Which is more impressive.. a KO or a clear decisive points victory?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by KuRuPT, Jan 31, 2012.


Page 1 of 3
  1. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,814
    Aug 26, 2011
    I was having a discussion with an excellent poster here on Eastside and we had a little disagreement on which one shows more supremacy. His opinion is essentially that Walcott showed supremacy over Charles because he KO'd him in clear decisive way.. Even though they are 2-2 overall.... but the KO was the most dominating display in the series.

    My view is that a KO doesn't show anymore, and in fact, can show less supremacy than a dominating points victory. A KO can have many more variables on luck involved than a dominating points victory. As in the case with Louis-Walcott... Louis (which not primed and a very good victory mind you) was being ouclassed in their first fight... in the second fight.. much of the same was happening for the majority of the fight and Louis was considreably behind on the cards. He scores a KO when Walcott showboats again. Now regardless of the showboating and really that specific fight... it illustrates my point... You can be losing most of the fight and just happen to catch someone flush and KO them. Did you really show supremacy because you landed one good shot while get dominated for round after round prior? I feel like the way Whitaker beat Ramirez or Nelson... showed a clear boxing superiority.. where the Louis KO of Walcott didn't show me that on the same level. Thoughts?
     
    KuRuPT, Jan 31, 2012
    KuRuPT, Jan 31, 2012
    #1
  2. MAG1965

    MAG1965 Loyal Member banned

    34,796
    65
    Dec 1, 2008
    a legit knockout where a clean punch is landed is better than a decision, although a fight like Benn/Barkley where the 3 knockdown rule was applied and the last knockdown was sort of an off balance slip was not legit.
     
    MAG1965, Jan 31, 2012
    MAG1965, Jan 31, 2012
    #2
  3. the cobra

    the cobra Awesomeizationism! Full Member

    12,028
    106
    Jun 30, 2008
    If you're winning the fight either way, it's always more impressive to get the knockout. It's just so much more decisive.

    Otherwise, it depends on the opponent, eg Decisioning Tommy Hearns is more impressive than (rallying) to stop him while knocking out Ray Mercer is more impressive than decisioning him.
     
    the cobra, Jan 31, 2012
    the cobra, Jan 31, 2012
    #3
  4. curly

    curly Fastest hands in the West Full Member

    2,007
    1
    Nov 29, 2008
    Depends against who. If it is a KO against a fighter with a suspect chin and stamina problems, it may not be as impressive against an equally rated fighter who is a renowned boxer whom you have beaten with a wide UD. Also, some flash KO's can be seen as flukes
     
    curly, Jan 31, 2012
    curly, Jan 31, 2012
    #4
  5. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,814
    Aug 26, 2011
    How can it be more impressive to be losing a fight clearly and without question till the last rounds where you land one punch or two.. than to.. win a clear dominating decision where you didn't lose more than 2 rounds the whole fight? One you showed superiority from the opening bell till the last bell (no luck factors involved) The other, you were getting a boxing clinic and behind on all the cards before catching the guy at the end of the fight.
     
    KuRuPT, Jan 31, 2012
    KuRuPT, Jan 31, 2012
    #5
  6. RockyJim

    RockyJim Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,242
    2,439
    Mar 26, 2005
    Take a win by KO...no questions about the outcome...
     
    RockyJim, Jan 31, 2012
    RockyJim, Jan 31, 2012
    #6
  7. Guyfawkes

    Guyfawkes Than who was phone?! Full Member

    1,446
    8
    Jul 18, 2011
    There are too many variables to think about to really say which one is more impressive
     
    Guyfawkes, Jan 31, 2012
    Guyfawkes, Jan 31, 2012
    #7
  8. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,120
    48,351
    Mar 21, 2007
    A serious domination on the cards is more impressive to me than a knockout. But it's more complicated than that. For a fighter who is known as a puncher to dominate a boxer with boxing is more nourishing for his legacy, and vice-versa.
     
    McGrain, Jan 31, 2012
    McGrain, Jan 31, 2012
    #8
  9. TAC602

    TAC602 Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,672
    6
    Oct 3, 2011
    Problem Solved.

    :deal
     
    TAC602, Jan 31, 2012
    TAC602, Jan 31, 2012
    #9
  10. Steenalized

    Steenalized Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,337
    1
    Sep 20, 2010
    It all depends on the circumstances around and in the fight. Too many variables to answer. But, gun to my head, I say KO.
     
    Steenalized, Jan 31, 2012
    Steenalized, Jan 31, 2012
    #10
  11. ironchamp

    ironchamp Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,365
    1,034
    Sep 5, 2004
    It's hard not to lean or show bias to the KO simply because any potential match between the said fighters will always involve the possibility of a stoppage.

    Fighter A beats fighter B by KO in the 11th round despite losing 8 of the first 10 rounds, all that is remembered is that the KO what separated the two men.

    Fighter A rematches Fighter B this time fighter B wins a wide UD 9-3 in the scorecards.

    They have a rubber match.

    Fighter A stops fighter B in the 10th round despite losing 9 consecutive rounds.

    Fighter A will go down as the winner of the series with no asterisks involved. The clinic that Fighter B put on display for 28 of the 33 rounds that they actually fought will always be take a back seat to the KOs that changed outcome.

    Look, dominating a fighter on the cards is great because it shows supremacy above your opponent but time after time we've constantly seen fighters getting criticized for not getting the opponent outta there; Purists and fans alike prefer the KO. A KO is what makes boxing different from other sports in that all it takes is a moment to achieve victory.

    I am personally more impressed than the KO because ultimately it is the most decisive way to win a fight all things considered.
     
    ironchamp, Jan 31, 2012
    ironchamp, Jan 31, 2012
    #11
  12. slip&counter

    slip&counter Gimme some X's and O's Full Member

    24,813
    20
    Jul 23, 2008
    All things being equal. A clear points victory is more impressive.

    That way a fighter shows his true dominance and all round ability. People can't claim it was a 'fluke' either like they do with Nunn/Kalambay.
     
    slip&counter, Jan 31, 2012
    slip&counter, Jan 31, 2012
    #12
  13. MagnaNasakki

    MagnaNasakki Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,658
    78
    Jan 21, 2006
    A KO is the pinnacle of boxing.

    They are difficult to achieve, and require timing, skill, and foresight.

    I would always take a knockout. What that victory says is "You couldn't get out of the way of the punch that you couldn't take."

    Checkmate. Game over.
     
    MagnaNasakki, Jan 31, 2012
    MagnaNasakki, Jan 31, 2012
    #13
  14. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    82,092
    22,173
    Sep 15, 2009
    Winning a shutout decision is proof you can perform whilst winning.

    Knocking an opponent out is proof you can perform full stop.

    Jersey proved supremacy over charles.

    Louis proved supremacy over jersey.
     
    lufcrazy, Jan 31, 2012
    lufcrazy, Jan 31, 2012
    #14
  15. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,814
    Aug 26, 2011
    I guess that is kinda the crux isn't it Luf.... and maybe I should've asked that question specifically....

    Do other believe Walcott proved Supremacy over Charles while still going 2-2??
     
    KuRuPT, Feb 1, 2012
    KuRuPT, Feb 1, 2012
    #15
Page 1 of 3