Applied Pressure Is One Of The Biggest Fluke Concepts In Boxing...

[elTerrible]

Main thing I look at in pressure when scoring fights is it effective or not?

Some people will give the round to the guy going forward regardless if he is landing well or not. Some guys like to counter punch going backwards and if they land the cleaner shots then they won that round.... I cant give a round for "controlling the tempo" or "dictating the fight", its who lands the better shots. Only if neither is really landing then it comes down to controlling the pace.

[pasky2000]

Originally Posted by walk with me

if hatton beat floyd his pressure would have been great
if hatton lost (which he did) his pressure was stupid

you either are successful while using pressure
or unsucecssful

No Hatton's pressure was never that good in my book, win or lose...

The thing is that at 140, he was a big boxer, that's why he dominated there to some extent with his style of pressure.

[walk with me]

Originally Posted by pasky2000

I'm getting lost for words because I thought I made it very simple...

Margarito always applied unintelligent pressure his entire career but his chin enabled him to dominate at a weight class where he was huge ! The Mosley loss has nothing to do...

Using any compartments of your game in order to absorb the least amount of damage coming inside while enabling yourself to distribute the most possible !

no you did... i understood what your saying

my response to that is

someone like margarito was a great pressure fighter even though he would get abused coming in... it didnt matter because he was going to boil your ass inside...

i just think to try to define good & bad pressure is bogus... you either have successful results with your pressure or you have unsuccessful results with your pressure

every pressure fighter is great at "applying pressure" until they lose... the day they lose they become bad at being a "pressure fighter"

Originally Posted by pasky2000

No Hatton's pressure was never that good in my book, win or lose...

The thing is that at 140, he was a big boxer, that's why he dominated there to some extent with his style of pressure.

ight

who else can we use as examples? before you name any i feel like they will all be identified as great pressure fighters until they met a master class boxer...

i wish we could use more recent fighters..... but there arent too many pressure guys around right now

[pasky2000]

Originally Posted by walk with me

no you did... i understood what your saying

my response to that is

someone like margarito was a great pressure fighter even though he would get abused coming in... it didnt matter because he was going to boil your ass inside...

i just think to try to define good & bad pressure is bogus... you either have successful results with your pressure or you have unsuccessful results with your pressure

every pressure fighter is great at "applying pressure" until they lose... the day they lose they become bad at being a "pressure fighter"

Just concentrate on the following :

Intelligent Pressure : Using any compartments of your game in order to absorb the least amount of damage coming inside while enabling yourself to distribute the most possible !

It's not Margarito !! Win, lose or draw !!

The discussion is about intelligent pressure afterall, not any kind of pressure that worked..

[walk with me]

Originally Posted by pasky2000

Just concentrate on the following :

Intelligent Pressure : Using any compartments of your game in order to absorb the least amount of damage coming inside while enabling yourself to distribute the most possible !

It's not Margarito !! Win, lose or draw !!

The discussion is about intelligent pressure afterall, not any kind of pressure that worked..

so by your definition.... who is a great pressure fighter then?

[pasky2000]

Originally Posted by walk with me

ight

who else can we use as examples? before you name any i feel like they will all be identified as great pressure fighters until they met a master class boxer...

i wish we could use more recent fighters..... but there arent too many pressure guys around right now

Well I did name Arturo Gatti..

Katsidis is another, etc..too tired to think anymore !

Good night !

[pasky2000]

Originally Posted by walk with me

so by your definition.... who is a great pressure fighter then?

Not talking about great pressure but rather intelligent..minimizing damage received, to maximize damage given..
Calzaghe, Tyson (early on), etc..

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by walk with me

thats what im saying though.... there has been no perfectly unbeatable pressure fighter as far as i know...

