"Post Fight Perception Vs Pre Fight Perception" Another Over Rated Boxing Concept...

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by walk with me, Sep 30, 2009.


  1. walk with me

    walk with me Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,066
    47
    Nov 17, 2007
    Last week I had made a thread about "Effective Aggression" and how that whole concept is totally over rated..... Here is another boxing concept that i think is totally over rated...

    Pre-Fight Perception Vs Post-Fight Perception

    It really annoys me when you point out a certain fighter and his flaws or that he wasnt that good to beging with and then people say

    "well before 'fighter A' Fought _______ Nobody Thought That"


    why should it even matter?

    my golden example of this is oscar de la hoya vs manny pacqiaou...

    there was plenty of evidence to prove that manny pacqiaou was going to beat oscar de la hoya...

    - steve forbes was tagging oscar easily and at one point had him shook (from some reports)
    - oscar had'nt fought at 147 for like 12 years prior to that date


    so the evidence was always there but nobody really thought about it and we needed pacman to actually prove that the evidence was realistic....

    but what kills me is when you refer to these facts... usually the fan of the winning fighter will say something like this...

    "well prior to the fight nobody thought that!"


    what does that really have to do with anything though? the fighter was the same guy before & after the fight and will continue to be that same fighter in most cases.... we just either didnt have enough evidence to know so or didnt really think about it until it was too late... either way it doesnt change the fact that the fighter who lost was succeptiable to certain styles or really wasnt that great to begin with..



    hopefully some of you will get the point i'm trying to make and will follow up with some good responses.... but basically the post fight & pre fight perception of a fighter should always be viewed in the same light....
     
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    #1
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,020
    48,132
    Mar 21, 2007
    What you are doing here is confusing reality with forum politics. You hate it when guys twist reality in support of their beaten fighter.

    The day I don't allow 12 rounds of action to alter the "light" I view a fighter in because of what goes on on an internet forum is the same day they drag me behind a barn and shoot me.
     
    McGrain, Sep 30, 2009
    McGrain, Sep 30, 2009
    #2
  3. pasky2000

    pasky2000 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,119
    0
    Nov 4, 2007
    I agree with this post but in regards to your ''effective aggression'' one...initially it was ''Intelligent pressure'' and you changed it...

    It was well explained as to the difference between effective and intelligent being two separate things !
     
    pasky2000, Sep 30, 2009
    pasky2000, Sep 30, 2009
    #3
  4. walk with me

    walk with me Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,066
    47
    Nov 17, 2007
    nah i mean people say the same thing in real life.... i was at a boxing gym the other day and a couple of the coaches was saying this same **** about pacman vs oscar....


    you know what im saying.. i just typed what i thought it was... i didnt exactly remember
     
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    #4
  5. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,020
    48,132
    Mar 21, 2007

    That's fine.

    But what if you genuinely learn something about a fighter that you didn't see before? Just shut the **** up about it becuase mentioning it isn't "fair play"?
     
    McGrain, Sep 30, 2009
    McGrain, Sep 30, 2009
    #5
  6. walk with me

    walk with me Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,066
    47
    Nov 17, 2007
    how so?

    thats like saying because Christopher Columbus proved the world was round means that we can mention that people honestly thought it was flat because they didnt have means to prove it... and thats not fair play?

    am i wrong or confused here?


    that just means someone was smart enough to see things another way... the true way
     
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    #6
  7. tolindoy

    tolindoy UBESTRIDTE MESTER Full Member

    6,396
    0
    Jan 22, 2009
    nah...mcgrain was right...just STFU:good
     
    tolindoy, Sep 30, 2009
    tolindoy, Sep 30, 2009
    #7
  8. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,020
    48,132
    Mar 21, 2007
    ...ok
     
    McGrain, Sep 30, 2009
    McGrain, Sep 30, 2009
    #8
  9. the_what

    the_what Bolo Punch KO Full Member

    8,031
    0
    Jul 20, 2004
    How do you explain 'fighter a' winning due to strategy only to get blasted by 'fighter b' with 1 punch? ie Campbell/Peden, Foreman/Moorer
     
    the_what, Sep 30, 2009
    the_what, Sep 30, 2009
    #9
  10. walk with me

    walk with me Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,066
    47
    Nov 17, 2007

    you gotta give me a better example than campbell vs peden though... campbell just did some dumb ass ****
     
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    walk with me, Sep 30, 2009
    #10
  11. dimmu

    dimmu New Member Full Member

    81
    0
    Jun 17, 2009
    hindsight is always 20/20. honestly, people like you remind me of those guys watching jeopardy/who-wants-to-be-a-millionaire/law&order/scooby doo who keep shouting "i knew it" almost after every answer and after the show, won't shut up about how they knew everything from the start.

    these so-called facts were overlooked for a reason, some factors like height, reach, etc were supposed to be more important. sure you can always fall back and nitpick the minor stuffs (even if the fighter in question managed to overcome the bigger variables) and try to say that these facts alone were responsible for the outcome of the whole fight, but have you ever tried to stop and think that maybe the other fighter is just that good?

    alot of people find it tough to admit whenever a huge underdog (which they aren't very fond off) wins and will try to find excuses for the upset. They will try everything to discredit the calibre of the competition (past prime, drained, overrated, sick, post surgery, c-class, not african american with green eyes born during a leap year on the night of a full moon with halley's comet visible) and if all else fails... cry steroids...
     
    dimmu, Sep 30, 2009
    dimmu, Sep 30, 2009
    #11
  12. Cobbler

    Cobbler Shoemaker To The Stars Full Member

    19,216
    2
    Dec 10, 2005
    It might just be me, but it seems like you and Walk With Me are trying to argue despite basically being in agreement...
     
    Cobbler, Sep 30, 2009
    Cobbler, Sep 30, 2009
    #12
  13. bladerunner

    bladerunner El Intocable Full Member

    33,921
    133
    Jul 20, 2004
    ****in hell all you do is complaining.
     
    bladerunner, Sep 30, 2009
    bladerunner, Sep 30, 2009
    #13
  14. TFFP

    TFFP The Eskimo

    45,002
    3
    Nov 28, 2007
    Your 'intelligent aggression' point was competely redundant because there are methods that are better than others which is why techniques are taught.

    I don't even understand what you are trying to say here.
     
    TFFP, Sep 30, 2009
    TFFP, Sep 30, 2009
    #14