Aggression and hard punching is by far the most important part of scoring

You just did a complete 180°..lol Anyway, you mean boxing should remain the same? Cool...

 

100% agree! Now, some guys don't punch as hard as others but if you don't "try" to finish the fight you have nothing to do in a boxing ring.

Boxing is not what it used to be...

 

Lol, so you did and know what you're talking about?! Ha! #SomePeopleDontKnow****AboutBoxing

 

Get off of Pac and GG's **** alt. We saw through your shameful, lame outlook before under another one of your damn alts. The ****ed up thing is that you don't think that we know who your re****ed ass is.:rofl

 

That's just totally false, you think Mike Tyson would have found it easier to box off the back foot? Fighters fight to suit their style based upon their abilities and it's easier if they can impose their style.

You're making sweeping generalisations and coming off looking like you don't know chit about boxing.

 

True, its partly style that is dictated by their physiology. However, this is the pros not the ams. And thus they have to balance the art of running and hugging versus aggression.

I think his point is a lot of guys don't ever bother with that balance and fans sometimes don't give a ****.

 

even leddermen who is naturally bias as hell towards the more offensive fighter (effective or not) stated during broner v antonio demarco that defense should make up about 25 percent of your scoring criteria

id say

effective aggression - 50 percent
defense - 25 percent
ring generalship - 25 percent

 

stick to making alts on a boxing forum. likely not because you were banned but because you were exposed. does our acceptance mean that much to you? im touched

 

I think if you are on the backfoot and countering the sh!t out of some guy coming forward all night...you should probably win the fight. Defensive counter punchers can instill fear too, when their opponent realizes they can't hit them and they get punished with each miss, the guy coming forward falls apart most of the time (his gameplan I mean).




Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

Nope. That's why we're no longer neanderthals. Intelligence matters just as much.

 

If you put a skilled inside boxer and made him box from the outside, he would look foolish against a far superior outer boxer with more range, skill, speed and experience.

Fighters fight to their strength, some fighters have slow reflexes, bad footwork, lack of timing and speed which makes it harder for them to potshot from the outside. Even if you have boxed before you obviously lack common sense.

 

Or both...

Some of the stuff posters write on here astounds me. The other day Blizzy said I was 'sick' for writing that Wilder's career has been frustrating to watch and I'd like to see him fight a top tier heavyweight.

Only on ESB could someone claim that wanting the WBC heavyweight champion of the world actually fight top ranked fighters was 'sick'.

 

if you look carefully at the current boxing rules it is well balanced. the problem is biased or money swayed judging. the people who score should be fixed, not the scoring system itself maybe.

for example if you look closely at the fluid pac fight you can tell just how badly the scoring was done for that. with fluid getting points for landing either ineffectual love taps, blocked punches, and fluffy slaps. and not get points deducted for excessive hugging, arm pulling, and below waistline ducking.

meanwhile some of pacs punches didnt get counted esp the punches he clearly landed when he launched his flurries whilst floyd wad on the ropes. just because floyd shook his head doesnt mean they didnt land or landed hard.

overall pac outboxed mayweather, performing even better defence and counters.. the judges need to get shot for such blatant bias favouritism.