View Single Post
Old 11-25-2012, 02:27 PM   #39
Absolutely!
Fabulous, darling!
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: A cut above my left nose
Posts: 3,225
vCash: 500
Default Re: Let's discuss Ring Generalship

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post
i like this one a lot. ring generalship is discussed quite a bit but hardly defined.

ricardo lopez imo was a great ring general because:
1)he rarely if ever fought his opponents fight
2)he controlled the pace and distance masterfully
3)he was able to reset the fight when needed, in order to re-establish control
4)he controlled the texture of the fights cater to his OWN strengths
5)he would minimize his opponents strengths or take them away

those are aside from strict offense and defense but tells "the story" of the fight. ricardo lopez was always the author of his own fight, his opponent merely a character
Can't really disagree with this. A great ring general is never going to look entirely like another great ring general or even particularly alike at all, since the skill is dependent upon the type of fight that is being employed. Frazier was a great ring general because he forced you to fight in close where he generally had the advantage, Wlad's a great ring general because he keeps you at a distance, Hopkins is a great ring general because he prevents you from working and constantly gets in your comfort zone, Locche was a great ring general because he made you leap and lunge just to hit him and thereby expend physical and mental energy and so on.

I think your last line more or less sums it up. A great ring general is always the author of his own fight.
Absolutely! is offline  Top
Reply With Quote