Increased Concussion/head injury in boxing..headgear banned

[Mick F]

I had a go at fencing a while back.

We all wore the right gear: visor, gauntlets, "stab vests" and our rapiers had a plastic plug on the end.

However, what about having a sharp sword, no visor or gauntlets, and fight stark naked?
Would we fight a little bit more carefully?

[Phil Fouracre]

Ooooh! Great, another helmet debate......................!

[bovlomov]

Ooooh! Great, another helmet debate......................!

Not only helmets! Every time I come to the CTC Forum all I see is talk about bicycle related issues. What a bore! Can't you lot discuss anything else?

[MartinC]

........................For example, a larger diameter head would actually make your head rotate slower................

Now that is supposition. Rotation of your head is resisted by your neck and jaw muscles which slow the rotation. Increasing the size of the head form increases the torque that can be applied by a blow and decreases the mitigation that can be supplied. So you'd have to know how the equation worked out. You're right that there's no direct evidence of this, like the increased chance of an impact with a larger head, it can be deduced from the laws of physics which aren't applied selectively. If you want some indirect evidence it will be in the amount of time boxers spends developing their neck muscles and in the take up of gumshields in many other contact sports. By locking the upper and lower jaw together they increase the muscle groups available to resist rotation. One could easily argue that gumshields would be more effective for cyclists in mitigating head injuries.

[Tigger]

Ooooh! Great, another helmet debate......................!

Not only helmets! Every time I come to the CTC Forum all I see is talk about bicycle related issues. What a bore! Can't you lot discuss anything else?

[Steady rider]

Postby BeeKeeper » Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:20 pm

Steady rider wrote:
The larger size of having head protection probably means more blows are landed and head rotation may increase compared to the smaller size of a bare head. The combination of more blows and rotation could result in more concussions, or the data seems to show this.

MartinC » Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:37 am
claim made

Steady rider wrote:
........................For example, a larger diameter head would actually make your head rotate slower................

It appears some mix up, Steady Rider did not make the above claim.

BeeKeeper » Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:20 pm made this claim

For example, a larger diameter head would actually make your head rotate slower

[MartinC]

Steady Rider - profuse apologies, you're right! I messed up trimming the quote and made it attribute it to you not to Beekeeper. I think you and I agree totally about this.

[Bonefishblues]

Puzzled man is puzzled why female boxers are still wearing them?

[Tonyf33]

Puzzled man is puzzled why female boxers are still wearing them?

Because they deem that ladies (& juniors/non elite) don't hit as hard as men/elite level boxers I think the problem is that it is an image thing as well, if ladies and juniors are getting cuts (from clashes of heads or punches) then lots of blood looks a heck of a lot worse than any concussion which can just look like your're a bit groggy (so you're not necessarily knocked out)
As they want to encourage ladies and kids into boxing they've decided that the chances of a concussion are less due to the amount of power, frankly I think that is a bit stupid and really the decision is based on the 'perceived' safety & image of the sport rather than safety as a whole.

[Bonefishblues]

Puzzled man is puzzled why female boxers are still wearing them?

Because they deem that ladies (& juniors/non elite) don't hit as hard as men/elite level boxers I think the problem is that it is an image thing as well, if ladies and juniors are getting cuts (from clashes of heads or punches) then lots of blood looks a heck of a lot worse than any concussion which can just look like your're a bit groggy (so you're not necessarily knocked out)
As they want to encourage ladies and kids into boxing they've decided that the chances of a concussion are less due to the amount of power, frankly I think that is a bit stupid and really the decision is based on the 'perceived' safety & image of the sport rather than safety as a whole.

Inconsistent application is inconsistent then

It's either evidence-based or it isn't. I hope a lady doesn't succumb to an injury that might have been avoided if she hadn't been wearing one of these devices or things might just get litigious.

[Steady rider]

I suppose they could allow a choice, to avoid legal risks.

[bovlomov]

I suppose they could allow a choice, to avoid legal risks.

Then no one would wear one. The unhelmetted boxer would have all the advantages; being more mobile, presenting a smaller target, and having a larger target to aim at.

[Bonefishblues]

I suppose they could allow a choice, to avoid legal risks.

Then no one would wear one. The unhelmetted boxer would have all the advantages; being more mobile, presenting a smaller target, and having a larger target to aim at.

...and the Governing Body would still be open to claims.

[Steady rider]

Has there ever been a claim I wonder? searching around
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1823523.stm
http://menshealth.about.com/od/fitness/a/boxing.htm

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=O_GD ... im&f=false