Will a good boxer always defeat the brawler?

Porter v Paulie
Duran v SRL1
Norton v Foreman
Sluggers win sometimes but boxing is the name of the game. all of the so called sluggers are usually deceivingly good boxers too.

 

But Hagler was normally a boxer, and Hearns fought less like a slick boxer and went to war (although I credit Hagler for making it difficult to move more)

Anyways, each fighter and fight is different

 

Yup, the odds are in the boxer's favor, assuming of course the the two are at the same level. The brawler might get lucky every now and then but the majority of the time it will be the technician who wins. It's easy to negate power, make him move and reset constantly.

 

I got it at a two level difference, even, the boxer wins clearly, boxer at plus one, the boxer wins comfortably, at plus two he wins easily. It would take the brawler at being plus two have a match where he can win in my opinion.

 

The punchers with the best chances to win on points are swarmers/body punchers, guys who just rely on the big knockout shot to the chin are screwed when facing a tough boxer.

 

This is so stupid and people dont just nicely fit into these caterogires

 

CHAVEZ vs Taylor
Margarito vs cotto
Trinidad vs Vargas
Trinidad vs de la hoya

All examples of brawler/puncher who beat the boxer

It happens.

 

You mean to tell me you don't realize that fighter's have a natural style they fall back on? To me a boxer is anyone who is primarily looking to win the fight on the cards first, and a brawler is anyone who looking to keep the fight out of the judges hands, he didn't ask for specifics so we're going by the broadest terms. And just the nature of that alone gives the boxer a huge advantage, as that is how the style was developed, to take advantage of that knowledge and use it against them.

 

well yeh maybe but what is pacaio roy jones and tyson, golovkin when they were looking to knock people out early does that make them brawlers. The thread is stupid there are so many factors and differing athletic qualites and mental qualities which decide the fight, if you think that then go ahead betting on the guy who wants towin by points over the guy looking for the knockout

 

I'm most intrigued by the cat and mouse matchup. The cat has to make the mouse feel uncomfortable or the mouse has the upper hand. The mouse might become exhausted w/ lateral movement and eventually get caught by the cat like Freitas did vs. Chico. Loved that fight. Or get picked apart by the technician's masterful display (Hopkins over Tito, Pavlik, Mayweather second half vs Hatton etc.) That can be pretty awesome too. You just never know which one.

 

Like I said, he didn't ask for any specifics, if you wanna go specifics name guys you know for sure are all out brawlers ie Margato, Gatti, Chico etc. He's not asking for guys you have to think where they would be included.

 

Yeah but it doesnt help clear up anything, does a boxer always beat a brawler? with so many factors the question is completely pointless

 

There's not too many instances in life where "always" can be applied, and especially boxing, so I don't think most people are taking it quite so literally.

 

is a pucher and a brawler the same thing, my understanding of a brawler is someone who goes toe to toe trading , I dont know if a pressure fighter is a brawler and not many brawler really exist like full on brawlers for the entire fight most have a plan suited to their natural abilites and some guys use it in certain situation , there are fights when gatti boxedand fights where boxers brawled it's such a wide element and it awlays depends on the individual

 

That is why it's a pointless question, even if it was changed to usually it would still be reaching