Originally Posted by walk with me
when a elite level pressure fighter loses does that make their "applied pressure" bad because they lose? thats what i'm trying to fig out
because any time i hear about a pressure fighter losing... all the sudden they didnt use "applied pressure" properly.... when in reality i just think they fought someone better than them.... which is why i keep saying you either have successful results or you don't
Their opponent always has the ability to render their technically sound pressure ineffective, just as a pressure fighter always has the ability to render a pure boxer's game ineffective. It doesn't mean their technique was off or that they were doing something wrong, it just means the fighter they were facing was too good at his own method and ultimately nullified theirs. If you want a perfect example, watch Whitaker vs Chavez. Chavez goes about his business as he usually does, but Whitaker's ability to fight off the backfoot behind his offense made it nearly impossible for him to be cornered or closed in on long enough to put in any effective work.
Your general point is sound, you're just not seeing the whole picture. Your effectiveness depends on the tact of your methods along with the tact of the opponent's methods. Often the best fighters have that little extra something that transcends style altogether, something that isn't taught in the textbook and can only be born into you or learned the hard way. Fighters like Duran, Monzon, Whitaker, etc. That level of fighter.