Vegas - New Rule: 135lbs & above to wear 10oz gloves

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 13 Jul 2006, 03:54

Lightweights (135 lbs) and above will now be required to wear 10-ounce gloves instead of the normal 8-ounce gloves when fighting in Nevada. This has been brought into effect because 7 of the 8 fighters who have died after fighting in Vegas have been between 140lbs and 147lbs.

I am interested to read opinions on wether anyone thinks this new ruling plays against Hatton (if he ever fights in Vegas). I think it will have a slightly negative effect on him. At least, i am convinced it is not to his favour. His stregnths are his mawling tactics and the volume of power punches he throws, but his shots will now carry a little less sting in them which is sure to be an advantage to someone like Mayweather, rather than vice-versa. Hattons trademark punch is his crippling bodyshots (which he has been struggling to get off at the top level). 10oz gloves are sure to take some of the sting out of them.

Sure, the other guy will have to wear the same 10oz gloves, but with Hatton being the style of fighter he is, i think it plays against him rather than for him.

Any opinions?

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 13 Jul 2006, 03:57

For the record, i am all for this rule change.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 13 Jul 2006, 05:26

Not sure if this is a great idea. Bigger gloves actullay prolongue a lot of beatings. How many deaths or injuries do you see in MMA with the 2 or 4 oz gloves? (And obviously quicker knockouts and less sustained punching to the head) I think there has been 1 ever worldwide with a guy who should never have been passed medically. Anyway my point is I dont think its the right move.

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 13 Jul 2006, 06:02

nickd wrote:Not sure if this is a great idea. Bigger gloves actullay prolongue a lot of beatings. How many deaths or injuries do you see in MMA with the 2 or 4 oz gloves? (And obviously quicker knockouts and less sustained punching to the head) I think there has been 1 ever worldwide with a guy who should never have been passed medically. Anyway my point is I dont think its the right move.

Fair point Nick..... i can see some sense in what you say. I've seen this debated on a few forums in the past, but it makes no sense to me when i see people on message boards throwing there weight behind a particular angle on this subject. Unless one is a highly qualified doctor, we should leave leave the decision making up to those who are.

Any opinions on Hatton (+ -) regarding this new ruling?

Regards
Ali

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 13 Jul 2006, 06:03

ALI wrote:
nickd wrote:Not sure if this is a great idea. Bigger gloves actullay prolongue a lot of beatings. How many deaths or injuries do you see in MMA with the 2 or 4 oz gloves? (And obviously quicker knockouts and less sustained punching to the head) I think there has been 1 ever worldwide with a guy who should never have been passed medically. Anyway my point is I dont think its the right move.
Fair point Nick..... i can see some sense in what you say, i've seen this debated on a few forums in the past, but i think, unless one is a highly qualified doctor, we should leave leave the decision making up to those who are. It makes no sense to me when i see people on message boards throwing there weight behind a particular angle on this subject.

Any opinions on Hatton (+ -) regarding this new ruling?

Regards
Ali

Of all those ring deaths how many went the distance or close to it? Nearly all if not all. Quicker knockouts seldom turn into a bad injury or death.

And these bigger gloves are going to make fights longer. Do the maths!

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 13 Jul 2006, 06:12

nickd wrote:Of all those ring deaths how many went the distance or close to it? Nearly all if not all. Quicker knockouts seldom turn into a bad injury or death.

Mmmm, perhaps we should consider using 4oz gloves then, just enough padding to prevent excessive cutting............ food for thought maybe

Lets just leave it to those who know what they are talking about.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 13 Jul 2006, 06:49

I remember Sky debated the size of glove issue after the Spencer Oliver fight were he suffered the injury (in a ringside special). It was argued that the same head jerking trauma occurs with bigger gloves - but then as Nick said, the fights will not last longer.

I think though it will help Hatton, think it will protect his skin and his face a bit more. He's not a concusive puncher anyway.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Jul 2006, 07:39

Bigger gloves are actually worse when it comes to brain trauma, their sponginess and greater surface areas spreads the concussive force of the impact which increases the chances of the brain coming into contact with the skull.

As pointed out earlier, bare knuckle fighting or fighting with lightly padded fists, produces swifter knockouts, and results in localised injuries rather than brain trauma. It's also arguable that without the padding provided by pro boxing gloves, fighters are not able to land as hard as often, as their hands will end up broken. Gloves were designed originally to protect the hands, not the opponents face or head, and that is what they do best.

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 14 Jul 2006, 02:42

jamesmcdonnell wrote:As pointed out earlier, bare knuckle fighting or fighting with lightly padded fists, produces swifter knockouts, and results in localised injuries rather than brain trauma.

Thats quite a stern viewpoint your giving us James

I strongly disagree with the above statement, based on personal experience. A friend of a friend of mine was killed with a single punch, he was'nt drinking and he did not hit his head on the way down. In my local pub a guy killed his brother with a single punch, he did not hit his head on the way down but he had been drinking, though it was the opinion of everyone there that he was not drunk.

Lets leave it to the doctors to decide what best protects a fighter. If your going to pass of second or third hand information, name your source!

