BoxRec

I have changed my mind from last night (only saw a replay directly after) and I think it was close but but clearly low. Obviously others have got away with much worse, but that doesn't change anything. Right call.

watched the fight in a pub and Dubois landed a fair few low blows...

that and the stuff he said about Joe Joyce's mum makes me think he's actually a naughty man rather than a good one.

and he gave up again on his knee

DDD fanbois: Legit body Blow

Everyone else on earth: Low Blow

I think it was legit, it definitely wasn't in the cock and balls, that said Usyk boxed his ears off for the rest of the fight and once he really got going DDD found a way out.

locoxelbox wrote: ↑26 Aug 2023, 21:46 Those who claim the shot was legal don't understand the rule. It's a foul if you hit below the belt. The belt being an imaginary line from the top of the hips to the navel. This is independent of where the trunks are, though the trunk shouldn't go above this, in pro boxing they usually allow but the referee marks where it is allowed and where not prior to the fight.
Half the glove lands under the belt with the upper part of the glove landing on the belt. The whole glove lands under the navel/top of the hips. Clear low blow.

To clarify: The shot is not on the balls but that doesn't make it a legal blow.

The amount of people who have decided that the "belt" is defined differently to what the rules dictate is amazing.

Boxing Prospect wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 11:09

locoxelbox wrote: ↑26 Aug 2023, 21:46 Those who claim the shot was legal don't understand the rule. It's a foul if you hit below the belt. The belt being an imaginary line from the top of the hips to the navel. This is independent of where the trunks are, though the trunk shouldn't go above this, in pro boxing they usually allow but the referee marks where it is allowed and where not prior to the fight.
Half the glove lands under the belt with the upper part of the glove landing on the belt. The whole glove lands under the navel/top of the hips. Clear low blow.

To clarify: The shot is not on the balls but that doesn't make it a legal blow.

The amount of people who have decided that the "belt" is defined differently to what the rules dictate is amazing.

Which rules do you base it on?

jwfg wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 12:52

Boxing Prospect wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 11:09

locoxelbox wrote: ↑26 Aug 2023, 21:46 Those who claim the shot was legal don't understand the rule. It's a foul if you hit below the belt. The belt being an imaginary line from the top of the hips to the navel. This is independent of where the trunks are, though the trunk shouldn't go above this, in pro boxing they usually allow but the referee marks where it is allowed and where not prior to the fight.
Half the glove lands under the belt with the upper part of the glove landing on the belt. The whole glove lands under the navel/top of the hips. Clear low blow.

To clarify: The shot is not on the balls but that doesn't make it a legal blow.

The amount of people who have decided that the "belt" is defined differently to what the rules dictate is amazing.

Which rules do you base it on?

They are all very consistent here
European Boxing Council

"1.31 Points will be awarded:-

For “attack” – direct clean hits with the knuckle part of the glove of either hand to any part of the front or side of the head or body above the belt.

The “belt” is defined as an imaginary line drawn across the body from the top of the hip bones."

(Which suggests shots ON the belt aren't scoring shots)

BBBofC

"3.31 Points will be awarded:–
For “attack” – direct clean hits with the knuckle part of the glove of
either hand to any part of the front or side of the head or body above the
belt.
The “belt” is defined as an imaginary line drawn across the body from
the top of the hip bones.
For “defence” – guarding, slipping, ducking, or getting away from an
attack. Where contestants are otherwise equal the majority of points will
be given to the one who does most leading off or displays the better
style. "

(Also suggesting that a belt shot isn't a scoring shot)

The least consistent are actually the US rules, they state both

Referee’s Responsibilities Before the Bout

1. Meet with each boxer and his/her chief second in their dressing room and:

a. Warn the seconds about violations of seconds rules, and if they do not comply, the referee shall warn them that further violations will result in disqualification of their contestant, and/or disciplinary action.

b. Identify the belt/hip line and clarify that the equipment shall not extend above this imaginary line.

AND

Fouls

A foul is an action by a boxer, identified by the referee, that does not meet the standard of a fair blow or the conduct of a responsible professional fighter. Fouls may include, but are not limited to, the following types of contact or acts:
1. Hitting an opponent below the navel or behind the ear;

It would appear that the ABC are using them interchangeably (or else why would the referee need to indicate it at the hip line?), which could cause confusion for those with high/low hip bones - they need to define it by one or the other.

