Ring SERIOUSLY hammers modern boxing in favour of classic this month: Punchers

Maybe Ring is taking a hint that many of us prefer the classic days of boxing over today's scene.

 

What about the three contributors, Knight, Goosen ,& Steward, are they ignorant of the nuts and bolts of the game?:think

 

I actually agree with a fair amount of what they say and i saw it first hand at my old gym, the head coach was always saying "Dont worry about power just focus on speed...speed kills...muhammad ali...yada yada yada yada"

 

Ain't it the truth...

 

atsch

I suggest the ignorant writer watches Helenius' brutal knockout of either Peter or Liakhovic.

Also, a Joe Louis comes about every 30 years, how can you realistically expect the absence of one saying anything, at all?

 

It's a good article. I've been bothered by the amount of apparently weak punchers in boxing myself over the past few years.

I've read that the likes of Malignaggi and Calzaghe broke their hands a lot early on, but that can't be true for all. What's more fighters like Hearns broke their hands too, but still retained their power.

A fighter like Tim Bradley, for example, would be more exciting and a much bigger star if he had decent power.

That said there are still some big punchers out there; Pacquiao, Maidana and Cotto to name a few.

 

They're right.

There are some true punchers though.

Donaire, Wlad, Martinez, Pacquiao, Haye, and I'd say, Bute.

Maidana is just a heavy handed slugger, not an explosive puncher, and the jury is still out on Kirkland, but he appears to be of the slugger style too.

The guys I mentioned above got EXPLOSIVE power.

Big difference.

 

I have commented on this more than a few times. There seems to be a heavyweight detente created by the immense size and strength that is almost universal in modern heavies. You see it even in KO punchers like Lewis and Wlad, very safety first approach. It's not so much that they can not punch but that they are only willing to once the risk has been greatly reduced. I think this is just a reality with a division that is bigger and stronger than it has ever been.

I am not sure what this is supposed to mean, especially since the most prominent Finnish fighter right now has produced the most devastating KO's the heavyweight division has seen in the past half a decade or more. Let's just say I have never been impressed with the intellect or worldliness of some of those interviewed or those doing the interviewing. It's written for proles... by proles.

When did this change occur in amateur boxing. Though I do not follow the amateur sport with the same consistency or passion as the pro ranks, I thought it has been about scoring since at least the 70's. Certainly, in recent times, Tzsyu was a devastating puncher who had a long amateur background, as was Lewis, as was Bowe... Is this a plea to bring back guys straight off the docks to do our boxing?

This has a ring of truth to it. However, Steward is a trainer. Why doesn't he change this tendency in his own fighters?

What is this exactly supposed to mean? Do we really believe the human body can be tempered to such a degree by repeated impact? It reminds me of Ali's desire to take shots in sparring to temper his punch resistance which was just garbage.

I think Manny has some good points about training techniques. I wonder what Roach would have to say regarding this topic.

 

The real problem is fighters are more risk adverse in the ring. And yes modern boxing gloves have more padding in them for safety. Even see an MMA event? Those are knock out gloves. There is a huge difference between 6 ounce gloves and 16 ounce gloves.


I have been thinking about what's wrong in boxing. The problem is twofold. The talent level over all is low, and the best fights aren't being made, or happen years after they should have.

 

Boxing is not my kinda' sport anymore. I just stick to the old stuff.

 

Plenty of all time elite punchers today. Donaire is Ray Robinson-esque, Pacquaio probably has the best straight left in history, Wlad's right and left hook are great punches

That's not true, he was as good as he is now pretty much in 2003, he just didn't get his shot

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgwbYUo4LNs[/ame]

 

I'd love to read the article in full. Since the magazine is no longer available here, I'm going to have to go with what's posted. (Thanks for posting this Matt.)
I hope it really stirs up the old v new debate since it makes some valid points.

I don't know about a lack of punchers. I haven't really noticed it, to be honest.

The Finland comment makes sense. Finland is not traditionally a fight country. One or two fighters may make people sit up and take notice, but it's not big on boxing. They produce fantastic rally and F1 drivers, are probably a great country for winter sports, but boxing is not a big deal there, and most likely never will be.
They don't have a culture of it.

 

There are good fights and good fighters still, but I agree it's not quite like it used to be.
I've been trying to catch up more on the modern scene lately though...it's not all bad.

 

I think that's more to do with the difference between an MMA and boxing style. MMA fighters are far more open to punches and they tend to leave their chins out hanging. Aside from that, they aren't only expecting punches, they're open to elbows, backfists, knees, kicks etc..

Like I said earlier in the thread, there was a test between boxing and MMA gloves. The MMA fighter hit harder but when both took their gloves off, the increase in power was the same percentage for both fighters. If the bigger boxing glove reduced power more than an MMA glove does, then the percentage of power increase would be bigger for the boxing glove, which wasn't the case.

I think it is the reason MMA fighters have more cuts though.

 

True.

If i'm not mistaken the first Williams fight was a tough fight for Martinez.

He was dropped a couple (?) of times.

In the second fight he dominated R.Williams from start to finish and looked world class doing it.