Everything a Beginning Boxing Fan Should Know...

[cross_trainer]

What are the most important facts and advice that a boxing neophyte should be exposed to?

[Russell]

Losses don't define fighters?

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Russell

Losses don't define fighters?

Good one. In fact you're right, that will be the most important fact for a new fan to grasp in my view.

Also; you don't know anything about boxing. At all. Nothing. Now get out.

[bladerunner]

titles mean shit nowadays.

[bumdujour]

Originally Posted by cross_trainer

What are the most important facts and advice that a boxing neophyte should be exposed to?

numbers don´t mean shit unless they have names attached to them.

[Jack Dempsey]

Ali does not necessarily have to be number one in your top 10 HW's

[Russell]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Good one. In fact you're right, that will be the most important fact for a new fan to grasp in my view.

Also; you don't know anything about boxing. At all. Nothing. Now get out.

Hahhaaa.... Whhhhhhat?

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by Jack Dempsey

Ali does not necessarily have to be number one in your top 10 HW's

Actually, a beginning fan should absolutely have Ali in his top 10, both at heavyweight and pound for pound.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Russell

Hahhaaa.... Whhhhhhat?

The things that the big fan thinks look cool - the big ko punches especially - are usually the least important. Who is interested in footwork, feinting, double jab, head-movement, resting in a clinch etc etc etc when they first get into the game? But these are the things that make the small advantages add up over the course of a fight to make a win.

Though Tyson-Frazier is easier to understand and often more fun, it's the tip of the iceberg.

[bumdujour]

a fighter is only as good as in his last fight.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by cross_trainer

What are the most important facts and advice that a boxing neophyte should be exposed to?

The differences between profiles like Journeyman, tomato can, fringe contender, clubfighter, prospect, and so on and so forth.

There are way too many people, some of whom are on this forum, who can't seem to make the distinction.

[Jack Dempsey]

Revolvers theory of all pre 1960's boxers being shit

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by tobkhan

I don´t have him in there p4p

Well,

Now you know to go back and revise your list. Glad to be of service

[Russell]

Originally Posted by McGrain

The things that the big fan thinks look cool - the big ko punches especially - are usually the least important. Who is interested in footwork, feinting, double jab, head-movement, resting in a clinch etc etc etc when they first get into the game? But these are the things that make the small advantages add up over the course of a fight to make a win.

Though Tyson-Frazier is easier to understand and often more fun, it's the tip of the iceberg.

I concur. Hence the reason I'm here in the first place, figuring this all out a little at a time but reading everything that I can put in front of myself and asking an asinine amount of questions.

How's this tie into me knowing "nothing" about boxing though?

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Russell

I concur. Hence the reason I'm here in the first place, figuring this all out a little at a time but reading everything that I can put in front of myself and asking an asinine amount of questions.

How's this tie into me knowing "nothing" about boxing though?

It's just a good place to start.

Clearly doesn't apply to you though. You obviously know a bit more than nothing just for the reasons you describe.