Objections to the sort of excessive holding that John Ruiz has engaged in repeatedly to "win" fights are not unique to our time. I have been reading Adam Pollack's excellent bio of John L. Sullivan, and in its discussion of his fight with Dominick McCaffrey in 1885, the Cincinnati Commercial Gazzette published this scathing critique of McCaffrey's performance against Sullivan:

"A clinch stops the fisticuffs and the referee orders them to part. Thus a clinch may be practiced as a dodge to escape blows. This was one of McCaffrey's great tactics....

McCaffrey's play was to keep out of the way of blows, and by dodging to keep through six rounds without getting knocked out. ... McCaffrey's tactics were to evade, dodge back, duck his head, dodge forward into Sullivan's arms, and dodge down to his knees. He played the game with expertness and activity; but this was not fighting!!!" [emphasis added] (Pollack, p. 126)

Elsewhere, the article apparently observes that the fight was "gentle enough for an entertainment for a peace society convention."

All of this reminds me a great deal of the deserved criticism that Ruiz receives for his endless, and excessive, holding. I found it quite interesting that boxing journalists, and perhaps fans, were no more enamored of these illegal shennanigans back then then we are today, either!!! And they were RIGHT!!

We may be getting to the point where Zak is CREATING more new John Ruiz fans than discouraging them.

Zak, it's clear excessive clinching does not make for an exciting fight and it doesn't surprise me that fans from all eras haven't liked it.

I think we can both agree that clinching is a part of boxing. It's clear you feel Ruiz' clinching has been excessive to the point of being "illegal." I'd say that to me I give more leeway in that area. I am truly often frustrated when certain refs don't let fighters clinch to protect themselves or when they arent' allowed to fight out of clinches. It's not that I like clinching, but I feel it is a legitimate boxing tactic.

We have a subjective disagreement on what constitutes excessive or "illegal" clinching.

I think if John Ruiz cheated his way to victory time and time again without being DQ'd, other fighters would have copied his tactics. I think his victories over many well known names show he has strength and will and heart that obivously are missed by many.

Your opinion is that the judges were influenced by Don King. Maybe that happens sometimes, but To me, John Ruiz has legitimately won fights that he's not given credit for (Golota, Oquendo, Rathman).

I thought Ruiz was losing the Kirk Johnson fight when KJ was DQ'd. I also think KJ was foolish to even try to hit downstairs at that point of the fight. Why was he still hitting at the beltline?