Boxing means different things to different people, and they get different things out of it. I sympathize with you tinman and agree that the guys you mentioned bore or excite me too, but we don't represent everybody. There's guys for whom Smoger's hands free let 'em fight style is preferred, and then there's other's who want Tony Weeks or Kenny Bayless more hands on approach. The sport caters to both tastes at every level. We have the judges that score on aggression and blood, and ones who score on ring generalship and defense. For some fans the purest exhibition of the sport is a man hitting and not getting hit, while for others it's one man completely dominating another, or an action packed even back and forth fight. What's important to understand is that the boxing world isn't monolithic. It has a wide base and attracts many different types of people. The boring dancers have their fans, and the rock em sock ems have theirs. It's like any entertainment medium. You need the romantic comedies, the action flicks, children's cartoons, and the high brow art pictures, and they each come with their own crowd. You cater to them all and you have a thriving business. You cater to one and you might not have any business.
Pac's fans STILL haven't gotten over Pac losing to Floyd, lmao. And how exciting was Pac against Floyd? Hatton and Maidana were more exciting against Floyd than Pac was. Pac was scared to get hit that's why, lol.
I agree with you it's a great post. My biggest thing is just that I believe the "pure boxers" are in the wrong profession. Pro boxing, IMO, is about one guy hurting another. It sounds savage, but if it's not about doing damage and hurting then how is pro boxing different than the amateurs. Which brings me to my thesis. The classic hit and move, but not inflict damage style is an amateurish discipline to me. The prototypical boxer to me (in the pro ranks) is someone like Marco Antonio Barrera to me. Very disciplined, very smart, very tactical. Yet at the same time relentlessly aggressive if given an opening. Will look to inflict damage. Will look to hurt, wants to destroy you.
I'm not criticizing Leonard for not hurting Hagler because Hagler was a great fighter. But I was responding to his post. Leonard didn't hurt Hagler because he didn't have the power and skill to do it. It's just that simple.
Skill?:nut The problem is he didn't need to. That's what you don't and never will understand Pac stan.
Best Answer Ever. This is what I need to use against ***gots who claim that Seattle "WOULD" have won if they ran Marshawn in the last drive. :yep
When you fight above your natural weight class your KO percentage begin to decrease. I think this is common sense.
I think the difference is some people watch exciting fighters and enjoy them, some people just like winners & the boring fighters generally beat the exciting fighters. Some guys just enjoy guys who can make others ineffective, thats a talent in itself.