There is a difference between running and moving, but sometimes it feels like the ring size is so big, that it allows fighters to run instead of move. Pacquaio vs Mosley comes to mind because I just thought of it, but there are several other examples involving some damn near unwatchable fighters, both of which reluctant to engage. I don't know if you can solve that, but if anything, it makes it easier to be the aggressor because the guy that refuses to make the fight has to fight more or duck and roll as oppossed to just running. Thoughts?
Let me rephrase your question. Why not just hand fighters like Pacquiao and Donaire the win? It's not fair for boxers to counter power with intelligence and craft.
I like the idea that there is no standard ring size. It makes it so that boxes need to adjust their game plans each time they fight.
Ya I think they probably do actually. I love boxing. Nothing makes me happier then to see a master technician at work. But interms of how to attract more fans. Smaller ring sizes is an obvious idea.
Maybe we should give them weapons too? Personally, I like the idea of randomly introducing wild animals at various stages of the fight. "HUGE left hand by Pacquiao,and hes really starting to get on top, but wait....HERE COMES THE JAGUAR!!...this could get interesting Max!."
it's a good topic. i prefer a bigger ring, if you go back to the 1970s and Ali's title reign, a lot of those fights were in a large ring. if the ring is too small, it feels like rock-em-sock-em robots and if it's too big then punch output might drop and it could be a lateral-motion fest. i think the bigger rings make for more interesting and tactical fights though. that said, it really depends on the fight. Like Berto - Guerrerro i don't think it really mattered how big the ring was because they were content to fight out of the clinch all night. outboxers who work off the jab generally prefer bigger rings, and infighting brawlers probably would prefer the fight in a phone booth, but when you have a mover vs a big puncher, i think larger ring provides a fair balance.
Very similar to baseball stadiums/fields having different dimensions, some parks favor pitching, some favor hitters from a certain side of the plate, etc.....you have to adjust your strategy. Making the fields smaller or standard could lead to more HR's which is crowd pleasing, just as regulating ring sizes or making them smaller could lead to more KO's, but it takes something away also...
I like the room and the versatility of styles you see. I don't want to see a phonebooth brawl every fight.
Rigo would have beat Donaire, regardless of the ring size. He's not a fighter that needs a lot of room to operate; however, if the ring was smaller, it would have been more tiring, and force more engagements. That is good for the sport. Think about the fight tonight. Trout came in there with the intention of stinking out the joint, but Alvarez turned out to be the better boxer.
