Tris Dixon’s new book, “Damage: The Untold Story of Brain Trauma in Boxing,” has stirred up considerable conversation among boxing people. In this vein, the survey question this time was whether a professional boxer should be forced to retire when he or she reaches a certain age? Here is what over 40 respondents said. They are listed in alphabetical order.

Jeff Bumpus — former fighter; writer: No. It’s the only thing that some people have. It’s a way of making a living in a dishonest game. Take that away from a person who can do nothing else and you create a problem where none existed before. He probably will be dead before brain injuries do their work.

Steve Canton — writer, author and head of Florida Boxing Hall of Fame: I don’t believe a boxer should be forced to retire at a certain age because each fighter is different and ages differently. The rigors of the sport affect each fighter differently. Rather than a certain age, perhaps medical testing should be the deciding factor.

Michael Culbert — former boxer: Every fighter is different. If a fighter can pass the proper physical exams, he or she should be allowed to box. Especially important are CAT scans and MRI’s on the brain for older boxers.

Jill Diamond — WBC International Secretary and Global Chair, WBC Cares:  Physiology differs. A person can be young and sustain enough punches to cause TBI years down the road, or be the kind of fighter that rarely gets hit, has fewer fights, or has a stronger neck and skull, etc. Until there are accurate tests to determine long term damage, I would rather see consistent, uniform and thorough testing rather than age.

Matt Farrago — former boxer and founder of Ring 10: Forced to retire? Absolutely not unless he or she is showing clear signs of serious or permanent damage. No two people are the same. Each fighter handles punches and damage differently. Plus, this is their livelihood. This is how they make a living or hope to. Who gets to make that call and how can the fighter be compensated for by a forced early retirement? A UNION has to formed.

Rick Farris — writer, former fighter, and head of West Coast Boxing Hall of Fame: I have strong feelings about “over age” boxers being licensed to fight. Those for it cite a few examples such as George Foreman to support their theory. Those against bring more credible evidence to support the risks involved. Trying to pick a specific age for mandatory retirement is difficult because all boxers age differently. I’m not going to get involved in this because it will not change one thing.

Bernard Fernandez – journalist, author, 2020 IBHOF inductee: Setting an arbitrary retirement age for boxers is not the answer to eliminating or even significantly reducing the possibility of traumatic brain injuries. Meldrick Taylor’s cognitive decline was beginning to be evident at 26; Bernard Hopkins still was mentally sharp after his final bout, when he was nearly 52. Not all fighters, or their brains, fit easy categorization. State commissions and physicians can only go so far in making assessments of any individual’s fitness for continuing in a hard profession.

Michael Finn — former fighter and president of RING 4: A boxer’s right to participate in the sport should be terminated when mental or physical defects are noticed in the person in question. The decision should be rendered by an independent medical staff.

Jeffrey Freeman (aka KO Digest), TSS writer: Of course not. Stop the sanctimonious wailing. Boxing is the hurt business. Under a proposal such as this it’s hard to see how George Foreman would ever get his triumphant last laugh at 45. Unless the age limit is 65, no.

Clarence George – writer, boxing historian: Wear and tear trumps age. Medical exams should be more regular and rigorous, and the doctor’s determination should be universally accepted by boxing commissions. It’s not unreasonable for the boxer to request a second opinion. If there’s medical agreement, however, that should be the end of the matter. If there isn’t, a third doctor’s opinion should be sought, in which case it would come down to a split decision one way or the other.

Dr. Margaret Goodman: — neurologist, author, former ringside physician, chairperson of VADA, 2021 IBHOF inductee:  “Age is just a number” and cannot be the sole factor. The timing of a fighter’s retirement should be multifactorial. “Ring age” is much more important—number of rounds a fighter has endured–including in the amateurs, stoppage losses and most importantly a yearly evaluation. Too few commissions are willing to deny a fighter a license and so they rely upon passing tests. It’s frustrating, often expensive and time consuming when determining if a fighter’s license should be denied, but to me, the most important role a commission has is determining fitness to box.  More often than not a commission doesn’t need costly testing to make that determination, but legal challenges often weigh in their determination. If we look at CTE autopsies–some of those individuals only had exposure when they were teens or college age….and may have had subconcussive blows–which may be of more significance than concussion itself. I agree that boxing is a young person’s sport, but that doesn’t mean we don’t include it—it means we have to look at the entire picture.

