Hit and dont get hit = Skill, Being a pressure fighter = 1 demensional

Calling pressure fighters one dimensional is, in itself, one dimensional. Good job.

the thing is that potshotting is actually easier than pressure fighting, yet everyone in this forum seems to think potshotting = super skills while pressure fighting = bum anyone that has boxed knows, try throwing one or two punches then running off into your defence, now try outworking and ko the guy, floyd(super-mega-ultra skilled boxer) knows this first hand when everytime he tries to pressure a guy ends up on queer street what happened to his super defence? I have to diagree to an extent. If that was the case everyone would pot shot. You have to be willing to dive into your opponent and defensively capable to avoid a counter going in and getting out. If timed right a pot shotter could end up on the knockout real of good counter puncher. Floyd/ Roy are exceptions because they were both naturally capable of going in and getting out in time but more times then not you either get smashed or you look like andre dirrell(falling down everytime you miss the shot) which hardly makes you look good in the judges eyes. I do agree you have to be tougher to be a stalker but I wouldnt necessarily call it a better skill. I will say though that if you are naturally fast and elusive, pot shotting is a lot easier but most guys arent that swift and ring savy.

Fine, pressure fighter is 3-dimensional, and hit and not be hit is 4 dimensional

the thing is that potshotting is actually easier than pressure fighting, yet everyone in this forum seems to think potshotting = super skills while pressure fighting = bum anyone that has boxed knows, try throwing one or two punches then running off into your defence, now try outworking and ko the guy, floyd(super-mega-ultra skilled boxer) knows this first hand when everytime he tries to pressure a guy ends up on queer street what happened to his super defence? I agree that potshotting is much easier, no doubt, a banger who sits inside the eye of the storm takes many more risk himself, while the potshotter doesnt even like to go out in the rain

the thing is that potshotting is actually easier than pressure fighting, yet everyone in this forum seems to think potshotting = super skills while pressure fighting = bum anyone that has boxed knows, try throwing one or two punches then running off into your defence, now try outworking and ko the guy, floyd(super-mega-ultra skilled boxer) knows this first hand when everytime he tries to pressure a guy ends up on queer street what happened to his super defence?

I think the difference is boxing and fighting. The art of boxing is to hit and not get hit. Anyone can fight not everyone can box. Ya but if you can "fight" or brawl in the ring and beat good boxer then it is also part of the "science" of boxing and they are just a different kind of boxer

I absolutely think that being a pressure fighter is a skill, shoot not everyone has the ability and toughness to be a pressure fighter. I think where people really criticize pressure fighters is not that they are unskilled, it's that a lot of them can only fight one way and therefore they have trouble adapting when they are in there with a style that does not fit them well. TS brought up Hagler ( who is absolutely one of my favorite fighters and one of the toughest dudes to ever step into a ring), and Hagler really could adapt and box better than most pressure fighters, but look at his fight with Ray Leonard. Now let's not even get into the outcome because we could start a whole new thread about who really won that fight, but at the end of the day Hagler simply did not adapt to what Leonard was doing (which was essentially running and flurrying at the end of rounds), but still he didn't adapt. Other guys like Margarito, yes tough dude and his style of pressure is absolutely a skill set, but that is absolutely the only way he knows how to fight and he simply cannot adapt regardless of who he is in there with.

How do you guys figure that? those are just two different styles, both are skilled. yes it does take skills to be on your toes have a tight defense and play high speed chess, no doubt. But there is also another element to the game, example Marvin Hagler, Mike Tyson, those guys, who were able to make it a dog fight and go in there for the killing, willing to take one shot to get of a equally good shot or better. So how the hell can you guys sit back and claim that fighters with a boxers style in which they hit and dont get hit is skill, yet the other style is Not skills? I mean it takes skills to win a fight, how you win it and what skills you use to win it is just a matter of difference in styles. But really I want to know why you claim its one demensional? Hit and dont get hit just means you are terriified of being hit like Floyd is. But Floyd vs Hatton was terrible refereeing because you got a boxer and a pressure fighter, and the ref wouldnt allow the pressure style, so ruined the fight.

