Rewarding ineffective aggression over clean punching, ring generalship and defense?

I have to agree especially when you see a guy who jabs like Wlad Klitschko and his jab is about as hard as some guys power punches

 

First thing i thought when i saw the title thread was JMM vs Pac 3.
Kotelnik vs Alexander is another.

People scoring ineffective aggression annoy me like no others.

 

The geography isn't really relevant in this case. The fight was actually in Cunningham's home state. But Adamek was the draw with the much larger fanbase, tv deals, etc. ; the future money maker.

 

Bull****, not automatically. A stiff well placed jab > a grazing looping rear-hand shot or cuffing hook.

Yeah, so? :huh That has nothing to do with it. In the amateurs they simply count # of punches.

That's essentially what you're doing by prioritizing "power connects" (anything other than a jab) without regard to how clean or hard they're connecting. You're the one scoring in a more amateur style, emphasizing quantity over quality, the only difference being that you're ignoring jabs instead of including them.

Quality matters. This isn't the amateurs.

A jab can in many instances be more effective than a so-called "power punch".

 

I'm on the side of not rewarding ineffective aggression and I recognize Cunningham was robbed. Let's set that fight aside.

However, let's say you've got a guy like Rigo, who I am a fan of. His whole approach is that he will only engage when he has the advantage. Let you make the mistake and then punish you.

He fights a guy, let's a call him Bald Bull, who comes forward and starts more exchanges. A couple of times he walks up to Rigo's chest, but each blocks the other's punches and then Rigo bails out and they start over. He's not flailing around, looking like a fool, but he has trouble scoring on the elusive fighter. However, Rigo never finds windows to counter and is unable to really execute his game plan. Let's say they each land exactly three, identical punches.

Is it fair to give Rigo's opponent the round, not on blind aggression, but generalship and defense? It seems that you could argue that, Bald Bull is pressing the fight and taking more risk, while Rigo is sitting back and engaging only when he has the advantage. If that is the case, and they both land exactly equally, hasn't Bald Bull done the better defensive job by coming in and initiating and taking all of the risks without leaving any openings? It seems fairly obvious that it is more difficult to maintain your defense when throwing punches and walking through your opponent's full range.

Similarly, could you say that, in terms of generalship, he has said, "OK, fine, I'll be the one to assume most of the risk, create a greater number of opportunities for myself to score and you exploit me if you can, but I'll wager that the best you can do is a stalemate" and been proven right?

Again, none of this applies to a fight like Cunningham/Adamek.

 

In that situation, I'd be inclined to give the edge to Bald Bull, because one could argue that his aggression was effective, in so far as it prevented Rigo Clone from really be able to impliment his game plan. And in terms of ring generalship, it seems that based off that description that the terms of engagement were dictated by and favored Bald Bull.

Therefore, scoring the round 10-9 to Bald Ball isn't at all out of the question and I would likely do so, because his advantages in ring generalship and effective aggression overcame the fact that Rigo was better in terms of defending.

 

Well put.

I am full agreement.

 

There were only 5 Cunningham fans in there, his wife and some of his friends.

 

I understand both arguments and to a degree I get it when casual fans talk about who pressed the action and who ran away.

I personally believe that clean effective punching should take priority as boxing is a disciplined skill and not just a fight.

That being said there are times when aggression isn't overly effective but it makes it clear who the ring general is and by default prevents the opponent attacking during those times I can see rounds going the other way.

I'm not gonna mention the obvious example because it will detract from the thread but for example Ali v young. There are times when Ali is marching forward swinging hitting nothing but he's backing up young and stopping him from firing back. I say Ali wins those exchanges. Especially when young ducks under the ropes to reset. Young might well have outlander Ali in clean punches that night but the combination of the other 3 factors led to me giving Ali 8 of the rounds.

 

TKO6... er... I mean... SD12.

 

Exquisite rebuttal.

Let me know when Adamek makes a quarter of what Lewis earned, or ranks within fifty spots of him on anyone's ATG list. :hi:

 

sd12

 

SD12 isn't near as definitive as TKO6.

 

We need a separate thread called "What's your favourite robbery?".

 

The chance of it being reversed by internet tears is equal though.

SD12.