The Boxing Truth's $100 Contest: Who Clinches More... Andre Berto or Shane Mosley?
by John Chavez

Mar 17, 2010 -

Just as I announced this contest this past week on The Boxing Truth Radio, I'm reiterating the terms of the contest and what we're looking for from the winner.

Excessive clinching has long been the ire of The Boxing Truth staff being that it ruins the various facets of the sweet science and creates for frustratingly boring fights. The main reason that the TBT crew is disgusted by the intrusive usage of wrestling and holding within boxing is because it is goddamn ILLEGAL.

Here are some of the rules outlining clinching/wrestling's legal status in various document forms for the rules of boxing:

The Queensbury Rules

1. To be a fair stand-up boxing match in a twenty-four foot ring or as near that size as practicable.

2. No wrestling or hugging allowed.

3. The rounds to be of three minutes duration and one minute time between rounds.

4. If either man fall through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, ten seconds be allowed to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner; and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the ten seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his awart in favour of the other man.

5. A man hanging on the ropes in a helpless state, with his toes off the ground, shall be considered down.

6. No seconds or any other person to be allowed in the ring during the rounds.

7. Should the contest be stopped by any unavoidable interference, the referee (is) to name the time and place as soon as possible for finishing the contest, to that the match can be won and lost, unless the backers of the men agree to draw the stakes.

8. The gloves to be fair-sized boxing gloves of the best quality and new.

9. Should a glove burst, or come off, it must be replaced to the referee's satisfaction.

10. A man on one knee is considered down, and if struck is entitled to the stakes.

11. No shoes or boots with springs allowed.

12. The contest in all other respects to be governed by the revised rules of the London Prize Ring.

Excerpt from the "Rules of Boxing":

The Clinch – Clinching is a rough form of grappling and occurs when the distance between both fighters has closed and straight punches cannot be employed. In this situation, the boxer attempts to hold or "tie up" the opponent's hands so he is unable to throw hooks or uppercuts. To perform a clinch, the boxer loops both hands around the outside of the opponent's shoulders, scooping back under the forearms to grasp the opponent's arms tightly against his own body. In this position, the opponent's arms are pinned and cannot be used to attack. Clinching is a temporary match state and is quickly dissipated by the referee. Clinching is technically against the rules, and in amateur fights points are deducted fairly quickly for it. It is unlikely, however, to see points deducted for a clinch in professional boxing.

Rules of Boxing

From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The rules of boxing vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and on whether it is an amateur or professional bout. A violation of the following rules is considered a foul, and can result in a point deduction or disqualification:

You cannot hit below the belt, hold, trip, kick, headbutt, wrestle, bite, spit on, or push your opponent.
You cannot hit with your head, shoulder, forearm, or elbow.
You cannot hit with an open glove, the inside of the glove, the wrist, the backhand, or the side of the hand.
You cannot punch your opponent's back, or the back of his head or neck (rabbit punch), or on the kidneys (kidney punch).
You cannot throw a punch while holding on to the ropes to gain leverage.
You can't hold your opponent and hit him at the same time, or duck so low that your head is below your opponent's belt line.
When the referee breaks you from a clinch, you have to take a full step back; you cannot immediately hit your opponent--that's called "hitting on the break" and is illegal.
You cannot spit out your mouthpiece on purpose to get a rest.
If you score a knockdown of your opponent, you must go to the farthest neutral corner while the referee makes the count.
If you "floor" your opponent, you cannot hit him when he's on the canvas.
A floored boxer has up to ten seconds to get back up on his feet before losing the bout by knockout.
A boxer who is knocked down cannot be saved by the bell in any round, depending upon the local jurisdiction's rules.
A boxer who is hit with an accidental low blow has up to five minutes to recover. If s/he cannot continue after five minutes, s/he is considered knocked out.
If the foul results in an injury that causes the fight to end immediately, the boxer who committed the foul is disqualified.
If the foul causes an injury but the bout continues, the referee orders the judges to deduct two points from the boxer who caused the injury.
If an unintentional foul causes the bout to be stopped immediately, the bout is ruled a "no contest" if four rounds have not been fully completed. (If the bout was scheduled for four rounds, then three rounds must have been completed.) If four rounds have been completed, the judges' scorecards are tallied and the fighter who is ahead on points is awarded a technical decision. If the scores are even, it will be called a "technical draw."
If a boxer is knocked out of the ring, he gets a count of 20 to get back in and on his feet. He cannot be assisted.
In some jurisdictions the standing eight-count or the three knockdown rule also may be in effect.
In other jurisdictions, only the referee can stop the bout.

Either the masses are stupid or they just can't see the truth behind what's going on in boxing today.

