Let's talk the three knockdown rule

[TankAbbott4Eva]

I have noticed that when the rules are read out for fight cards the three knockdown rule is not always "in effect". I've never really heard when it is and isn't applied, can anyone shed light on this? I guess personally i'd reckon that if someone gets knocked down in one round three times a ref should be stopping it, often two knockdowns would be enough depending on circumstances.

The one fight I can think of which should have been subject to this would be Foreman v Frazier, though I'm not sure if he was saved by the bell in the first? And the link i watched below wasn't clear whether the corner or ref stopped that one.



Interested to see other examples of three (or more) knockdowns in a round where it wasn't stopped, and actually if there's a fight where someone won after being knocked down three times in a round I'd like to know about it, cheers!

 

[Hagler]

Firpo went down 7 times in his first round against Dempsey. He didn't win the fight as he was stopped in the second, though. Dempsey also floored Willard 7 times in the first round before ending it in the 3rd.

 

[TankAbbott4Eva]

Firpo went down 7 times in his first round against Dempsey. He didn't win the fight as he was stopped in the second, though. Dempsey also floored Willard 7 times in the first round before ending it in the 3rd.

Ah yes i remember seeing Dempsey v Willard (not live ha ha). That one was particularly brutal as the ref didn't need to restart after the knock down, once Willard's knee went up Dempsey was back into it, no neutral corner shit.

 

[DaveDave]

Marquez got decked three times by Pac-Man in the 1st round of their first meeting & came back to scrape a draw.

Whether you agree with the scoring or not, Cortez (a guy I don't have a lot of time for) acknowledging that two of the knockdowns weren't particularly heavy gave the fans an awesome, awesome fight.

This isn't to dis the 3 knockdown rule or to come out in support of it, just saying. & IIRC it's a commission/sanctioning body thing, so depends on who's sanctioning the fight. Old WBO used to enforce it & then the WBA did (& then they didn't, & then they sort of did) but when it's a unification or more than one belt is on the line (like the first Pac-Marquez fight) they use the "unified rules" w/o the 3 knockdown rule.

 

[DaveDave]

Interested to see other examples of three (or more) knockdowns in a round where it wasn't stopped, and actually if there's a fight where someone won after being knocked down three times in a round I'd like to know about it, cheers!

Just remembered what used to be the most famous one:



Archie Moore vs Yvon Durelle, undisputed world light-heavy title.

 

[Minowafanatic]

Marquez vs Pacquiao I is an example of a guy getting knocked down three times and coming back to get a draw. If the three knockdown rule had been in effect, then it would've ended there and then and we wouldn't have got their series of fights.

I've seen a few fights in Japan and Korea where the three knockdown rule was a factor as well.

 

[Hagler]

Marquez got decked three times by Pac-Man in the 1st round of their first meeting & came back to scrape a draw.

Whether you agree with the scoring or not, Cortez (a guy I don't have a lot of time for) acknowledging that two of the knockdowns weren't particularly heavy gave the fans an awesome, awesome fight.

This isn't to dis the 3 knockdown rule or to come out in support of it, just saying. & IIRC it's a commission/sanctioning body thing, so depends on who's sanctioning the fight. Old WBO used to enforce it & then the WBA did (& then they didn't, & then they sort of did) but when it's a unification or more than one belt is on the line (like the first Pac-Marquez fight) they use the "unified rules" w/o the 3 knockdown rule.

Very good call. Cortez absolutely had it right. The 10-7 judge kind of screwed up but you cannot complain about a draw. Also it kind of makes up for the lucky JD Pac got in the 3rd fight. 3-1 for Pac in the series would be a tad too much, 2-1-1 is better.

 

[Hagler]

Barkley could have carried on after the 3 KDs in the Benn fight's first round, but he could have gotten pretty much fucked up in the process.

 

[ssx]

Barkley could have carried on after the 3 KDs in the Benn fight's first round, but he could have gotten pretty much fucked up in the process.

 

[City_Lights]

Some knockdown aren't bad though. Sometimes someone is clearly not hurt or it was just getting hit while off balance. It should just be up to the ref to decide.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

lots of refs stop the fight on three knockdowns even if the rule doesn’t apply. sometimes you can just tell that it isn’t gonna get any better for a fighter. plus, if the third knockdown is really close to the end of a round, it’s worth giving a guy a chance.

the first fight that comes to my mind is bentt winning the title from tommy morrison via three knockdown rule. none of the knockdowns were particularly bad and morrison probably could have made it to the second round without much worry.

 

[mozfonky]

I have noticed that when the rules are read out for fight cards the three knockdown rule is not always "in effect". I've never really heard when it is and isn't applied, can anyone shed light on this? I guess personally i'd reckon that if someone gets knocked down in one round three times a ref should be stopping it, often two knockdowns would be enough depending on circumstances.

