. Could fighters like Khan, Wlad and Enzo be the safest fighters on the planet with their supposed glass jaws?

What is the medical data to support that Enzo is now in a more dangerous state than someone who seemingly has the ability (from the outside anyway) to get pummeled with punches all night?

I understand these questions may be the naivest ever asked

I think the people suggesting he retire now are doing so because the road back to the level which he aspires to looks beyond his grasp. It's just too far to come back from (another) defeat like this. And even if he is OK physically, his confidence might be beyond repair, considering how much he put into coming back as far as he did, and how well he was doing in the Frenkel fight before it all collapsed.

I do think people overreacted with Jermain Taylor, though.

[Counter-puncher]

I do think people overreacted with Jermain Taylor, though.

after the Abraham KO?

[oliverfennell]

I do think people overreacted with Jermain Taylor, though.

after the Abraham KO?

Yes, or specifically in the wake of back-to-back KO defeats. In one of those, he was winning, and in the other he was competitive. That's good form against two of the very best guys in the division. Maccarinelli's recent defeats have come at a lower level than Taylor's did.

[Counter-puncher]

oh, ok, personally i was pretty worried for him after the AA KO. 3 heavy KO losses in 4 fights just doesn't seem healthy, plus the AA one was a heavy heavy shot and from memory ended with his head banging the canvas.

[watson748]

oh, ok, personally i was pretty worried for him after the AA KO. 3 heavy KO losses in 4 fights just doesn't seem healthy, plus the AA one was a heavy heavy shot and from memory ended with his head banging the canvas.

I know what you are saying but just because we cannot see the effects physically, does the guy that can withstand the same blows (that would KO another boxer) receive less damage, especially if he is able to go the full 12?

If you take the Enzo/Frenkel fight. Frenkel actually took far more full blooded shots to his head than Enzo did but he clearly he has a strong chin. However, my question is, is that visual/physical gauge enough to measure that he is receiving less serious long term damage than Enzo who collapsed after one shot?

Sure it looks worse when a boxer collapses like a deck of cards but it still doesn't prove that that one shot he took was worse than the 75 more powerful blows a strong chinned fighter would possibly take over 12. How do we honestly know that so called 'glass chinned' boxers are more vulnerable to serious damage than others?

If Enzo kept on fighting would he be seen as being in a higher risk category and more susceptible to brain damaged than other boxers? And if so who is making this call?

Do we really not have a medical answer to this, is it all just based on knee-jerk emotional reaction? "That KO looked bad therefore he should retire"

[Counter-puncher]

Do we really not have a medical answer to this, is it all just based on knee-jerk emotional reaction? "That KO looked bad therefore he should retire"

without a doubt, that is a factor I think. a really heavy knockout looks terrible.

[orbtastic]

A heavy KO where the neck/body flops/falls usually ends up with the head hitting the canvas with a thump (not actually canvas, but wood covered) or worse, the bottom rope...which can cause more damage c.f. Watson.

One of the issues not taken into account [in the whole discussion] is draining/dehydration, which reduces the amount of "padding" for the brain, often to dire consequences late in fights.

Either way, whether someone gets knocked out cold/clean or takes a beating and gets stopped - It's not really good for your health. It's like saying which is better - smashing my thumb very hard with a 6lb lump hammer once, or hitting it 100s of times with a pin hammer? Neither are conducive to having normal sized thumbs.

[Counter-puncher]

yes, thanks Matt, put it better than i did

thats why the last Taylor KO (vs AA) looked the worst rather than earlier ones when he waso ut on his feet.