Talk:Boxing glove

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Mass times acceleration[edit]

People keep quoting force equals mass times acceleration when speaking of punching power, and interpret it wrong. The force of the punch is determined by the deceleration after impact and the mass behind the punch. More padded gloves increase the distance over which the deceleration occurs and therefore the rate of the deceleration. Thus the decelerating force on the hand is reduced (transferred to the rest of the body's mass behind the punch) and the corresponding acceleration and force on the target is reduced. Larger gloves also dissipate the force over a larger area. Holymolytree2 07:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


This section is too small and not very accurate. In fact something very much resembling the modern boxing glove was in use by the Greeks and/or Romans. It is interpreted as being for practice only, but I suspect that its use was a legitimate spectator sport. Check this out: Also, Gomme and Sandbach on Menander Dyskolos 517 say "(The Roman authors [which?] show that in their time sphaeromachia could draw spectators, and P. Oxy. 1050, of the second or third century AD, mentions σφαιρομάχοι along with pancratiasts at an athletic contest.) In spite of Senecas's reference to blood (which after all can flow from the nose), it is clear that the σφαῖραι must have been of the nature of boxing gloves, not iron balls or lead weights, as is often absurdly stated" Vince Calegon 12:23, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Protection to the Opponent[edit]

Can idiots please stop saying that the main purpose of boxing gloves is to protect the wearer? The gloves protect both athletes but the most important aspect is to protect the opponent. If boxing gloves weren't worn, even in the absence of KOs, fighters would be getting severe eye injuries, severe facial lacerations, etc. Someone wrote that professional fight gloves are specially designed to only protect the wearer, which is one of the stupidest statements I've ever heard in my life. The gloves make a BIG difference to the recipient of a punch, though the effect is greater on the reduction of localised trauma than the prevention of an actual KO. Jesus Christ, just get some gloves and try being hit with them, then try being hit by a bare knuckle.

Has anywone heard about the story of Billy Collins vs Luis Resto? Panama Luis, Resto's trainer, took padding out of Resto's glove. Collins ended up with eye damage and could never fight again, and Resto and Lewis both got sent to jail. Now can someone please explain to me, if boxing gloves are designed to protect the wearer and not the opponent, why would Lewis have taken the padding out of the gloves?

God, I'm amazed at the stupidity of some people.

True. Gloves where introduced to make boxing appear more civilized. Less cuts and bruises, protecting the hands was a side effect that let people hit harder then before, but not the original goal of the gloves. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Canadian Ninja (talkcontribs) 05:10, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
  • It's critical that we get some sources for the claim that boxing gloves are either safer or less safer than bare-knuckled fighting. What we have there now is an egregious example of original research. Nareek 16:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Original research? Panama Lewis went to jail for taking padding out of his fighter, Luis Resto's gloves. The opponent suffered permanent eye damage. Holymolytree2 (talk) 15:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
That isn't stated anywhere. Furthermore, that constitutes an example, hardly a verified source. I agree, this entire article is, in fact, "an egregious example of original research." The whole thing needs to be cited ASAP, and probably re-written. Marshaul (talk) 10:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Here's a reference:$FILE/TheBoxingDebate.pdf Quoting from it: "Gloves are designed to protect the fists of the wearer and do nothing to prevent brain injury unless they are so large as to be unwieldy. Indeed, the bare fist prize fighters of the past were able to sustain very long matches because the force of the punches was less than in modern times." —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm also going to remove part of the seciton under 'advantages depending on the weight of the glove', as it's unsourced, and according to the reference above, wrong. Comments like this: "Jesus Christ, just get some gloves and try being hit with them, then try being hit by a bare knuckle." are unhelpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

what about moving this?[edit]

shouldn't this be moved, as glove is also in singular, and not in plural --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


I think the article needs more work, but probably doesn't need the tags anymore. Opinions? CheesyBiscuit (talk) 13:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Ounces ?[edit]

Can someone add to the article why there are different sizesand weights of boxing glove ? Why do they vary so much ? 6oz 8oz 10oz 12oz 14oz 16oz ? ? ? How do people choose ? Does it depend on the competition or the fighter ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


"Bare-knuckle rules also allowed grappling all this is fake and throws, and some of the deaths were caused by a fighter hitting his head on a stone or rail.[4]"

Noticed this while reading, needs to be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Boxing glove/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gracefool (talk · contribs) 10:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

This is a decent article that is almost ready for good article status. It definitely failed the first criteria, well written, but I have copyedited the article to fix this. The remaining issue is with many sources of dubious quality, e.g. iSport, Commando Boxing, LiveStrong, AZCentral. Probably none of these sources are needed (there are too many references anyway), and they should be replaced with primary sources, whether already used elsewhere or not (e.g. official boxing rules).

Thank you for reviewing and modifying some section in this article. So now I just need to remove or replace the dubious references to appropriate ones or leave it on the reference list, and any further action should I be taken to consider? Thank you. WPSamson (talk) 13:42, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by "leave it on the reference list". If it's not good quality it should be removed altogether.
I've made some more copyedits and other improvements (like discovering a completely false statement and adding an image). Looking again the first caption could be improved by expanding it, e.g. "a pair of velcro sparring gloves" or whatever they are. I think that and fixing references would suffice to make this a good article, although I'd appreciate a second opinion since this is my first review.
Further improvements could be some expansion on hand wraps (taken from the article), and a (captioned) picture of a bare-knuckle boxer to compare against. ··gracefool💬 20:14, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the feedback. Based on the feedback provided, I had do some modification on the page. This includes removal of non-necessary referencing, expansion of the hand wraps section and also small description of the boxing gloves in Minoan youth boxing so far. Do this page need any further thing to complete on so that it is ready for gaining the status? Thank you. WPSamson (talk) 06:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Good work on the removals.
Your hand wraps expansion had major grammar problems and didn't add any relevant information, so I reverted it.
It's okay - often good - to use the same reference more than once in an article. I've readded the repeats you removed.
I removed the information you copied from the caption (Minoan youth boxing). It's okay to have new information in captions, and not good to say the same thing twice.
I'm finding a lot of issues with references as I'm checking them, so unfortunately it seems all the references need to be checked for correct reference information - see my last edit for examples. Also I find it much harder to edit an article when the references are split over multiple lines, because it's very hard to see where the paragraphs are, but that's personal preference, you may disagree. ··gracefool💬 03:23, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


Gracefool, WPSamson, where does this review stand? The nominator has not edited the article since December 5, and there are no new comments here since the reviewer's on December 9. If the issues mentioned in the last comments have not been addressed in the seven weeks since they were made, then perhaps it is time to close the nomination as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok I've closed it as failed. ··gracefool 💬 23:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

The portrayed fresco is no evidence of the use of gloves.[edit]

The portrayed fresco is no evidence of the use of gloves since it is plain to see that what resembles a glove is not but an area of the fresco where the paint has fallen off! Also, the only hand visible in the painting, that of the youth at the right, is not wearing gloves, which leads us to believe that neither of the supposed fighters in the fresco are wearing a thing on their hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)