the what fights did you watch today\scorecard thread.

[Flea Man]

I'm more about the classification. What entails a pure boxer? Simply hit and not be hit? That could evoke quite a few names. I guess Calderon would be, but Kalule is fare more impressive an operator than that punk.

I'ma go with counter puncher. It's his footwork that makes it all happen, should be fun.

[McGrain]

Cassius Clay UD10 Doug Jones

This is a fun fight. George Chuvalo speaks well about this fight, like he does most things. He says it is interesting the way "Ali, then Clay" didn't really run in this fight, that he fought Jones's fight, that he left himself over to that counter-right. I thought his best counter-punch was a sneak right hand to the body, but it didn't seem to bother Ali at all like the right upstairs did in 1 and 8, so probably that's a fair shout by George.

What I don't understand is why Ali is allowed to fight a more stationary fight, probably a good plan against a smaller, slower fighter but then doesn't sit down on his punches like we would see him do the following year, and had seemed to see him do before. Maybe I am being a little unfair there as it's possible he needs the poundage he would gain (202) to hurt a really durable opponet, but he o nly really hurt Jones on accumilation and in the last round.

The other thing was how ordinary Jones's head-movement made the Ali jab look. I have next to zero sympathy for those who try to structure an argument for Liston beating Ali at his best, but if there is one it is in this fight. Little ducks, usualy to his own left, allowed Jones to slip a lot of Ali left jabs. Then, just to complete the you're-not-in-Kansas sensation you get seeing Ali miss with the jab, economise with his footwork, Ali turns on the best hooking performance of his career. I mean he hits Jones with a lot of hooks here, lots of different types, lunges, counter-hooks. He also tosses in a couple of uppercuts!

Although Jones had some success, started well and had the crowd roaring every time he so much as flicked out a half landed jab, I can't see the fight as that controversial. The individual rounds are often quite close and a couple of times I was flat out praying for something clean in the final seconds to seperate them, but Ali is throwing more and landing more. Although some of his shots are glancing blows he is mixing them up with enough solidly landed punches to take stretches. Only that extraordinary rally Jones pulled off in the 8th kept him in the fight for me, as that one was going to Ali too.

It's entertaining and fun though, despite of all the missing. Ali doesn't manage to find his stride and start landing a percentage of his punches until the very last round, by the end of which Jones is rubbery leggd and sporting a nice shiner.

Not particularly controversial for me.

JONES: 1,2,6,8

ALI: 3,4,5,7,9,10


6-4 Ali

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by GPater11093

At least Joo do.

[GPater11093]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Cassius Clay UD10 Doug Jones

This is a fun fight. George Chuvalo speaks well about this fight, like he does most things. He says it is interesting the way "Ali, then Clay" didn't really run in this fight, that he fought Jones's fight, that he left himself over to that counter-right. I thought his best counter-punch was a sneak right hand to the body, but it didn't seem to bother Ali at all like the right upstairs did in 1 and 8, so probably that's a fair shout by George.

What I don't understand is why Ali is allowed to fight a more stationary fight, probably a good plan against a smaller, slower fighter but then doesn't sit down on his punches like we would see him do the following year, and had seemed to see him do before. Maybe I am being a little unfair there as it's possible he needs the poundage he would gain (202) to hurt a really durable opponet, but he o nly really hurt Jones on accumilation and in the last round.

The other thing was how ordinary Jones's head-movement made the Ali jab look. I have next to zero sympathy for those who try to structure an argument for Liston beating Ali at his best, but if there is one it is in this fight. Little ducks, usualy to his own left, allowed Jones to slip a lot of Ali left jabs. Then, just to complete the you're-not-in-Kansas sensation you get seeing Ali miss with the jab, economise with his footwork, Ali turns on the best hooking performance of his career. I mean he hits Jones with a lot of hooks here, lots of different types, lunges, counter-hooks. He also tosses in a couple of uppercuts!

Although Jones had some success, started well and had the crowd roaring every time he so much as flicked out a half landed jab, I can't see the fight as that controversial. The individual rounds are often quite close and a couple of times I was flat out praying for something clean in the final seconds to seperate them, but Ali is throwing more and landing more. Although some of his shots are glancing blows he is mixing them up with enough solidly landed punches to take stretches. Only that extraordinary rally Jones pulled off in the 8th kept him in the fight for me, as that one was going to Ali too.