Randy Gordon — former New York Athletic Commission chairman, host of “At the Fights” on Sirius Radio, historian, writer: Part of me says there should be a mandatory retirement while another part says everyone is as different as a fingerprint. If the retirement age in boxing was, say  38, that would eliminate such men as Mayweather, Foreman,  Holyfield, Luis “King Kong” Ortiz, etc from competing. Some fighters are damaged goods in their early 30’s, while others (like Mayweather and Pacquiao) are still going strong in their early 40’s. With some fighters, obvious physical deterioration is noticeable in their 20’s. There should not be a mandatory retirement age, but rather, a commission or medical review board to handle each case individually

Allan Green — multiple world title challenger: No, as long as his or her health is intact they should be allowed to compete.

Lee Groves — historian, writer, author, CompuBox wizard and podcast panelist:  I don’t agree with a mandatory blanket age. We all are built differently and we all have different capabilities. Some fighters burn out by their mid-20s while others, like Foreman, Hopkins, Pacquiao, Mayweather, GGG and many more, can still compete well at a high level at an advanced age. What if Eder Jofre retired for good after his second fight with Harada? We then wouldn’t have seen one of the most remarkable comebacks in history — 25 fights, 25 wins and a second world title in a higher weight class at the age of 37. Medical and ring results and not an arbitrarily determined age should determine when a fighter should retire.

Henry Hascup — president of the New Jersey Boxing Hall of Fame, RING 8 official, and noted historian: No! Fighters grow old at different times. Fighters like George Foreman, Bernard Hopkins and Archie Moore were still competing at a high level well into their 40’s. While others like Terry McGovern, Tami Mauriello and Artie Levine were done by their mid-20’s! Styles play a big part as well; boxers usually last longer than sluggers.

Bruce Kielty — professional boxing booking agent:  Federal laws would prevail if an arbitrary age was chosen. The Chief Ringside Inspector should be qualified enough to determine if a boxer is unable to safely compete and his/her license be revoked. The boxer could then challenge the matter in a court of law, if desired.

*********

I am an old man. I just happen to be an old man that can fight. — Bernard Hopkins

*********

Dr. Stuart Kirschenbaum – former head of the Michigan Boxing Commission: Age is not the problem…it is how many miles are on the car. Boxers start too young as amateurs when the brain and skull is not fully developed. Professionals can be placed on medical suspensions but be allowed in unregulated gyms to spar. In baseball a manager counts pitches not to ruin an arm, but in boxing it’s not the number of fights but the number of rounds in the gym and bouts that accumulatively cook in the crock pot for a serving of brain trauma.

Jim Lampley – linchpin of the legendary HBO Boxing announcing team, 2015 IBHOF inductee: Age is the wrong criterion for evaluation of a fighter’s pathology because just as styles make fights, styles identify careers. A gifted 37-year-old defender/counterpuncher is one thing, a gifted 37-year-old puncher/warrior is something entirely different. I am not sure what criterion I would suggest for this other than age, but I know for sure that age isn’t it.

Arne Lang — TSS editor-in-chief, author, historian: If I ran a state boxing commission, I would convene a panel and charge them with developing a formula for establishing a line in the sand — a boundary beyond which no boxer would be licensed in my jurisdiction. Yes, I know that’s just passing the buck, but so be it. And by the way, Evander Holyfield doesn’t need to be taking any more punches to the head, not even punches from oversized gloves in a glorified sparring session, and shame on anyone that would abet it.

Ron Lipton — former police official, veteran pro referee, former fighter, boxing writer and historian, inducted into both the NJ and NY State Boxing Halls of Fame: The sole determining factor is the physical and medical determination by the respective Boxing Commission’s medical staff once they have been  provided with the results of an MRI, cat scan, thorough blood workup, physical tests and exams involving reflexes, eye sight, hearing, cardio vascular fitness and the history of the individual applying for the boxing license. When approaching 50 years of age, prudent judgment is required. Some boxers are too old at 35, others can still fight at 50.

Paul Magno — boxing writer, author: No mandatory retirement age. All fighters are different and travel different career paths. Forcing retirement would’ve robbed us of Bernard Hopkins’ post-40 run as well as the late career exploits of Pacquiao, Mayweather, Marquez, etc. There should be, however, an oversight committee of experts and fight-knowledgeable physicians deciding, on a case by case basis, whether fighters should still be competing. But that opens up the question of how we could do something like that and enforce the committee’s decisions. As long as boxing continues to be a regulatory mess, fighters will continue to box under varying degrees of risk.