Whilst messing about here there was some other interesting finds I thought I'd share from the ABC:
13. Use of abusive language;
21. Stepping on opponent; (does this include foot?)
22. Crouching below opponent’s belt; (how does this apply when facing someone like Fundora?)
23. Leaving neutral corner; and (should be clarified to mention when a knockdown - rarely enforced)
24. Corner second shouting. (Never enforced)

From the WBA we have some oddities on fouls

"20. Terminated Bouts.
a. Intentional: If a boxer is injured as a result of an illegal intentional
blow and cannot continue fighting, the offender boxer shall lose the fight by disqualification.
If as a result of an intentional illegal blow a boxer causes an injury to his rival, the referee
shall take a mandatory and automatic two (2) point deduction from the offender. If as a result
of that injury the referee determines that the injured boxer cannot continue fighting in later
rounds, the result of the bout shall be determined by the judges’ scorecards as long as four
rounds have been completed. If the injured fighter is ahead on the scorecards, he will be
declared the winner by technical decision. If the injured fighter is behind or drawing on the
scorecards, the fight shall be declared a technical draw. If the situation described in the above
paragraph occurs before the completion of the fourth round, the fight shall be declared a no
decision or a draw. If a boxer injures himself by attempting to commit an intentional foul to
his rival, the referee shall not take any action in the offender’s favor and the injury shall be
considered as a result of a legal punch."

These don't seem to be consistently applied

Okay…

Usyk shorts were high - nope. They sat on the line of the protector which is dictated by the protector.

It wasn’t in the balls so wasn’t low - nope. Low is between hips and generally indicated by the ref at the start of the contest. I have been too busy to rewatch so will have to confirm if this happened later but I’d be surprised if not. A punch to the bladder area can be both dangerous and very painful, it’s not a legal scoring zone.

Dubois should be winner by KO - nope. We really don’t know that if the ref had judged the low blow to be legal that Usyk wouldn’t have got up and seen out the round. Perhaps he would, perhaps he wouldn’t.

Usyk used gamesmanship/played the referee - IMO nope. When has he ever been anything other than an absolute, genuine professional? It’s POSSIBLE that whilst easily boxing rings around Dubois that he felt the need to fake but that’s generally what people being soundly beaten do.

Dubois should now be the deserved champion - IMO nope. If the low blow had been judged to be legal AND Usyk wasn’t able to continue, he would be the same type of champion that Rahman was when he beat Lewis in their first contest, actually even less so as the contest was much less competitive.

The commentators said it was legal so it was legal - nope. No explanation needed.

KiwiRider wrote: ↑26 Aug 2023, 19:36 The ref put his hand to show where he would call a low blow at the beginning of the fight. DD's entire fist was below that mark.

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 10:19 I think it was legit, it definitely wasn't in the cock and balls, that said Usyk boxed his ears off for the rest of the fight and once he really got going DDD found a way out.

You ever been caught on the protector?

Frostieballs wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 14:49

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 10:19 I think it was legit, it definitely wasn't in the cock and balls, that said Usyk boxed his ears off for the rest of the fight and once he really got going DDD found a way out.

You ever been caught on the protector?

Yeah, its a fqer innit!

I think watching the slow motion video is far more telling than a still photo.

Looked like a perfect body shot bang on the limit

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 10:19 I think it was legit, it definitely wasn't in the cock and balls, that said Usyk boxed his ears off for the rest of the fight and once he really got going DDD found a way out.

it doesnt need to be cock or balls to be a low blow - anything below the belt line or top of hips , which is quite the distance from the boys

every area below the belly button here is illegal

Low blows should be punished far more. Its unbelievable how Lomachenko took 12 rounds of balls punishment from Salido and was able to step on the gas in last round

Frostieballs wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 14:49

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 10:19 I think it was legit, it definitely wasn't in the cock and balls, that said Usyk boxed his ears off for the rest of the fight and once he really got going DDD found a way out.

You ever been caught on the protector?

I haven't, he was clearly hurt by whatever it was, I'm no expert but I've seen some pro fighters say it was legit some say it wasn't

It was not a low blow, it was on the navel area. Usyk is well known to complain from low blows every time he's hurt to his glass body, it happened in many fights. But his fanbase will insist this is a conspiracy - he was always on the right side, but his opponents were dirty. I mean, the next holy man to ever live on this land next to Jesus is Usyk according to them.