Holding, wrestling, and clinching are quickly becoming a plague within our sport being that they are tactics being employed by veterans and prospects alike. It's something that boxing fans might have expected amongst the heavyweight division in decades past but has quickly become fairly common amongst the lighter weight classes. It is by far the biggest threat to the sweet science... far more threatening then any MMA/Wrestling organization could ever be to boxing.

The reason for this sentiment is the fact that real boxing and defensive fundamentals could be rendered obsolete if this clinch form of fighting is allowed to take over the sport. The only thing a fighter would need is the speed and reflexes to skate around the ring, fire off combinations and quickly hug their opponent to negate any return fire. This would always allow for the quicker or taller opponent to stink out the fight on their way to an unfair and most importantly... illegal victory. It is not intriguing enterainment and drives would-be fans away from the sport being that it sucks the life out of a fight completely. There has never been a "Fight of the Year" or even anything resembling a "Fight of the Year" candidate involving a notorious clinch-based fighter. In fact, constant clinching takes away the key components of slipping, parrying, footwork, and sustained action that truly separates boxing's stand-up game with that of Mixed Martial Arts.

Clinching renders shoulder rolls ineffective.

Clinching renders bobbing and weaving as rather useless defensive tactics when up close.

Wrestling slows the pace of the fight down since the referee must consistently step in to break the holds.

Inside fighting has quickly become a thing of the past.

The most alarming aspect of this whole fiasco is that clinching is predominantly utilized by American fighters with speed and physical gifts to avoid any return fire after having dished out their own. It's a disgusting display of the breaking of the rules as the referee lumbers around in a zombie-like trance merely breaking the fighters up over and over again without deducting the necessary point or points to put a halt to the ridiculous display of illegal tactics.

The only referee that I've seen actually implement the proper rules of boxing in a televised match is what Keith Hughes did in the Andre Berto-Luis Collazo fight. He properly warned Berto... even warning him 3 times after twenty-seven Berto initiated clinches then proceeded to deduct a point. The welterweight affair then became "Fight of the Year" material as both men were squarring off on even terms. In speaking with Hughes after the fight it was quite clear that he understood the rules of boxing and knew how to implement them.

For those of you that question how much holding is actually taking place in many of these professional bouts today... I pose the question: What if fighter "A" headbutted his opponent 20 times in a fight? What if fighter "A" low-blowed his opponent 20 times within a fight?

Surely as a spectator you'd expect the referee to not only deduct points but also to disqualify the abuser of these illegal tactics.

Why the double-standard when it comes to clinching?

I completely understand that if a fighter is dazed or hurt, holding is a viable tactic until the cobwebs clear up. Unfortunately, boxing is seeing it's most "exciting" and "emerging" stars utilize this tactic when not hurt or dazed and moreso as a defensive tactic to nullify their opponents offense.

They are telling the boxing fan... I don't care enough to learn to slip, block, deflect, parry, or use my legs to avoid punches. I'll merely hold since the stupid referee that's scared to take a point away from me (for fear of not getting the chance to work another high-profile gig), won't do anything and I don't care if you the fan think it's entertaining or not.

It's complete and utter bullshit.

Shane Mosley and Andre Berto are the biggest culprits within boxing to use this type of garbage in their fights.

So now my friends... the question comes down to this. Who clinched more in their fights and what was the final tally in both tights... Andre Berto vs. Juan Urango or Shane Mosley vs. Miguel Cotto?

I picked these fights since it is very easy to see who is initiating the clinches since both Juan Urango and Miguel Cotto utilize little to no holding whatsoever in their fights against all other opponents throughout their careers.

Are you suprised to see the supposedly "exciting" Shane Mosley in this contest? If you have half-a-brain, you wouldn't be.

Berto was rightfully and heavily criticized for his excessive clinching tactics in his recent performances and rightfully so. I just wonder out-loud as to why the criticism isn't uniform across the board. There is no "art-form" to clinching and it doesn't make you "crafty".

It makes your fight shitty and makes you a reincarnation of heavyweight John Ruiz, a fighter that most boxing fans completely despised for his overusage of this illegal tactic.

So there's the outline of the contest... Berto vs. Urango/Mosley vs. Cotto... who clinched more and how many times per fight was it used. The correct answer and the closest number to what I tallied up can call into The Boxing Truth Radio Sunday, March 21st will receive $100 via Paypal.

PS. There's a reason that points are deducted quickly in the amateur boxing system if clinching is utilized. Why does this change for professionals? It makes no sense. The clearest example of clinching being an illegal tactic is that in video games such as the EA Sports "Fight Night" series, if you blatantly attempt to clinch over and over again, points are deducted and disqualifications are quickly rendered. If clinching wasn't so illegal why would the video game creator implement these algorithm in the game? I consider anything over 20 clinches in a fight (truthfully 10 if nobody is hurt) to warrant a point deduction and if it continues, a disqualification should be in place.

truth@theboxingtruth.com