Don Majewski — historian and official of RING 8: I suppose a question of an individual’s right comes into play here. Different people age in different ways. On the whole humans are growing larger and living longer as to boxing; Wilfredo Benitez was finished at 25 and is near catatonic today at age 63 while Archie Moore did not win his world title until he was 36 – and held it for nine years and lived, relatively healthy, to 82 years of age. On the whole — as we are talking about a commercial enterprise (professional boxing) where the person (the boxer) is the commodity — I do not believe that any boxer who has not made it by age 40 should continue to fight. I would say that 90% of the professional boxers I’ve known past the age of 65 have had brain damage

Adeyinka Makinde – U.K. barrister, author, and contributor to the Cambridge Companion to Boxing: Boxers should not be forced to retire at a particular age. But boxing commissions should strictly enforce retirement based on comprehensive physical surveys with particular emphasis on the condition of a boxer’s brain and eyes. There would need to be a determined level of national and international co-operation over this. The quality of the fighter’s life after what is a limited time span of a career should be paramount notwithstanding the romantic tales of the likes of Joe Frazier and Gypsy Joe Harris, both of whom apparently fought half-blinded.

Robert Mladinich — former NYC police official, boxer, writer, author, actor, commentator, and God only knows what else: In the early 1980s, heavyweight Dave Zyglewicz sued the NYS Athletic Commission to be allowed to make a comeback at 38. Today he would be considered a spring chicken. To protect fighters from themselves, there could be individual medical evaluations after a certain age or amount of fights with strict criteria. One size does not fit all in life or in sports so putting an age limit on boxers would be well-intentioned but unfair.

************

                     Retirement should be multifactorial — Dr. Margaret Goodman

                                                  ************

Gordon Marino – philosophy professor emeritus, Wall Street Journal boxing writer, trainer: Seems like a good idea to me despite the exceptions. My wife is a neuroscientist and work some with the professional fighters brain health study. The fact is as we age our brains shrink and there’s more room for them to be slammed against our skull or at least that’s how I understand part of the problem. Still, so many people who fight on into middle age are just doing it because they’re broke and they’re getting hurt.

David Martinez — writer and historian: I have always contended that NOBODY beats father time. I would be in favor of a specific age limit for professional boxers to retire, that has nothing to do with the amount of fights in one’s career. These days we are subject to retired boxers in participation with something called an “exhibition” … as said in a circus “ladies and gentlemen – let the show begin” and I can’t wait – what’s next – dancing elephants?

Layla McCarter – active boxer, world champion in multiple weight divisions: Definitely not. Age is not the factor unless they have slowed considerably and are taking damage. Everyone is different.

Diego Morilla — The Ring en Español/RingTV.co: The issue of  forcing retirement due to age or neurological damage is touchy and goes straight to the heart of boxing as a viable human activity. But the debate, to me, can be summarized in a simple question: are the proponents of this forceful ban or retirement willing to do the same for every human activity that implies irreparable physical or neurological damage? Are they rallying people in coal mines, chemical plants, virus-infested intensive care units or risky demolition or construction sites to leave those life-threatening, low-paying jobs because of the danger they face each day? As long as a person is free to earn a living legally and honestly, he or she is free to put his body at risk. And no other human activity exposes the hypocrisy of those who pretend to know how to judge other people’s exposure to harm better than boxing. Hence the occasional (and always futile) calls for its demise.

Joe Pasquale – elite boxing judge: As in any sport it is about condition, not age. Too many stoppages, injuries and concussions would make it a licensing issue for the Boxing Commission. Otherwise, retirement would be a personal choice.

Russell Peltz – legendary Philadelphia boxing promoter, 2004 IBHOF inductee: Not at all. Look at Hopkins. If they can pass all required post-40 medicals, why not let them fight?

Cliff Rold — writer, editor: No. Mandatory retirement age has never made sense. Fighters age differently.

Fred Romano — historian, author: I am not in favor of mandatory retirement. What we need are state commissions which are not unduly influenced by political or financial factors and that are supported by a sound medical review of potential participants.

Dana Rosenblatt — former middleweight champion of the world, motivational speaker, commentator: All fighters have physical differences that make them more or less susceptible to brain injury. Arbitrary age restrictions will not hurt a fighter’s chance of living a quality life after boxing. However, tell George Foreman that he can’t fight anymore at the moment he knocked out Michael Moorer and you not only rob him but also the world of true greatness and inspiration.

