BoxRec

to a 4x3 ?

i see this on some small hall shows mostly,is it to fill the card or is there some other reason ?

cheers

I've always thought this aswell why come out of the amateurs have a few four rounders and then go back to 6x2? Surely the natural progression is 6x3. Why is it even still allowed?

i think it's more attractive for the journeyman tbh as the money aint there & it's short rds v a lesser opponent then they are used to.
the fighter dont benefit or develop from 2 minute rd's.

ive always thought pro fighters boxers should fight 3 min rounds,however if the board dont allow certain boxers to do 3 min rounds thats the way its got to be.

If a lad can't fight 4x3 as a minimum he shouldn't be fighting.

There is little difference between a 6 2 and a 4 -3... one thing worth considering is it takes some fighters a while to settle- so in a pro debut for example it might be worth doing the six to overcome this.

Jeff Thomas wrote:There is little difference between a 6 2 and a 4 -3... one thing worth considering is it takes some fighters a while to settle- so in a pro debut for example it might be worth doing the six to overcome this.

theres a massive difference between a 3 minute round and a 2 minute round. And you being an ex pro should certainly know that. Unfit I could last two mins.

yid14 wrote:

Jeff Thomas wrote:There is little difference between a 6 2 and a 4 -3... one thing worth considering is it takes some fighters a while to settle- so in a pro debut for example it might be worth doing the six to overcome this.

theres a massive difference between a 3 minute round and a 2 minute round. And you being an ex pro should certainly know that. Unfit I could last two mins.

also jeff why did you do 2 minute rounds in you 14th & 15th fight after doing 3 minute rounds in all but one of your other fights ???????

yid14 wrote:

Jeff Thomas wrote:There is little difference between a 6 2 and a 4 -3... one thing worth considering is it takes some fighters a while to settle- so in a pro debut for example it might be worth doing the six to overcome this.

theres a massive difference between a 3 minute round and a 2 minute round. And you being an ex pro should certainly know that. Unfit I could last two mins.

The problem is heart rate not duration. There is no difference- or hardly any at least for me. I prefered three's.

And i did 2 min rounds because thats what i was asked to do.

Absolutely, Terry. You get clipped and get a flash kd scored against you in a four rounder - your in big trouble.

Vinny Mitchell vs Deakin was the one that sprung to mind in recent times.

Sometimes its the opponent who asks for it and not the prospect.

If a fighter has to take a fight on 24hrs notice then sometimes he will ask if it can be made with 2 minute rounds due to lack of preperation.

Happened quite recently at Oliver Harrison's show in September and Steve Wood's show last month.

A lot of the time the Boxing Board will only let a boxer fight two minute rounds: Matt Scriven and Sid Razak for example. no promoter wants 6x2's as far as i am aware but sometimes its a necessity. For example on my next show Michael Norgrove (3-0) is still learning and he boxes Scriven over 6x2.

King Geedorah wrote:

stujones wrote:Absolutely, Terry. You get clipped and get a flash kd scored against you in a four rounder - your in big trouble.

Stop press, we agee

Only kidding. Seen a few fights where the prospect gets dropped and is then, in theory, chasing a margin but in these fights refs often give 10-9 rounds, if the prospect is boxing well for the rest of the round, rather than the knee-jerk 10-8. The optimist in me says that this is a good thing, not every KD should result in a 10-8; the cynic in me says that the 10-9 is put into play by inexperienced refs to avoid an upset.

You do realise that is why I said 6 rounds are better?

These press guys who get lost in Blackpool

stevegoodwin wrote:A lot of the time the Boxing Board will only let a boxer fight two minute rounds: Matt Scriven and Sid Razak for example. no promoter wants 6x2's as far as i am aware but sometimes its a necessity. For example on my next show Michael Norgrove (3-0) is still learning and he boxes Scriven over 6x2.

When would it get to a stage that you'd stop using a particular journeyman..... if you don't mind me asking?

Australia has 2-min rounds as well, but is there anywhere else in the world that does (not including female bouts)?

In Sweden you are only allowed to box 12 minutes, so a lot of fights are 6 X 2.
In Denmark neo pros can choose between 4 X 3 or 6 X 2 in their first couple of fights

A 2 minute journeyman is sought after by managers as they are seen as easy wins to protect the 0!!!!

As a Promoter (not a manager) we can only arrange bouts that a particular manager will accept.

stevegoodwin wrote:A 2 minute journeyman is sought after by managers as they are seen as easy wins to protect the 0!!!!

As a Promoter (not a manager) we can only arrange bouts that a particular manager will accept.

And it is also means rounds in the bank for the prospect as well despite it not being a 3 minute round.

stevegoodwin wrote:A lot of the time the Boxing Board will only let a boxer fight two minute rounds: Matt Scriven and Sid Razak for example. no promoter wants 6x2's as far as i am aware but sometimes its a necessity. For example on my next show Michael Norgrove (3-0) is still learning and he boxes Scriven over 6x2.

yes certain boxers are restricted to box 6x2s/4x2s even by the board.

Jeff Thomas wrote:

yid14 wrote:

Jeff Thomas wrote:There is little difference between a 6 2 and a 4 -3... one thing worth considering is it takes some fighters a while to settle- so in a pro debut for example it might be worth doing the six to overcome this.

theres a massive difference between a 3 minute round and a 2 minute round. And you being an ex pro should certainly know that. Unfit I could last two mins.

The problem is heart rate not duration. There is no difference- or hardly any at least for me. I prefered three's.

And i did 2 min rounds because thats what i was asked to do.

was you allowed to do 3 min D

I was reporting on the October 30th bill in Newport and Gareth Piper on his pro-debut in a 4x3 did more than enough to win, it was close but clear (if that makes sense) and that was scored a draw. So yes, 4 rounders are dangerous until a new pro gets more experience and 4 rounders require that the boxer makes it absolutely obvious he's won and sometimes on a pro debut it can get to a boxer, we are all human and all have emotions. As well all know, sometimes the judges interpret things differently.