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 14 Jul 2006, 04:30

ALI wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:As pointed out earlier, bare knuckle fighting or fighting with lightly padded fists, produces swifter knockouts, and results in localised injuries rather than brain trauma.

Thats quite a stern viewpoint your giving us James

I strongly disagree with the above statement, based on personal experience. A friend of a friend of mine was killed with a single punch, he was'nt drinking and he did not hit his head on the way down. In my local pub a guy killed his brother with a single punch, he did not hit his head on the way down but he had been drinking, though it was the opinion of everyone there that he was not drunk.

Lets leave it to the doctors to decide what best protects a fighter. If your going to pass of second or third hand information, name your source!

There is a big difference between pub fights and fighters who actually train to take blows to the head.

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 14 Jul 2006, 05:04

nickd wrote:There is a big difference between pub fights and fighters who actually train to take blows to the head.

What the fcuk is that supposed to mean? Please elaborate for us Nick..........

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 14 Jul 2006, 05:06

ALI wrote:
nickd wrote:There is a big difference between pub fights and fighters who actually train to take blows to the head.
What the fcuk is that supposed to mean? Please elaborate for us Nick..........

What that means is boxers are training day in day out to take punches head and body so are used to it which means far less chance of a head injury than man in the pub.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 14 Jul 2006, 05:23

ALI wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:As pointed out earlier, bare knuckle fighting or fighting with lightly padded fists, produces swifter knockouts, and results in localised injuries rather than brain trauma.

Thats quite a stern viewpoint your giving us James

I strongly disagree with the above statement, based on personal experience. A friend of a friend of mine was killed with a single punch, he was'nt drinking and he did not hit his head on the way down. In my local pub a guy killed his brother with a single punch, he did not hit his head on the way down but he had been drinking, though it was the opinion of everyone there that he was not drunk.

Lets leave it to the doctors to decide what best protects a fighter. If your going to pass of second or third hand information, name your source!

Well I am basing my opinion on articles I have read in the ring several years ago, as well as medical treatise I found on the internet, there's a lot of this stuff in the public domain if you

There is a difference between fights in a pub and bare knuckle fighting. Bare knuckle boxers were trained like fighters to be fit and strong, a fighter's neck and shoulder muscles are far stronger than an ordinary joe. They are also trained to try and ride the effects of the blow out, so there is a difference between that and someone getting smashed in the head in a pub brawl.

There's plenty of evidence to suggest that boxing gloves actually contribute to brain trauma by spreading the impact of the blow over the entire cranium, I think Dr Margaret Goodman may have written something on the subject if I recall, and maybe Ferdie Pacheco. If you do a trawl on the net you will find some subject matter.

I don't have time to go through and find the exact material, but it IS out there, but I researched it for an article I wrote a couple of years back for cyberboxingzone I think or might have been another site.

ALI · Post by **ALI** » 14 Jul 2006, 05:59

I've read the same (or similar) stuff before James, and i'm not disputing it. Huge gloves? no gloves? i dont know. This subject requires a wealth of knowledge and experience. I'm not a doctor and cannot give a qualified opinion on the matter so i wont, and my point is, you should'nt either. Leave it to the people best qualified, i'm sure the Nevada state athletic commision made this new ruling on the back of advice given to them by top tier neurologists........ even they may be making a grave error, but who are we to say so just because we have read a few snippets on the web by who the fcuk knows?

Nick, James...... so, the more punches a fighter takes to the head, the better his brain copes with it? Intreresting, though this theory kind of fcuks with everything you have said thus far, so whats it to be?

Sure, bigger neck & shoulder muscles would help stop the head from snapping back, and good conditioning helps the recovery process. Also, after time you should learn to cope with the pain factor better, but, as far as i'm aware, you cannot train a brain to take a punch, end of!!!

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 14 Jul 2006, 07:25

Where did I say that you can train yourself to avoid brain trauma, don't put words in my mouth.

The single most important thing is learning to ride punches to mollify the repercussions inside the skull, that is the major difference between a street brawl and a boxing match.

As you say, the Nevada State will have taken advice, but I wonder whether it's not a bit of a knee jerk reaction to make the sport appear safer. It will be interesting to see what if any effect this new ruling will have.

The most likely reason for fighters below 147 and the number of deaths is weight cutting, since the lower down the weights you go, the bigger the impact of losing a few lbs is. I think I read somewhere that 5% of bodyweight is considered the limit for weight loss in 24 hours, for a guy weighing 147, this is only 7 lbs. For a 200 lber it's 10, and for a 105 lber it's 5 lbs.

As I said earlier, the reason gloves were introduced in the first place was to protect the hands, not the person being hit. They are not specifically designed with reducing brain injury.

As an analogy, think about heading a football, a football is heavy and springy, and yet it's been proving that heading a football can induce dementia pugilistica. The reasons are the same, it sends repercussions through the cranium and can jar the brain against the side of the skull. Modern footballs are in fact lighter than the old ones partly for this reason. So this being the case, how does a heavier glove reduce the likelihood of brain trauma, you are adding to the mass of the object on impact?

I'm not saying I know it all, far from it, but simple physics would surely dictate that a heavier object with a larger surface area is going to spread the force over a wider area and therefore involve the contents of the cranium more, not less?