Ted Sares: TSS writer and historian:  For me, Dr. Bennet Omalu made the CTE breakthrough in football and Dr. Ann McKee connected football to boxing with her study of Paul Pender. Faced with massive legal action, football started to take responsibility. Boxing, however, continues to largely ignore the issues. One way (and there are others) to break through this denial is to establish a zero-tolerance age limit. Make it 40 or 42 or 45, but just do it.

Iceman John Scully — former fighter, elite trainer: Every fighter is completely different. Literally completely different biological forms. You have to go on an individual basis. If forced retirement was in effect, Bernard Hopkins would never have added to his legacy as he did and would never have been a world champion at a seriously advanced age for a boxer and Willie Pep wouldn’t have 229 professional victories. Fighters are all completely different physically and biologically and must be treated and dealt with accordingly.

Peter Silkov – British boxing writer, artist, founder of The Boxing Glove: Boxers should not be retired due to biological age but on a performance and health related system. We all know the fighters who have carried on fighting when they are already slurring or showing stark decline in the ring. Often it has nothing to do with biological age, more the mileage travelled inside the ring. Benitez should have been retired at 24 while Archie Moore and Bernard Hopkins were winning world titles in their late 30s and 40s. We have to stop fighters like Danny Williams. It’s all too obvious who needs to be retired for their own safety.

Mike Silver — author, writer and eminent boxing historian: Glad you are bringing attention to this important book. Focusing on age misses the point and diverts attention away from the main problem. There are some fighters who should be retired at 19 or 20. There are too many other factors to consider. No one should be allowed near a ring until they’ve read this book.

Alan Swyer — associated with the West Coast Boxing Hall of Fame, movie producer (Boxeo, etc): Though age is certainly a factor, in a period when boxers have far fewer fights than before, imposing retirement at a certain age seems like a half-hearted solution. Think about the great Sugar Ray Robinson, who had thirteen fights in 1965 alone — and fought until he was 44 had no brain trauma. In contrast, Ferdie Pacheco told me that in Ali’s case the issue was not age, but the early signs of Parkinson’s. What we need is better coaching plus far better medical attention.

Bruce Trampler – Top Rank matchmaker, screenwriter, blogger, 2010 IBHOF inductee: It was considered remarkable that Jersey Joe Walcott was heavyweight champ at 38. Athletes age better today (Brady, Foreman, Hopkins,  Pujols, etc.) so there should be no age limit in boxing. However, fighters should be analyzed on an individual basis, from amateurs who have been getting hit in the head since age 10 to the sport’s senior citizens. I once asked a neurologist when brain damage showed during an exam, and his reply was “When it’s too late.” Kelcie Banks, a U.S. Olympian in 1988 at age 23, seemed damaged goods neurologically just four years later. He was a beautiful kid and was sadly allowed to fight on, struggling against very low-level opposition. Many top boxers now fight safely and competitively well into their late 30s and even beyond. We would never automatically say anyone over 75 should not drive, and boxers of any age should be examined separately before being licensed. I saw Jerry Quarry and Terry Norris pass physicals well past their “sell by” date, yet they were rejected for a license, as Kelcie Banks finally was, too. Amen.

Harold Weston Jr. — popular middleweight contender of the 1970s and member of NY State Boxing Hall of Fame: I have discussed this with many doctors and I have been in the ring with great boxers who are not doing well today. Some have passed. Boxing and football are sports in which anything can happen. If you engage with the best, you will get hit “hard.”

Gary “Digital” Williams — voice of Boxing on the Beltway: I’m not sure if it should be a certain age more than a certain condition. There is a boxer I know in his 40’s who is still competing well. But if the condition is bad, that boxer shouldn’t be competing.

Tim Witherspoon — former two-time heavyweight champion of the world: Yes, boxers should be forced to retire if they get too old. It’s just too much for the brain to handle. I also think there should be some test-taking to see if a boxer has brain damage. Safety should be the number one priority and also a boxing Union.

Peter Wood — former fighter, writer and author: No, he or she should not be forced to retire. Boxing should remain what it is—an outlaw sport for rugged individuals and risky iconoclasts. Good question.

Observations: Only four respondents (including yours truly) went for an age restriction. The overwhelming consensus can be summed up in three words: “everyone is different.” Clarence George’s response is especially well-stated and covers the bases nicely.

In summary and based on this survey, the issue is not age. It’s the punishment a fighter has taken and the damage it has done.

What do you think?

Pictured: The Quarry brothers, Jerry and Mike.

Ted Sares enjoys researching and writing about boxing. He also competes as a powerlifter in the 80-85-class. He can be reached at tedsares@roadrunner.com

To comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE