Out Boxer Style Killing The Sport?

[Box-Office]

If you have the talent and skills to duck a punch, guess what? You will duck it and not get hit flush with it. Why should you? It is not as if the fans will take care of you afterwards anyways.

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

Nothing is 'killing' boxing. It is unkillable.

Also, those bores who insist outfighting is the pinnacle of the sport are as bad as those who call it running.

good argument, i see some of that as well, i appreciate all styles and understand how hard it is to actually be good at this sport so i give props to them all. I happen to favor the out boxer style

[Weebler I]

if thats all you saw then ur not a boxing fan, how about the constant beating fighter B to the outside with a lead foot and circling to his right EASILY to throw off their attack... how about countering over a fighters strong hand and making them hesitate to throw it? A boxing fan would have noticed and appreciated it! Fighter A won the fight easily using basic techniques.... boxing techniques will take u a long way and should be appreciated by boxing fans!

When you read talk of "killing the sport" you're talking about its mass appeal.

Negative fighters turn off viewers, period. Just as negative football teams do.


I don't know about you, but I like exciting fights. I can tolerate other fights because I'm a boxing fan, but there's no doubt it limits the growth of the sport.

If last weekend was a legendary fight there would have been a huge uptake in people following the sport. It wasn't, so there won't be.

[VG_Addict]

Who are some more pure boxers? I say Lomachenko.

[C.Y.]

if thats all you saw then ur not a boxing fan, how about the constant beating fighter B to the outside with a lead foot and circling to his right EASILY to throw off their attack... how about countering over a fighters strong hand and making them hesitate to throw it? A boxing fan would have noticed and appreciated it! Fighter A won the fight easily using basic techniques.... boxing techniques will take u a long way and should be appreciated by boxing fans!

He's not a true boxing fan

[The Gambler1981]

Well outside boxing isn't the be all and end all, although it can be very effective if employed properly by a longer man (which is why it is called a reach advantage). If a guy is a 1 trick pony they will only go so far, even if it is a great trick.

It is the old Game of Death thing, styles are great but if you get so focused on a style it leads to limitations. So the best style is to not really have a style taking elements when you need them in any situation, being able to do anything and everything.

High end versatility kills boxing especially if a guy is playing to win, but luckily those sort of guys don't normally exist (or last).

[ea22]

When you read talk of "killing the sport" you're talking about its mass appeal.

Negative fighters turn off viewers, period. Just as negative football teams do.


I don't know about you, but I like exciting fights. I can tolerate other fights because I'm a boxing fan, but there's no doubt it limits the growth of the sport.

If last weekend was a legendary fight there would have been a huge uptake in people following the sport. It wasn't, so there won't be.

Indeed and it wouldn't bother me if the scoring was fair and the aggressor got the benefit of the doubt since he is making the fight(like they used to in the old days, you know when boxing was popular). The thing is that a lot of these guys just exploit the scoring system, and its starting to look less and less like a fight. I mean what in the hell happened to effective aggressiveness? Defense should be used to supplement offense not the other way around, after Mayweather had Pacquiao figured out he should have gone for the kill, and done a world of good for boxing. The thing is I don't have anything against "slick" fighters but there is a difference between a James Toney and Floyd Mayweather, one is using his boxing skills to take out his opponent while the other is using them to survive.

The way boxing is scored now rewards fighters who don't take a risk and just look to cruise than the guys who are doing the necessary work to make it a fight. But you know don't take my word for it, the proof is everywhere around you, boxing is not half the sport it used to be.

Link to Evander Holyfield's article, but hell he probably doesn't know **** about boxing right.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/may...for-relevance/

[Weebler I]

Indeed and it wouldn't bother me if the scoring was fair and the aggressor got the benefit of the doubt since he is making the fight(like they used to in the old days, you know when boxing was popular). The thing is that a lot of these guys just exploit the scoring system, and its starting to look less and less like a fight. I mean what in the hell happened to effective aggressiveness? Defense should be used to supplement offense not the other way around, after Mayweather had Pacquiao figured out he should have gone for the kill, and done a world of good for boxing. The thing is I don't have anything against "slick" fighters but there is a difference between a James Toney and Floyd Mayweather, one is using his boxing skills to take out his opponent while the other is using them to survive.

The way boxing is scored now rewards fighters who don't take a risk and just look to cruise than the guys who are doing the necessary work to make it a fight. But you know don't take my word for it, the proof is everywhere around you, boxing is not half the sport it used to be.

Link to Evander Holyfield's article, but hell he probably doesn't know **** about boxing right.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/may...for-relevance/

That's a really good article from Holyfield that people should read.

I thought one of the best points was that other sports update their rules to draw viewers and increase the level of entertainment whereas boxing has failed to evolve and fallen behind as a consequence.

[CANELOLUJAH]

hugging is not a style.

[Porter's Dad]

That's a really good article from Holyfield that people should read.

I thought one of the best points was that other sports update their rules to draw viewers and increase the level of entertainment whereas boxing has failed to evolve and fallen behind as a consequence.

That's an utterly fantastic article.

We really need a revamp of the whole system. Right now, we are in the era where Mayweather is king, and so defence has become so highly valued.

I'm just gonna say it straight - Mayweather's style is cynical and playing the system. His long-time fans and the boxing hipsters will defend it as scientific and artful...but it's **** to watch. Lara against Canelo was another classic case of playing the system. I mean, the dude was ****ing running that fight, and yet somehow he was supposed to have been robbed. **** outta here. He didn't want to fight. He didn't want to engage. Running around, pot-shotting is the easy option. He's relying on Canelo to make the fight, run around and being caught off balance as he does. It's a flipping joke.

As for Mayweather... .so he took part in the three biggest PPVs of all time. You know what else they had in common? They were all dreadful fights.

I don't even blame him for doing it. He makes so much money, while not getting tagged. If he was a new fighter giving these kind of non-engagement performances? He'd be getting less traction and hype than the Charlo brothers.

But hopefully once he retires, people will start evaluating fights in a different way.

Cos this isn't boxing.