is counter punching the hardest way to win a fight these days?

Williams-Lara

 

apparently *******s think u cant win a fight being a counter puncher(marquez) yet mayweather is 42-0.

 

Absolutely no, but your lastname must to be Mayweather

 

I mean the judges can only see 1 angle we watch on TV at every angle zoomed in

the judges cant tell what lands and what doesnt and if one guy is significantly busier it can pay dividends

 

Mayweather is the exception but he is not strictly a counter puncher. He can lead naturally unlike Marquez. CLEAN,EFFECTIVE blows matter more than volume punching but unfortunately most judges go by aggression since they only see a fight from one angle and can't rewind and see if a punch landed or not. Hard not to believe some judges are paid off after seeing some scorecards by them.

 

mauweather
depenfs on the style of the opponent.

 

Not if you tell the world that you're coming to take his head off and you're not leaving it to the hands of the judges . If you say you're not going to run like a ***, you better back it up or else don't be crying if a close decision doesn't go your way.

 

clean effective punching, plain and simple, that's criteria number 1. Doesn't matter if your countering or are the aggressor, that is the main criteria. If a judge gives a guy a round because he's aggressive but not effective while the other guy is countering yet landing cleaner more effective shots then that judge needs to re-evaluate the criteria for scoring a fight(I.E. a lot of judges these days).

 

It does appear that too many judges favor aggression for aggression's sake. On the other hand, the stars & fan favorites are usually the ones with more aggressive styles to begin with, and are more likely to be favored by judges for that reason. So it's not easy to pin causality on the styles themselves, when the styles bring along with them trends for different implications for standing within the sport.

:good

 

this is a really good question, When a fighter decides to play the role of matador you have to take many things into consideration. the counter puncher maybe the more effective; i.e. landing the more accurate and telling shots. but if said fighter cant get the fighters attention/respect, i.e. hits him with good shots and continues to press forward, then it could wind up being the fighters undoing. for example, take iran barkley vs james toney:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMLqQrGDQhw[/ame]


the kind of pressure barkley applied towards toney would either folded any other fighter like a newspaper or take him to a close and narrow, controversial decision. but because of toney's balance, uncanny ability to throw short precise punches in extremely close quarters, world class endurance, constant punch output and use of the ropes he was able to convince the judges he won damn near every second of the fight. he not only matched barkley's offensive output, but he gave it a defensive touch. also notice toney's body language and how he reacts to barkleys pressure, its almost as if he's taking a stroll through the park. even though toney was on the ropes the vast majority of the bout, he was in the drivers seat the entire time. now take dirrell vs froch:


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6fjIw4LeH0&feature=related[/ame]

dirrell is without question the faster and much crisper between the two. but because of the lack of respect froch had for dirrell which allowed him to walk him down without much of a struggle, he was able to win most of the rounds through the judges eyes. dirrell may have landed the more telling blows in the fight, but he never had control of the fight until the late rounds of course. and when you're fighting on foreign soil, being the aggressor against a very negative but at the same time affective opponent will give you the nod through the judges eyes. so it depends on many factors beyond the amount of punches landed

 

i thought Froch won clearly, Dirrel landed good shots but not often enough

he would hold a lot and look for the ref for help and Froch would jsut keep punching, and Froch wasnt missing with everything

if the counter puncher is effective but not busy enough they lose the round

 

To differ a clean and effective blow from a blow that clearly lands, but not as hard, is in many cases hard as hell when you watch a fight in real time.

To win you have to make sure to outland the opponent. Thats just the way it is. If you stubbornly rely on counter punching alone of course it can go down the toilet.

 

It was very hard to tell how well or bad Frochs shot where landing, because Dirrell kept himself moving at all time. But that nosebleed he suffered where most likely not an allergic reaction.