Requirements for a Fight to be considered GREAT?

two fighters will a great level of ability performing at the best of that ability.

 

it depends, both fights come to win rather than not let the other guy win if that makes sense

for example i thought kessler vs calzaghe was a fantastic fight because both boxers went for trying to impose their style

hopkins vs calzaghe, ****ing hell hopkins came to play dirty and land 1 punch then hold, punch then hold, punch then hold and so on

i think as long as two boxers come and look to win a fight will be good, what makes it great is dependant on their performances after they try to win during the fight

 

Ward vs Gatti is one of those.

Not saying its not a great fight to everyone else, but I'm not that big a fan of that trilogy, even though I have a ton of respect for both fighters.

 

for me there are two things that can make a fight great

1) the hype around it, for example cotto vs pac. because of all the hype it was just too involving and i couldnt help but class it as great.

2) back and forth with knockdowns. for instance, dunne vs cordoba

 

Well minutes before coming across this thread, I finished watching Trinidad vs Vargas again. So if you're looking for requirements, look no further than that!

 

Drama.

It could be the drama of sustained brutality without someone wilting (Lopez vs Saad II), the drama of many knockdowns in quick succession (Foreman vs Lyle), or it could be a highly skilled 12 rounds of savage action between two great fighters in their prime (Barrera vs Morales I). A competitive fight with sustained action is a great fight to me.

 

I think it truly depends on the circumstances. Say for example I thought the Froch/Taylor fight was amazing, but of the way it ended, at times the fight was poor. Multiple KD's, a toe to toe war. There are no set criteria, its just when you see a great fight, you know its great. The circumstances in the fight make it great.

 

Great fight; SRL vs Hearns I. The build-up, the styles, the fight, the corners, and finally the result.

 

I find it difficult to enjoy a fight if it is not current, meaning if the outcome is not relevant for the state of the division. So if a fight isn't a recent one of a fighter who's relevant in a division, my enjoyment drops a LOT. For example I recently watched a bunch of Tyson fights and didn't get much of a thrill from them. In fact only the ones against Lewis and Holy I enjoyed.

 

Relevance of whats at stake should be held into account.

If Ward/Gatti I had a lineal title at stake, im sure more would hold it higher than Chico/Castillo I.

 

I think its simple. If you find yourself rewatching it then its a great fight.