The Sheffield / Ingle style of fighting ?

Switch hitting is great and Galahad did well using these tactics against Josh, pot shotting is bull**** though and he didn`t land enoufg, Herol`s pot shotting against McCallum is all that saved him from getting outclassed. Galahad`s defensive fighting was quite good but the clinching was bull, Naz and Graham didn`t clinch like that.

 

I cant make up my mind... I thought some of the work that Galahad did was world class, the way he kept Warrington off his mark to stop him launching his usual 4/5 punch combos was something Josh hasnt seen before. Galahads balance is excellent and he can see openings very well.

However far far too much clinching without releasing and working himself. Lack of output cost him that fight and lets be honest he could easily have been docked points for the holding. In the end Josh ended up following suit as the ref was doing nothing about the clinching.

All through the fight i was kinda expecting Galahad to drop Warrington as Josh became more and careless and off balance trying to land.

Warrington won, most of Galahads work was stuff that you dont get scored for. Yes he frustrated and was awkward as hell but those are not factors involved in scoring a fight.

 

Most Ingle fighters have been bums


Steve 'Superbad' Barnes
Tyan Booth
Kash Ali
Nadeem Siddique
Amer Khan
Atif Shafiq
Adam Etches
Jake Ball

And so on..

Its a journeymans/bums gym mostly

 

Herol Graham, Naz Hamed and Galahad are far better than the above guys you`ve mentioned, Amer Khan?

 

Add Nelson to the list of its graduates.

It's a weird one, the constantly changing footwork and perpetual movement is obviously excellent for defence but it leaves a lot of its adherents woefully lacking firepower unless they are unusually hard hitting to begin with. Galahad was a perfect example. He was so obsessed with not getting hit he was never in place long enough to deliver let's be honest more than about 10 telling punches the whole fight.

This is where Naz was a one-off. He hit like a MW regardless, and the style accentuated it due to his long arms. This is my issue with Liam Williams there actually.

 

[url]http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/196309[/url]

I can't imagine Adam Booth for example wasting his time with the amount of low level fighters the Ingles have had.

 

Witter, Brook and Rhodes were good!

Graham stood McCallum on his head for six rounds, just like he did Eubank in sparring leading up to it.

 

I call it "the style that always falls short at the top"

 

Naseem Hamed never lost a fight with the Ingles.
Johnny Nelson was undefeated world champion for over 6 and a half years until he retired.

 

It’s not a great style to watch most of the time. Most of these ingle fighters when they have a big fight end up being in some real stinkers!

Witter was horrible to watch

but then you look at brook vs porter and brook lands some jabs and counter punches timed to complete perfection!

 

Amer Khan was a junior champion, won every fight as a pro, works for the ambulance service, is a full-time fireman and coaches at the gym as well as being a father.
What have you done with your life?

 

Neither of those guys won vs an elite opponent using the ingle style.

Neither has any ingle fighter.

Overrated trainers and a style over substance approach which is often undressed by sound fundamentals

 

The issue with that style of fighting is that when you come against the elite in your division, are you going to be able to land often enough and demonstrate the control of the fight (ring control) required to win decisions?

I would argue that in most cases, no.
It’s a style that allows you to beat the majority of opposition, but when you get to the top levels, you will come up short.

Naz had bladdering power which meant the style was still effective at the highest level. He didn’t need to land more much to have you hurt.

 

Clinton woods didn't do too bad either