Tweet
Not always but sometimes ring size can be of great significance. As hopefully we all understand by now, a smaller ring is more ideal for a brawler than for a slick boxer, and vice versa.
It seems like a general rule that holds pretty true, that the more two boxing styles contrast, the greater the potential for ring size to exert increased influence on the set of all possible outcomes.
Ring size is a sideline that has interested me for a while. The subject doesn't exactly get a lot of play, but I like to fiddle around with numbers anyway.
We are only dealing with squares. Easy enough to figure the area of a square. Simplest example possible--square these numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. There are several things to notice about the numbers 1,4, 9, 16, 25 and 36: there is a regularity to the increase in area easily captured in a formula since the sequence of squares advances in leaps of consecutive odd numbers, with each increase in dimension adding more total area to the ring, but each increase also achieving a smaller percentage gain than the last increase. But no matter, the real idea is to add or subtract total square footage to the ring for our fighter's benefit, and for that purpose the simple example given works increasingly well, since the sequence of consecutive odd integers is an increasing function to the right. Just extend the concept up to the larger scale of boxing rings.
Leonard demanded a 24 ft ring in the contracts for Hagler. To try and put that in perspective, consider that those dimensions added 176 square feet to our idealized compromise of 20x20. Hell, man, that is equivalent to another full 13 foot 2 inch ring set down inside of and added to the idealized ring of 20x20. A ring of more than 13 feet to a side, added, and made room for inside a new expanded super ring!! How much bigger did you say it was? A full 13 foot square ring bigger, son. In his blind lust for mammon Hagler essentially allowed Leonard to fix the fight without even knowing he was being robbed at penpoint.
When you add the entire square footage of another 13 foot ring to the square footage of the standard ring, I would call that very significant in regards to the two men's styles. Leonard just about always started his wins in the negotiating room or earlier. This was really easy to accomplish too, with the over confident Hagler, who was convinced he would finally get his due dose of dough and idolatry. He foolishly sold off to Leonard every advantage his style and body could best exploit. In addition, they would also compete for 12 rounds instead of the traditional 15. Then of course Ray did not forget to include the clause stipulating those 12 ounce pillows they would sling at each other. I thought Hag was never very bright in regards to ring generalship. A very poor negotiator too, it turned out. Over confidence can be deadly. But so can poor strategizing and poor tactical adaptation. But I digress..
Perhaps gentlemen here know of other instances of ring sizes in major fights that would be irregular to us today--from any era. I have a small list. Probability-wise, it is not unreasonable to assume that at least in a few instances such a study is likely to shed more light on certain historical results simply by uncovering ring sizes we were unaware of. There could be traces of marrow in them thar bones.
I know (or at least I believe I do) that Marciano fought Cockell in a 16 foot ring. In that one, no ring size would have mattered. Don was not going to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee for very long anyway. That ring size is an obvious ideal fit for Rock against anyone else, it is so in his favor as to seem set up. The traditional reason given was that's all they used at the Cow Palace, or whatever venue it was. Maybe a touch of insurance on it.
You think Kearns wouldn't have finagled some such advantage for Dempsey if a Greb fight had ever materialized? When it came to ring size, he would want as small as he could get, and shady Doc often got what he finagled for.
I believe a big time fight was once fought in a 14+ foot ring in the mid 20th century. I was mildly astonished when the video's live commentator made note of the ring's dimensions casually, but I forgot to remember and then I forgot. It was a Youtube vid. That is something I always listen for but sometimes forget to permanently record.
You think I think you don't have more examples? Too many hounds around here for that. These irregular ring sizes (to us) are anomalies of interest, for the very reasons stated above. My free version of Boxrec does not offer ring size information as far as I know. Has it been included in negotiations before, is another question of interest? I imagine it must have.
It seems like a general rule that holds pretty true, that the more two boxing styles contrast, the greater the potential for ring size to exert increased influence on the set of all possible outcomes.
Ring size is a sideline that has interested me for a while. The subject doesn't exactly get a lot of play, but I like to fiddle around with numbers anyway.
We are only dealing with squares. Easy enough to figure the area of a square. Simplest example possible--square these numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. There are several things to notice about the numbers 1,4, 9, 16, 25 and 36: there is a regularity to the increase in area easily captured in a formula since the sequence of squares advances in leaps of consecutive odd numbers, with each increase in dimension adding more total area to the ring, but each increase also achieving a smaller percentage gain than the last increase. But no matter, the real idea is to add or subtract total square footage to the ring for our fighter's benefit, and for that purpose the simple example given works increasingly well, since the sequence of consecutive odd integers is an increasing function to the right. Just extend the concept up to the larger scale of boxing rings.
Leonard demanded a 24 ft ring in the contracts for Hagler. To try and put that in perspective, consider that those dimensions added 176 square feet to our idealized compromise of 20x20. Hell, man, that is equivalent to another full 13 foot 2 inch ring set down inside of and added to the idealized ring of 20x20. A ring of more than 13 feet to a side, added, and made room for inside a new expanded super ring!! How much bigger did you say it was? A full 13 foot square ring bigger, son. In his blind lust for mammon Hagler essentially allowed Leonard to fix the fight without even knowing he was being robbed at penpoint.
When you add the entire square footage of another 13 foot ring to the square footage of the standard ring, I would call that very significant in regards to the two men's styles. Leonard just about always started his wins in the negotiating room or earlier. This was really easy to accomplish too, with the over confident Hagler, who was convinced he would finally get his due dose of dough and idolatry. He foolishly sold off to Leonard every advantage his style and body could best exploit. In addition, they would also compete for 12 rounds instead of the traditional 15. Then of course Ray did not forget to include the clause stipulating those 12 ounce pillows they would sling at each other. I thought Hag was never very bright in regards to ring generalship. A very poor negotiator too, it turned out. Over confidence can be deadly. But so can poor strategizing and poor tactical adaptation. But I digress..
Perhaps gentlemen here know of other instances of ring sizes in major fights that would be irregular to us today--from any era. I have a small list. Probability-wise, it is not unreasonable to assume that at least in a few instances such a study is likely to shed more light on certain historical results simply by uncovering ring sizes we were unaware of. There could be traces of marrow in them thar bones.
I know (or at least I believe I do) that Marciano fought Cockell in a 16 foot ring. In that one, no ring size would have mattered. Don was not going to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee for very long anyway. That ring size is an obvious ideal fit for Rock against anyone else, it is so in his favor as to seem set up. The traditional reason given was that's all they used at the Cow Palace, or whatever venue it was. Maybe a touch of insurance on it.
You think Kearns wouldn't have finagled some such advantage for Dempsey if a Greb fight had ever materialized? When it came to ring size, he would want as small as he could get, and shady Doc often got what he finagled for.
I believe a big time fight was once fought in a 14+ foot ring in the mid 20th century. I was mildly astonished when the video's live commentator made note of the ring's dimensions casually, but I forgot to remember and then I forgot. It was a Youtube vid. That is something I always listen for but sometimes forget to permanently record.
You think I think you don't have more examples? Too many hounds around here for that. These irregular ring sizes (to us) are anomalies of interest, for the very reasons stated above. My free version of Boxrec does not offer ring size information as far as I know. Has it been included in negotiations before, is another question of interest? I imagine it must have.
Dr Z
Comment