It's entertaining and fun though, despite of all the missing. Ali doesn't manage to find his stride and start landing a percentage of his punches until the very last round, by the end of which Jones is rubbery leggd and sporting a nice shiner.

Not particularly controversial for me.

JONES: 1,2,6,8

ALI: 3,4,5,7,9,10


6-4 Ali

I really like this fight, and I like Jones, think hes a quality veteran.

[lora]

Originally Posted by McGrain

[lora]

Originally Posted by Flea Man

I'm more about the classification. What entails a pure boxer? Simply hit and not be hit? That could evoke quite a few names. I guess Calderon would be, but Kalule is fare more impressive an operator than that punk.

I'ma go with counter puncher. It's his footwork that makes it all happen, should be fun.

Keeping things in broad categories, i'd just call him a textbook boxer-puncher(not actually being able to punch would be a fundamental weakness but not something reflected in the choice of style here).Geting more specific you would have to mention being slanted heavily towards methodical, patient yet quite aggressive counterpunching ie Marquez, Sal Sanchez or to a slightly lesser extent Jofre(he did wing punches and punch more aggressively, but that was because he could afford to being a great puncher with a tough beard).Strengths and weaknesses are different but the intent and textbook skills being used are the same.

[GPater11093]

lora you are right there, he boxes like he can punch and he is strong enough to get away with it IMO, aswell as sharp and skilled enough, just dosent have power.

[Flea Man]

Originally Posted by lora

Keeping things in broad categories, i'd just call him a textbook boxer-puncher(not actually being able to punch would be a fundamental weakness but not something reflected in the choice of style here).Geting more specific you would have to mention being slanted heavily towards methodical, patient yet quite aggressive counterpunching ie Marquez, Sal Sanchez or to a slightly lesser extent Jofre(he did wing punches and punch more aggressively, but that was because he could afford to being a great puncher with a tough beard).Strengths and weaknesses are different but the intent and textbook skills being used are the same.

Textbook boxer? Good shout I guess, his functional foot movement is perfection. But for me, his counter punching seems his strongest suit, but then, all the guys you've mentioned (and Arguello) were also brilliant counter punchers.

If he's just a textbook boxer without a punch....he'd be a pure boxer, no?

Love the way his feet and upper body movement and so perfectly in sync. I think you see it well in the Moore fight, an open straight forward guy and until he tires Kalule is all over him, slips and digs all running seamlessly. He really does seem to be trying to get Moore out offbeat, as you and Greg have said, if he knew he couldn't punch he certainly didn't show it.

He was a respectable hitter IMO, because of the way he caught guys, especially the step back out/to the side and counter, or as it's known 'The Ho Joo Train'.

He does seem an awkward blend though does Kalule. Just something about his work that doesn't make him seem all that 'textbook' to me, although those Ugandans were all well-schooled. Fuck knows who was teaching 'em but he knew his stuff

[GPater11093]

Do any of yous know anything about the Ugandan amateur team around that time poured out some reasonable fighters.

Flea, I d say there is a difference between a boxer-puncher and a boxer, stylistically. Id say a boxer-puncher is using them boxing skills to land hard shots and to do damage, whereas a boxer is all about the points and defence.

[Flea Man]

True, I guess Kalule wouldn't fit into 'pure boxer' then, and I need to stop getting hung up on his lack of power, which is also a myth.

He couldn't bang, but wasn't (sorry to use the same example but a great shorthand for dreadfulness) Calderon in the power department.

[Flea Man]

Or rather stop taking the puncher in boxer-puncher as a literal representation of power.

[GPater11093]

Originally Posted by Flea Man

True, I guess Kalule wouldn't fit into 'pure boxer' then, and I need to stop getting hung up on his lack of power, which is also a myth.

He couldn't bang, but wasn't (sorry to use the same example but a great shorthand for dreadfulness) Calderon in the power department.

He was sharp, you see it in his shots. He could sting.

Originally Posted by Flea Man

Or rather stop taking the puncher in boxer-puncher as a literal representation of power.

[Flea Man]

Sting? Against Ho Joo it was like a nuclear powered JCB Vs a wet patch of turd

[GPater11093]

One performance though.

[Flea Man]

I was obviously joking nobber.