The one fight I can think of which should have been subject to this would be Foreman v Frazier, though I'm not sure if he was saved by the bell in the first? And the link i watched below wasn't clear whether the corner or ref stopped that one.



Interested to see other examples of three (or more) knockdowns in a round where it wasn't stopped, and actually if there's a fight where someone won after being knocked down three times in a round I'd like to know about it, cheers!

I think it's by state but you have to be more current than Foreman/Frazier, fights have gotten less and less brutal ever since boxing has been in existence. So, even if the knockdown rule isn't in effect, most fights would be stopped if a guy was in that much trouble. Historically, i'm sure there are plenty of examples of guys who got knocked down more than three times and either continuing or coming back to win, i can't think of any offhand. I think Patterson went down more than three times in some of his fights. Foreman/Frazier is a late example, boxing was allowed to go on a little further then, Joe was tough as nails and would never stay down on his own. In fact, Ali said that his first thought when he knocked George down was how Frazier would have never stayed down that long.

 

[mozfonky]

lots of refs stop the fight on three knockdowns even if the rule doesn’t apply. sometimes you can just tell that it isn’t gonna get any better for a fighter. plus, if the third knockdown is really close to the end of a round, it’s worth giving a guy a chance.

the first fight that comes to my mind is bentt winning the title from tommy morrison via three knockdown rule. none of the knockdowns were particularly bad and morrison probably could have made it to the second round without much worry.

ya, that's a good example, alot of times guys go down because they aren't in their right mind, they don't have their normal balance and even a push will knock them over.

 

[treelo]

It's always a good idea not to agree to the 3KD rule if you are chinny, or facing a big puncher, and even worse if both apply.

Tommy Morrison always had a suspect chin, he took a gimme fight and paid the price, he also took a lot of clean shots in that fight, and would have been badly hurt had it continued.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

It's always a good idea not to agree to the 3KD rule if you are chinny, or facing a big puncher, and even worse if both apply.

Tommy Morrison always had a suspect chin, he took a gimme fight and paid the price, he also took a lot of clean shots in that fight, and would have been badly hurt had it continued.

honestly i just watched it back and you’re right. there was another minute and a half left in the round. i think i would have let him get up one more time as the ref because he wasn’t super wobbly but that’s a LOT of time to try and survive.

 

[treelo]

honestly i just watched it back and you’re right. there was another minute and a half left in the round. i think i would have let him get up one more time as the ref because he wasn’t super wobbly but that’s a LOT of time to try and survive.

He was basically out on his feet from the very first knockdown, he took a big uppercut in the last exchange and was going to get badly hurt. Morrison wasnt a guy to wobble much, he used to get knocked down a fucking lot though, reminds me of Bruno in a way.

 

[Krimzon]

I think it's important to distinguish between 'hard knockdowns' and 'soft knockdowns'. There we're a bunch in Marq Pac I for example. Imagine if after the 3rd knockdown, Marquez pops right back up ready to slug and Cortez smothers Marquez with his big belly waving the fight off.

All this to say... the 3 knockdown rule is shambolic, it should be 4 knockdowns.

 

[TankAbbott4Eva]

I think it's important to distinguish between 'hard knockdowns' and 'soft knockdowns'. There we're a bunch in Marq Pac I for example. Imagine if after the 3rd knockdown, Marquez pops right back up ready to slug and Cortez smothers Marquez with his big belly waving the fight off.

All this to say... the 3 knockdown rule is shambolic, it should be 4 knockdowns.

I think 4 knockdowns would be a bit ridiculous personally. But I guess as long as you have good refs you should be ok no matter what the rule is.

Also you need good cornermen, they need to look after their guy as well of course. I don't have a recent boxing example but if you watch Dan Hooker vs Barboza from last month Hooker's corner should have saved him a lot earlier, dude took an unnecessary brutal beating.

 

[Hagler]

Sergio could keep fighting after hitting the deck thrice in round one against Cotto, but it was basically to get his ass kicked for 9 more rounds.

 

[mozfonky]

I'd say the rule is a good rule in general but there are times where it doesn't really work as it's intended. How many guys have we seen a little dazed and then go down more from the other fighter hitting him with shoulder, muscling him because he is excited? That's why it's important for a fighter to know how to clinch when hurt. Tommy Hearns learned the lesson late, by the time he fought Kinchen, after his major wars, he learned to hold on to his man "like he was my woman". I've never understood how fighters don't learn that before they need it, either a bad trainer or a fighter who won't listen to the trainer. It's one of the most important parts of the game.