Im not trying to turn this into a floyd vs pac debate if thats what you think im planning It would be an insult to classify floyd as purely a defensive fighter.
The person with the vest has a gun himself. It's just not as great. He's also able to destroy his opponents' weapons. No one gets to the high levels of boxing without having an effective offense. Too late, your boy mrtony80 has already done it.
But by defensive fighter i didn't just say someone who purely blocks. It involved counter punching. So the bulletproof vest analogy wouldn't quite work in this case. If the defensive guy was countering all night long the judges could give the round to him
yea but pimpC has done the same, except backing mayweather. Which is fine. Pac vs Floyd inevitably ends up being the focal point of nearly every thread on esb nowadays thats why i want to SEE THE DAMM FIGHT HAPPEN Like i said floyd vs pac doesnt isnt what i mean by offense vs defense. Both guys have far more dimensions to their game.
Offense wins. For an overly extreme explanation: Imagine Offensive Fighter throws 200 punches in a round and lands 10. Defensive Fighter throws 5 punches and lands 2, while avoiding 190. Who wins the round?
I know right? I mean considering he has 41 wins and a 61% KO ratio it is very likely. :roll: Come on Big Tone!
lets make this interesting! Opinions seem to be quite polarised on this one! Added a Poll to it now. Please vote
lol my bad. I guess i didnt word my q properly. Was just interested what guys think about the whole offense vs defense thing! Didnt mean for it to get this technical and rigorous
PBF has the best defesne in boxing since a prime Pea Whitaker period.:deal And some may argue even better because he doesn't put himself out of position for the counter like Pea did.:deal
First to vote! Well if we say boxing is punching AND defending. All things being equal the guy who can defend better will win or will have the longer career in general so would win a rematch. Guys who are masters of defense may lose, but guys who are masters of offense are usually destroyed. The reason for this is that if the defensive guy fights a fighter with better offense? He can lose "comfortably" relying on his defense or just wait for spots. If the offensive fighter is out gunned? It will get really ugly. Game over.
Horrible analogy. It would be much better and more realistic if you said Offensive fighter throws 60 punches in a round and lands 15 Defensive fighter throws 40 punches in the round and lands 25 Who wins the round? My scenario is much more likely than yours.hi:
Another thing is, if you look through history, the greatest fighters ever never had a crazily high KO %, suggesting that most weren't simply mad offensive fighters, but must have possessed considerable defensive skills aswel