Enforced retirement?

[Graham]

We see the likes of Roy Jones Jnr, Evander Holyfield etc etc going on and on and on and on.... Like a broken record when they should have their feet up being pestered by their grand children for pocket money.

 

Bearing in mind the UK ama's have to retire on their 35th birthday... (I think)

 

Would a compulsory retirement age be the answer?

 

Thoughts?

[The_budweiser]

thats a hard ? if we put a age limit on professional boxing we wouldnt see the likes of hopkins at the age of 43/44 beating pavlik, jones jr beating lacy , holyfield getting robbed v valuev . i dont think there should be a age limit but what i think would work would be something like when you hit 35 each year you have to undergo a full medical/fitness test to get a new licence each year

[Graham]

That's a very good reply...

 

Some may say we shouldn't leave it to the medics, but I think something has to be done.

[mofo2]

Age of a fighter has no relevance for me Graham...bud points out BHop...who has fought some of his best fights in his forties ,whilst looking at Hattton at 30 seems Shot!!

 

Its all about the individual and I don't see a medical doing anything other than approve fighters that are clearly shot can still plod on...because physically they all all in tremendous shape!

[Faulks]

As long as they are fit & healthy it should be their choice.

 

Medicals should play a part as we dont wanna see people dying in the ring.

 

Some boxers fight because they need to pay their bills after losing the £££££ they have already earned. Thats when it get dangerous.

 

People like Hopkins just defy logic, he looks like hes got at least another 5 years in him lol

[WelshDevilRob]

Agree with the points already made.

 

If an older fighter is still beating others then its hard to justify taking their license from them. If you ban the older fighter then surely the fighters he's beating need to be banned/retired.

 

If a fighter is medically fit then he should be allowed to fight - problem is that as there is no unified boxing governing body then different country's have different medical requirements. Even in the US the different states have different rules regarding medicals - Edwin Valero is a prime example of that.

[bambi]

It is a tricky one, there are clearly many boxers in their forties who more than deserve their place in the ring. But then there is the disturbing side when you hear one time great boxers like Ken Buchanan declaring his desire to step back into the ring in his sixties. Not sure how it should be controlled but it does need some measures in place to protect the fighter and the sport.

[ironjab]

it is a difficult one, who is anyone to tell anyone not to do something anymore? perhaps the fighter shouldnt only be assessed on their physical condition, maybe their brain functions and general functions such as speech and movement should also be checked, just because a person is fit, it doesnt mean they are fit to fight. I mean, who let Meldrick Taylor fight towards the end of his career, the man was and still is suffering from the effects of repeated trauma to the head, judging by his decline as shown in legendary nights, those doctors/ promotors have a lot to answer for

[vikinghero]

If a guy who is nearly 41 still have the fastest hook in the world, I say let him fight!!!

[dig112]

I don't like manditory age requirement but commissions should look at older fighters and watch for decline. I also think health restrictions and physicals should be stricter for fighters showing signs of decline. By decline it could include losing and getting hit more.

[mitch]

difficult to say because some fighters bloom later on but i agree something has to be about fighters going on too long. They need protecting from themselves i mean who wants to see what happened to Greg page again? nobody

[Brick Top]

Unless a fighter is completely and utterly shot, I dont think its fair to call someones career to a close by judging what they have left, for eg. Evander Holyfield is constantly being ridiculed for still fighting, yet he almost became a world champion and many people believe he should of been crowned a champion. Although he's clearly a shadow of what once was, he's still been competitive in the divisionso it would be unfair for someone to take his livelyhood away

[grapevine241]

well they kind of have that in that sense that you have to have a license to box...

 

but these guys have families to feed so no i wouldnt force retirement

[londoner]

I think it depends on each guy and also believe that humans have the right to work if they wish. Boxing is a difficult one as their "work" consists of being punched but as long as that human can do the job without any unnecessary risk posed to themselves, then they should be able to do as they please.

[brooklynbrawler]

Age limits don't necessarily solve the issue, because I've seen guys in their late twenties completely shot to pieces and fighting on, only doing themselves damage in the process.

And like has already been pointed out, you get fighters like Hopkins defying logic and maintaining an elite level of performance, at what should be at least the 5th anniversary of his retirement.

 

Regular checks should be done, but are medicals not taken prior to a fight, to assess a fighters legitimacy to step between the ropes anyway?

I'm pretty sure they're already done, but not necessarily to a stringent enough level.

[Jabandmove]

I have to admit I don't know what is involved in getting a boxing licence but I'm sure the process could be made smarter for the fighters who some believe are fighting on for too long.

 

I think if there was some sort of testing that could prove a severe decline in a fighters abilities it would help to justify them not giving a licence. It would have to be standard testing across the board in every country, maybe consist of reflex/speed tests, vision tests etc that would be scored. They would have the scores from when they turn pro and for every year they had to re-apply for a licence, so any dramatic dip could be detected.

 

I do agree with others points though it is a hard one to call. They need to work and make money and to deny that without any conclusive medical fact is harsh, the flip side though is a terrible injury in the ring and nobody ever wants to see that.

 

Holyfield is a good example, a couple of times in his career he has looked completely gone, yet he has continued to fight on and was unlucky not to beat Valuev.

[davemurphy]

I think that strictly speaking from a USA perspective, if a guy passes his physical and you can't show conclusive proof that he's a threat to himself (which is a hard case to make) by continuing to fight, then you run the risk of a Age Discrimination Lawsuit if you reject simply on that factor alone.

[Wheelchair]

One thing that can happen is that one commission might ban someone, as was the case with Evander around 2004 IIRC, but then the fighter can just go elsewhere. Very difficult to police.

[davemurphy]

One thing that can happen is that one commission might ban someone, as was the case with Evander around 2004 IIRC, but then the fighter can just go elsewhere. Very difficult to police.

 

Yep, I admired the NY Commissioner Ron Scott Stevens for doing that, and it DID keep him out of action for awhile, but in the end there's just too many other places you can go that aren't as conscientous.