OK, that doesn't mean there haven't been elite level intelligent pressure fighters, as opposed to highly flawed ones who've gotten by on the basis of their lackluster opposition.

thats why im saying either you have successful results with pressure or you don't.. but to try put pressure in compartments prior to a fight is stupid imo

Noone is saying there is only one correct way to do it. But there are right things to do and wrong things to do, a few of which I've layed out. Just as is the case with any style in boxing. You can win with unintelligent pressure depending on your other attributes and the level of your opponent, but at the highest level, you must have certain qualities in order to be effective.

if hatton beat floyd his pressure would have been great
if hatton lost (which he did) his pressure was stupid

He didn't win because his pressure was stupid. Against lower level fighters, he gets away with coming in wide open flailing his arms. Against Floyd, he gets check-hooked. Again, at the highest level, it depends on your methods. Not that there is any one set method of success, but it's very easy to distinguish between intelligent and unintelligent pressure. It's what makes it easier to tell how a young prospect will fare when he makes it to the top level, or if he'll make it there at all. Again, by saying pressure doesn't depend on your methods you're saying the same about every style, and that boxing is just a big free for all.

Your effectiveness depends on your method and how well you're capable of applying it.

you either are successful while using pressure
or unsucecssful

That is quite obvious. Your success at the highest level depends on your method, that should also be obvious.

[walk with me]

Originally Posted by Sweet Pea

OK, that doesn't mean there haven't been elite level intelligent pressure fighters, as opposed to highly flawed ones who've gotten by on the basis of their lackluster opposition.

ight...

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

[eliqueiros]

Originally Posted by walk with me

no you did... i understood what your saying

my response to that is

someone like margarito was a great pressure fighter even though he would get abused coming in... it didnt matter because he was going to boil your ass inside...

i just think to try to define good & bad pressure is bogus... you either have successful results with your pressure or you have unsuccessful results with your pressure

every pressure fighter is great at "applying pressure" until they lose... the day they lose they become bad at being a "pressure fighter"




ight

who else can we use as examples? before you name any i feel like they will all be identified as great pressure fighters until they met a master class boxer...

i wish we could use more recent fighters..... but there arent too many pressure guys around right now

Okay, Margarito was a good pressure fighter but not an intelligent pressure fighter. Mosley used intelligent pressure vs Margarito though, in that it was a strategic play, a trap, in which Margarito fell right in. Cotto used intelligent pressure vs Mosley to negate his speed. DLH used intelligent pressure vs Trinidad and vs Floyd (although it collapsed with Floyd and Floyd regained control). I see intelligent pressure as using pressure but also negating your opponents strengths as you do so. I don't think intelligent pressure is a skillset but the perfect offensive strategy to be used against a particular opponent.

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by walk with me

ight...

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.

[daydachamp]

tyson overrated tyson overrated tyson overrated.
tyson improved into the 90's. had his fallout with conditioning before the douglas fight. thereafter into the mid90's for his fights with evander, entered the ring in better condition than he was in the 80's. problem for him was because neither her nor evander were ever that good atg wise, evander was in better condition than tyson. thanks likely in no small part to steroids.
nobody ever talks real on these issues. people just want to live in a fantasy where tyson86 is the best fighter ever. well tyson86 ruled a division bereft of talent.
it's the same today with tyson as it was in the 30's when nobody wanted to believe there was any better then dempey of the 20's despite the fact that he was owned by tunney twice.
everybody gotta say tyson lost his form at 24 and never regained it? really? yall fooling yourselves when you don't realise tyson96 at 30 walked into his fight with evander a better conditioned more thoughtfull fighter than

[walk with me]

Originally Posted by Sweet Pea

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.

so more than anything else....

you have high level pressure fighters
and
low level pressure fighters
& the quality of your opponent..

as opposed to someone using "applied pressure" vs "stupid Pressure"

[Jeff M]

Hatton would be considered to use effective pressure in fights where his size made up for not being as technically skilled as other fighters, or his opponents either lacked the skill or knowledge to counter it.. Same for Margarito I suppose. When they face a more skilled fighter, or one who uses an effective counter-strategy, their aggression is rendered less effective. Everyone has variations in their styles.

What intelligent pressure is to me is probably subjective, kind of like how people view human intelligence. People say you can't define intelligence as just this or that, because there are different kinds of intelligence.

I'd just call it ineffective or effective I think.

[daydachamp]

than tyson86. you remember. you even made him the favorite youre so smart.
take this and ponder. tyson86 never had to confront an evander96. much less anyone truely skilled. sure tyson hit harder than anybody, but didn't ali teach you anything with what he did to liston and foreman.??