BoxRec

When the champion walks into the arena does he remain the champion as the first bell rings? Or does he give up the championship upon commencement of the fight......Do any of the "ABC" groups codify this question in any way? (If so wouldn't that mean that an "NC" would leave the belt open?)

We often hear two schools of thought, some saying that judges should give the champion some sort of "special" status as defender of the belt. Others say it should be an absolutely neutral affair.

I side with those who think a current champion deserves a "slight positive bias".

However if he is not considered champion upon the ringing of the first bell it could have some impact on this subtle if not meaningless and yet somehow annoying nuance.


No smug answers...and yes I've a bit too much time on my hands today.

Absolute neutral is how the judges and referee should treat the fight. Over the years I've heard quite a few guys make the claim that champions should get the benefit of the doubt. But why ? So a guy can be built up as a great champion because he has more title defenses ? I heard the silly argument that if you don't give the champion the benefit of the doubt in the close fights, the title will be like musical chairs with a new champion every fight. If the situation is really that bad it doesn't matter.

BoxBuzz wrote:When the champion walks into the arena does he remain the champion as the first bell rings? Or does he give up the championship upon commencement of the fight......Do any of the "ABC" groups codify this question in any way? (If so wouldn't that mean that an "NC" would leave the belt open?)

We often hear two schools of thought, some saying that judges should give the champion some sort of "special" status as defender of the belt. Others say it should be an absolutely neutral affair.

I side with those who think a current champion deserves a "slight positive bias".

However if he is not considered champion upon the ringing of the first bell it could have some impact on this subtle if not meaningless and yet somehow annoying nuance.


No smug answers...and yes I've a bit too much time on my hands today.

Of course he remains champion. How do you think he retains the title in the event of a draw?

Look, stick to your area of expertise, buzzy. Now, someone said that the single Pinklon Thomas put out in the 80's was called Think Pink but I reckon it had a different title. Can you assist?

You are the Champion until someone beats you.

It depends, least in my mind, when it comes down to exhibition bouts. Back in the olden times guys like Nat Fleischer used to say if the champ was lackluster in an exhibition (more or less 'lost' the exhibition) that a portion of the title was generally lost.

Many a champion was lackluster in sparring/exhibitions:

Muhammad Ali= Tony Doyle is a big example, as Ali was hit three times with a right hook and was stunned, after, of course, when Ali made the comment that sparring partners were the 'lowest forms of life'

Rocky Marciano= According to Tommy Harrison, who also claimed for many years that he was Bob Satterfield, when he sparred with Marciano he broke the Rock's nose and out boxed him

Primo Carnera= As the lore goes, John 'Corn' Griffin boxed rings around then champion Carnera in sparring

Kid Chocolate= Was knocked out by Walter Edgerton (The Kentucky Rosebud) in an exhibition bout, and also 'lost' exhibitions to Edgerton, while as champion [Note: I could also be referring to George Dixon, atm I forget which champion fought Edgerton]

Mike Tyson= Was knocked on his ass by Greg Page in sparring while in preparation for the Buster Douglas bout


Or maybe it can be the other way around, maybe just maybe it can also be an indication of just how good someone actually is...when Louis retired and had an exhibition tour in order to raise money, he sparred against the likes of Roland LaStarza and other top flight contenders, but it wasnt until he knocked out Pat Valentino in 8 rounds, that he was urged to come back against Ezzard Charles.

Louis might also be of another good example, as his title was actually put on the line in an exhibition bout (least the NYSAC title) against a man who was only 3-3-0. This naturally infuriated Louis, and in short order the Brown Bomber knocked the young man out in less than 30 seconds.

So, it is a fact, that no matter when or where or what circumstances there are, the champ is always the champion, and if anyone gets the better of him...he loses something...the tradition started with Sullivan as he entered into taverns and other public houses with the phrase "I can lick any son of a bitch in the house", as his street fights were just as documented, just as his exhibitions were, as his professional fights.

buzzy, you seem to have screwed up my response in your excitement. Can you fix it. You know how we hate it when you edit our posts...

Collins2000 wrote:buzzy, you seem to have screwed up my response in your excitement. Can you fix it. You know how we hate it when you edit our posts...

Collins....'tis the season....and I have been sampling some of Samuel Adams finest.....so I'm not currently responsible for my actions until I complete a 12 step program currently scheduled for Friday.

....uh that would be two six packs of the dog that bit me.....sure to cure any ailment. As of 08 I shall partake of no more than a six pack a year. So you may look forward to far more relevant and sober contributions from Buzzter.

Until then....withold judgement.

I agree with Collins that as the champ keeps the title in a draw then they do have an advantage.

When the bell goes though scoring should be neutral.

Terry D wrote:The seat of a Champions title is the belt so when it gets given over he is fighting for it again.

All this "take from the Champion" stuff is bollocks. Why not give Manchester United a +5 in the league based on their title win last term?

In some World Cup & other international competitions however, the champions of the previous tournament are granted automatic entry without the need for qualification trials, so it isn't a concept without precedence.

I am for a slight leaning to the champion. But I can perfectly understand how people refute that idea in it's own right.

As you say, in the event of a draw, the titleholder is still the titleholder. You can't compare boxing to those nancy-boy games like baseball, football and tennis. A boxing champion is like a king who can only be dethroned by defeat in battle.


Cap

..judging should be absolutely neutral. It's ridiculous when you hear people say about a champion "shouldn't have lost his title in a fight that close." Also, "to beat the champion you have to go after him." Nonsense...if you move around and outbox him outscore him you should win those rounds. As many have written here, the champion keeps his title in case of a draw,and that is his legit "championship edge.' As for going after him....well...i suppose if the champion just stood in his corner and the opponent didn't "go after him" the bum would keep his title...purely hypothetical of course, as that would be a draw.

now, as to boxbuzz. please be gentle with him during this holiday season,a s he is fragile at this time of year with all of the bubbly flowing so freely, and his problem with refusing excesses of it.

Mike Tyson= Was knocked on his ass by Greg Page in sparring while in preparation for the Buster Douglas bout


Back in the 80's, the word was that a rather obscure Texas heavyweight named Mike Williams (remember him?) more than held his own with Tyson during a few sparring sessions.


.

Terry D wrote:

Cap wrote:As you say, in the event of a draw, the titleholder is still the titleholder. You can't compare boxing to those nancy-boy games like baseball, football and tennis. A boxing champion is like a king who can only be dethroned by defeat in battle.


Cap

Kings can be dethroned by intrigue, or governing bodies as we call them.

Exactly!