A fighter just runs over a good or great fighter. Just goes to toe to toe no pretense for defense and eat all the punches like like they're nothing. And then obliterates them. Or a technical masterpiece? Where they take a methodical approach and slowly break down their opponent.
Can't I respect both, it takes as much work either way, even Froch said 'nobody likes getting hit in the face'.
So you would be more impressed with Leonard-Benitez than Hagler-Hearns assuming both opponents were similar quality?
But it depends how you are limiting the word 'impressive', not only one type of fight connotes to 'impressive' after all as a sunrise or full moon are not attached exclusively to opposite interpretations.
Of course a fight like Marquez vs Pacquiao is going to be a stunning, jaw dropping, blood-soaked classic each time, frenetic chess with the pieces wielding blades and screaming at one another for the whole three minutes but a Leonard vs Benitez has so many damn layers brewing beneath the surface you see, patience and bluffing, a staring contest over the board until somebody makes a mistake and pays for it dearly, it's a completely different intensity but both are AS intense... hard to explain. I understand why people prefer one or the other but not why they don't appreciate the two approaches. And of course some boxer can engage in both approaches or is only skilled in one particular side of the line and it's intriguing when they're taken out of their comfort zone.
the first one is better because they are winning against a great fighter. there is waay more shock value cause its unexpected.
I can respect both it just depends on level of opponent, in some situations a 12-0 shut out can be more disabilitating. A guy trying his hardest to no prevail not even a slim hope of landing anything for 12 rds can break a guy mentally because, you know no matter how hard you go you can't do anything. A competitive KO sometimes leads a fighter to believe with a few changes they have a chance. The opposite is true as well though so it's a case by case thing.
**** that. Offense is just as much a masterpiece as defense, and more entertaining. Knockouts are better than decisions.
It all depends the general casual boxing fans love a knockout, whilst others appreciate the finer art of boxing, but whilst I do enjoy both I think I need the right balance of both to keep it interesting.