If the punch was a one off that strayed low then there would be more sympathy for Dubois.
But he had stated before the fight he'd win by any method, and threw and landed far too many punches below the waist and even on the thigh to seriously believe it wasn't intentional.

fWank actually said afterwards they had prepared to specifically downstairs, and slipping in as many low blows as the ref allowed would have been a part of that.

Ultimately - Dubois couldn't land another meaningful punch in the next 4rnds, and quit after taking a jab.

Dubois made himself look even more pathetic afterwards claiming he was robbed - he has too much quit in his character sadly. fWank pinned lots on Dubois .. he knows the kid is no good now after the Joyce and Usyk surrenders.
As has been demonstrated - once you quit the first time, it just gets easier thereafter.

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 18:30

Frostieballs wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 14:49

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 10:19 I think it was legit, it definitely wasn't in the cock and balls, that said Usyk boxed his ears off for the rest of the fight and once he really got going DDD found a way out.

You ever been caught on the protector?

I haven't, he was clearly hurt by whatever it was, I'm no expert but I've seen some pro fighters say it was legit some say it wasn't

I think that’s more to do with them genuinely not understanding what a low blow is.

It’s not really something that’s subjective. If it’s below the belt line (line across the top of hips - pretty much where the belly button is) then it’s an illegal shot.

The shot that floored Usyk was below the belt line. Clearly it didn’t hit his balls but it doesn’t matter. Still an illegal shot. Ref probably thought it was unintentional hence not taking points etc.

Some people (many actually involved in boxing worryingly) think that just because it didn’t hit his balls then it’s fine. They’re wrong.

fifth_root wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 03:19 It was not a low blow, it was on the navel area. Usyk is well known to complain from low blows every time he's hurt to his glass body, it happened in many fights. But his fanbase will insist this is a conspiracy - he was always on the right side, but his opponents were dirty. I mean, the next holy man to ever live on this land next to Jesus is Usyk according to them.

Well known? Is that right? Would you mind padding that out with some detail please?

Dubois did hit low repeatedly but I don’t think he was fighting dirty, I think he was in accurate.

leejonesjnr wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 04:40

fifth_root wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 03:19 It was not a low blow, it was on the navel area. Usyk is well known to complain from low blows every time he's hurt to his glass body, it happened in many fights. But his fanbase will insist this is a conspiracy - he was always on the right side, but his opponents were dirty. I mean, the next holy man to ever live on this land next to Jesus is Usyk according to them.

Well known? Is that right? Would you mind padding that out with some detail please?

Dubois did hit low repeatedly but I don’t think he was fighting dirty, I think he was in accurate.

If Usyk is well known for anything apart from brilliant boxing - its being respectful to the sport and his opponent but when someone tries to low blows or use the head / shoulder etc he will flag that up in the ring to remind the ref and judges about the rules .
He did it vs Chisora who was trying to grab wrestle & throw him around rather than box .

For me it's a clear low blow and I don't understand all the debate.

You're not supposed to punch in the area where the punch landed.

Some refs let fighters get away with similar shots, with some famous examples, but they shouldn't.

Yeah, low.

If it was deemed legal, how do you think it would have gone?

It was a low blow and the reaction by Warren and BT/TNT etc pundits etc is utterly pathetic and possibly even harmful to Dubois, he will probably know really think he should be world champ and not that he was outclassed and lost fairly.

peter barlow wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 05:46 It was a low blow and the reaction by Warren and BT/TNT etc pundits etc is utterly pathetic and possibly even harmful to Dubois, he will probably know really think he should be world champ and not that he was outclassed and lost fairly.

the warren cabal is totally deluded .
how the F can a world title fight be decided by a puch in nutsack !

stevec@france wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 05:59

peter barlow wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 05:46 It was a low blow and the reaction by Warren and BT/TNT etc pundits etc is utterly pathetic and possibly even harmful to Dubois, he will probably know really think he should be world champ and not that he was outclassed and lost fairly.

the warren cabal is totally deluded .
how the F can a world title fight be decided by a puch in nutsack !

I'm sure they'll be on Talksport and they'll be eating it up how Dubois is the real champ lol