How do you guys figure that? those are just two different styles, both are skilled. yes it does take skills to be on your toes have a tight defense and play high speed chess, no doubt. But there is also another element to the game, example Marvin Hagler, Mike Tyson, those guys, who were able to make it a dog fight and go in there for the killing, willing to take one shot to get of a equally good shot or better. So how the hell can you guys sit back and claim that fighters with a boxers style in which they hit and dont get hit is skill, yet the other style is Not skills? I mean it takes skills to win a fight, how you win it and what skills you use to win it is just a matter of difference in styles. But really I want to know why you claim its one demensional? I agree with you. They are just two different ways to approach a fight. Hitting and not getting hit usually means that the hits are quicker but not as powerful because you have to be able to pull the punches back and evade counters while reassuming a defensive posture at the same time. Being a pressure fighter usually means that you sit on your punches and keep throwing like you are hitting a punching bag. You may get tagged a bit more because you are close for one, and you also are sitting down on your punches more which makes it harder to pull them back especially if you miss. What usually tends to happen though is that the pressure fighter can wear down the quick, evasive guy by using his weight by leaning on the opponent and his power-packed punches have a cummulative effect that makes it hard to "hit and not get hit" as the fight progresses. Cotto-Margs I is a good example and Rios-Acosta is another good one. Floyd would have worn down had his fight with Ortiz gone the distance....he was getting pinned against the ropes and wasn't looking too hot there. It's one-dimensional from the cpu chair or the couch but not so much when you are in round 5 of a fight and finding yourself almost unable to lift your arms up due to the beating they are taking.

You have a point here. Both are skill sets that wins the fight. However, between a prime Ali and a prime Tyson, who would you pick to win? My common sense tells me to pick Ali, the fighter who get hit less. The reason people would pick a prime ali because of his big reach, height, stamina advantage and he had a granite chin . Ali fights in the outside because of his height and reach. Tyson fights in the inside because of his lack of height and reach. Tyson is far better inside fighter than ali, while ali is far better outside fighter.

I think the difference is boxing and fighting. The art of boxing is to hit and not get hit. Anyone can fight not everyone can box.

How do you guys figure that? those are just two different styles, both are skilled. yes it does take skills to be on your toes have a tight defense and play high speed chess, no doubt. But there is also another element to the game, example Marvin Hagler, Mike Tyson, those guys, who were able to make it a dog fight and go in there for the killing, willing to take one shot to get of a equally good shot or better. So how the hell can you guys sit back and claim that fighters with a boxers style in which they hit and dont get hit is skill, yet the other style is Not skills? I mean it takes skills to win a fight, how you win it and what skills you use to win it is just a matter of difference in styles. But really I want to know why you claim its one demensional? You have a point here. Both are skill sets that win fights. However, between a prime Ali and a prime Tyson, who would you pick to win? My common sense tells me to pick Ali, the fighter who get hit less.

i think u got it all wrong. were u under the impression that the most skilled boxers in the sports history only fight one way??? because if so, then i see where u failed.

Boxing has different style aspects associated with it. It takes skill to apply anyone of them. There are different types of pressure fighters. Winky was a pressure fighter, with a tight,tight defense. He came forward behind & tight guard firing jabs & backing fighters to the ropes then skillfully he placed his shots. Margarito is a pressure fighter that simply follows guys around & hoped his chin held up long enough for him to catch you. 2 different styles of applying pressure with Winky's much more highly skilled. Same thing with slick fighters. There are the Floyd's of the sport, sound in offense & defense & able to make fighters fight his fight. With blazing handspeed but takes steam off of the power to rack up points. Then there was guys like Sugar Ray, also slick but very capable of laying down the power at a time he saw fit to ko his man.

