They are all about "skill", "hit and not get hit". Yet they are the ones who condone all the dirty stuff, like elbows, clinching, headbutts, etc. If your fighter can't win without that, then he's not as good as you thought. Those moves are all illegal. Most of these elite boxing masters can't win without that. They can't do the whole "hit and not get hit" thing without all kinds of dirty **** in the process. They are so called boxing "purists", but a purist would obviously prefer pure boxing and look down on dirty tactics. They also make fun of brawlers or boxer punchers, yet most of these stick to their fists to do the damage. That's more pure than anything else.
If you judge other fans based on what kind of athletes they enjoy watching some serious self evaluating may be in order. It's not that serious
So if they advocate the latter they cannot be categorized as the former. Defeating ones own argument in the first sentence is an elite level fail.
Like I said in my thread on the subject most sweet science guys are full of **** and have no idea what they're actually watching and they just go with the American or Cuban that runs or clinches a lot and screams "schooled" at the top of their lungs, and when someone they don't happen to be a fan of have immaculate skills they never seem to notice.
Yeah because Ward is the only boxer in history to abuse these tactics. Not like Hopkins just retired and was called "crafty" and "slick" for headbutting, faking low blows and clinching. How can you follow boxing for so long and come up with that answer?
There is quite a bit of irony I see in comments from a lot of you fools with recent happenings. Lots of hypocrites, and you're a special kind of stupid if you think it only goes one way (naturally, opposite of the side of the fence you lay)! I've been sitting here laughing at this forum for the last year and a half, straight comedy.