But that doesnt make sense it gets the job done, I mean it takes skill to get someone to fight your fight, I mean sure over all hit and dont get hit is the idea, but if you have a style that is a pressure style or even a great defensive style it takes skill to make sure that your fighting your type of fight through out the fight. thats what skills are. its not that ohh this guy is a pressure fighter he is one demensional, or this guy is a saftey first fighter hes a ***** who runs. it takes skills to fight at your pace and force your style weather your a boxer or a banger. I am just sick of these cats round here acting like there is only one style that means you have skills that is false.... This is somewhat hard to disect. I understand where you're coming from. There are many different style fighters that bring different things to the table.If it works for them, then, hey...how can you knock them? But a skilled fighter to me is one who can master the science of hit and not get hit. For example, Mike Tyson in his prime was a highly skilled fighter. He was on the balls of his feet bobbing and weaving, shooting the jab and making you miss. He was effective coming forward but was just as dangerous countering the opponents jab or straight right. Every punch he threw was precise and accurate. Plus, he banged the body with both hands and threw multiple types of combinations. Thats what I consider masterful boxing, even though he was known as a KO artist. But the past his prime Mike Tyson was far from being skillfull. He never used his jab, the head movement was gone, and he threw 1 punch at a time. That's what I consider 1 dimensional. Hagler in his prime was highly skillfull. He bounced around, used the jab, made you miss, and broke you down with body shots and combinations. But the Hagler that fought Hearns,Mugabi, and Leonard was 1 dimensional. He was much easier to hit and became a brawler. I look at guys like Berto, and Khan. they both are quick and flashy at times, but still 1 dimensional. They haven't mastered the art yet to fully utilize their gifts. A skilled fighter can switch styles and adjust to a fighter in the middle of a bout. That's what skill is to me, being able to master the art of defense and offense. If a boxer takes away one of your main weapons, then you have the skill to use something else in you arsenal. A 1 dimensional fighter can't do this and usually gets beat by the more versitile boxer. So a fighter that takes 2 or 3 shots to get his own off might be a hell of a fighter and warrior,but to say he is skilled, I don't think so. Boxing is the sweet science of hitting and not getting hit.

First and foremost , boxing in its entirety is a skill. But the point of boxing is to get hit, while not getting hit, out pointing your opponent. You don't just need pressure, but effective pressure, also a chin. Some brawlers don't have effective and stalk their opponents , but can't cut the ring off or don't have a chin. Imo a boxer becomes a brawler because his skills might not be as fined tuned as a classic boxer, but on the right day, against the right guy , and the right gameplan they can.win some fights. For example Miguel Acosta is a far better boxer than Rios, but Rios had the stamina, chin and relentless pressure to break him down. The higher skill set is the boxer who hits and doesn't get, ko's are nice, but I like technical boxers and if he ko's his opponent then its a bonus. But the bottom line is, you take the best pressure brawler/boxer against the best high tech classic hit and don't get hit boxer and the latter is gonna win all day.

Most pressure fighters are not that versatile, if they can't get in the other guys business to get them off their game they are not likely to be successful, if that game plan is not successful there is nothing for them to fall back on. In most cases, doesn't mean they aren't tough to beat, or skilled or talented they just have to do their thing one way or another or they won't win. Outside boxers are the same way, if they can't fight their way they will get beat. If a guy can keep a guy outside their best ranges, very tough to overcome that if properly done. A truly skilled slick boxer has options, and versatility kills if a guy can fight both inside and out they are very difficult to deal with but those sort of guys are exceedingly rare.

theres loads of pressure fighters in history who is considered extremely skillful. You're generalizing too much. I dont think so, I rather think that some of the new people to the sport really dont understand this aspect of the game. I aint taking a cheap shot at them I am just pointing out, that alot of them tend to think if you get hit if your a pressure fighter you are one demensional and thats not true. one demnsional basicly means what it say, you only know one way to get the job done. But when you look at alot of these guys like we discussed, they had multiple ways of getting inside making it their fight and getting the job done. I think all to often people assume if your a pressure fighter your easily beatable if a fighter just stays on the out side and sits behind that jab. That is un true

theres loads of pressure fighters in history who is considered extremely skillful. You're generalizing too much.

who said pressure fighters are one dimensional? the dumbasses on that "watch MMA if you don't like boring guys" thing? you can box going forward and show skill doing it a guy like Winky stays in a shell and works off the jab, boxer but he's a sick pressure fighter, walks you down, makes you fight too many idiots trying to critique things they don't know about