Does an aggressive style exaggerate a fighter's power?

This thread is ATG stupidity. What the TS is referring to is fighters that fight best coming forward, getting backed up and being less effective, hence their power is less effective, because they fight off the front foot. Wrong...you have completely missed the point. What I am saying is based specifically on a guy like Tyson. Because he rushed at opponents and tried to take their head clean off from the opening bell, and pretty much succeeded every time in the early part of his career, did this aggressive style make people over-exaggerate the level of his power? THAT is the point of this thread. that's what he's talking about???? LOL well then. power comes a lot from your legs. guys that are use to going forward usually is not as good or use to planting their feet properly backing up. that's part of it. Refer to what I said to the other poster. This isn't a thread about the mechanics of power punching and fighting on the front and back foot - that's obvious stuff.

Aggressive fighters knock more dude out yeah. If you can bang you will more likely fight that way. But no the two don't have to go hand in hand. Look at comeback Foreman, he wasn't defensive but he wasn't a crime forward face first guy either. In fact Pac is a boxer more than he's a power guy but most on here wouldn't even know that because he's not Floyd

This thread is ATG stupidity. What the TS is referring to is fighters that fight best coming forward, getting backed up and being less effective, hence their power is less effective, because they fight off the front foot. that's what he's talking about???? LOL well then. power comes a lot from your legs. guys that are use to going forward usually is not as good or use to planting their feet properly backing up. that's part of it.

Yes, but do you then agree or disagree that the type of fighting style aggressive fighters can use can make their power seem greater, when an opponent can't deal with such aggression? from the audience or the opponent pov? either way this topic is too complicated to simplify. too many factors. does the style make him more powerful? or is his power the reason he chose his style? does wearing opponents down make his shots more powerful? or does his power wear the guy down? punching power is hard to define/explain. BUT we know it when we see it. that's why ko ratios and other defining models for power is worthless.

more aggression/active = opponent has to work harder which means they are more tired/worn down fatigue causes your guard to lessen, concentration, etc. more susceptible to getting caught. Yes, but do you then agree or disagree that the type of fighting style aggressive fighters can use can make their power seem greater, when an opponent can't deal with such aggression?

more aggression/active = opponent has to work harder which means they are more tired/worn down fatigue causes your guard to lessen, concentration, etc. more susceptible to getting caught.

I think that this is true, but only to a certain extent. Also aggressive fighters tend to throw more punches than those who fight off the back foot. If you're throwing more, you're more likely to knock someone out or bust up their face. The previous point about being willing to plant the feet and really get into the punch is a good one too which is worth bearing in mind. Good post. Yes, it is obvious that the more you throw withintent, the more chance of a KO. But then does that aggressive style prove anything more about power than someone who takes their time to score a KO later in the fight? I think an aggressive style can make people perceive a certain fighter more powerful than what he might be. But just because an aggressive fighter is nullified, doesn't mean his power is gone. Sure his confidence can be shaken, he might not commit as much, or maybe he just fails to create the opportunities he would normally set (because he's being nullified), but the power is still there. I don't think being aggressive is a guarantee of being perceived as a powerful puncher. Take Juan Diaz for example, he would come forward, and he was very active, but nobody considered him a puncher. Some fighters can't fight as well moving backwards as they can moving forward though, and if a power puncher doesn't get leverage on his shots while moving backwards, he might very well "lose" his power whenever he's backed up. So I guess, in the end it depends on the individual fighter. Good point. Yes, i agree that sometimes it can be down to a specific individual basis.

I think an aggressive style can make people perceive a certain fighter more powerful than what he might be. But just because an aggressive fighter is nullified, doesn't mean his power is gone. Sure his confidence can be shaken, he might not commit as much, or maybe he just fails to create the opportunities he would normally set (because he's being nullified), but the power is still there. I don't think being aggressive is a guarantee of being perceived as a powerful puncher. Take Juan Diaz for example, he would come forward, and he was very active, but nobody considered him a puncher. Some fighters can't fight as well moving backwards as they can moving forward though, and if a power puncher doesn't get leverage on his shots while moving backwards, he might very well "lose" his power whenever he's backed up. So I guess, in the end it depends on the individual fighter.

I think that this is true, but only to a certain extent. Also aggressive fighters tend to throw more punches than those who fight off the back foot. If you're throwing more, you're more likely to knock someone out or bust up their face. The previous point about being willing to plant the feet and really get into the punch is a good one too which is worth bearing in mind.

I think what you see at elite level is a selective bias. Aggressive style boxers who don't have power won't make it to the top. The best KO artists are about timing over pure power in my opinion. With correct timing, you don't necessarily need to be the most powerful though. You can get counter punch KOs and similar. However, this is my point. Timing KOs sometimes show more power, arguably, so it may be that an aggressive fighting style can exaggerate the level of power.

I think what you see at elite level is a selective bias. Aggressive style boxers who don't have power won't make it to the top. The best KO artists are about timing over pure power in my opinion.

I believe Wlad and Lennox have more single punch power than Tyson. Tyson have more explosive power though. I'm not bashing Wlad when I say this. Wlad is a top 10 HW ATG. But if he fought like Tyson? He would have been knocked out 2-3 more times. Yeah, probably. It isn't really a style for taller fighters. Then again, aggression can be different. The early days Wlad was aggressive, but yes you are right, what Tyson had more was the explosiveness. I think explosiveness can be better than raw power in some cases.

A lot of fighters who are come-forward brawler types, (let's take Mike Tyson in his prime for example - a guy who fights toe-to-toe, actively goes out there from the first bell in search and destroy mode), are best known for their crushing power. However, as soon as these fighters are not allowed to be as aggressive, they suddenly seem to lose their killer weapons. Even if they may be landing the same bombs, the power does not seem the same. If an opponent can successfully control range and limit the way in which a fighter can come at him with determination and aggression can basically show the over-exaggeration of someone's power. Or, is the power not over-exaggerated at all, but simply blunted by effective tactics of an opponent? With heavyweights, I don't know - let's take Tyson and maybe Wlad - who hits harder? Tyson was known as a monster puncher because of his ultra-aggressive style. If he got on top of you, it was the end. His power seemed murderous, better than anyone who came before. But say someone like Wlad or Lennox or any other power puncher could fight the same way, as in rushing forward and just laying people out, would it be exactly the same? If so, it is really tough to decide who really is the most powerful. Take other fighters in lower classes too, such as Mattyhsse, Maidana, Provodnikov, hell - even GGG. The 3 former have been controlled, let's say, and their power has failed the test. What I mean by that is that when they are not allowed to be aggressive, they don't seem as powerful. Is their power overrated, or is it just simply tactics from an opponent that can blunt and mask power? In GGG's case, it is simply that no one has been good enough to stop him, but when he cannot be aggressive, will the KO streak end? Same with Wilder, he could be aggressive with bums, but v a more live body he struggled to prove his power. So, people, thoughts? Does aggression sometimes exaggerate a fighter's power, or is the power just as good as it was when people knock out bums or those who allow themselves to be attacked aggressively, but it is just effective tactics that can stop that power being transferred? Discuss.... :boxing: I believe Wlad and Lennox have more single punch power than Tyson. Tyson have more explosive power though. I'm not bashing Wlad when I say this. Wlad is a top 10 HW ATG. But if he fought like Tyson? He would have been knocked out 2-3 more times.

Good post. I generally agree. However, do you think that if feather fisted fighters were very aggressive, they would have more success? Perhaps not, as Bradley tried it v Ruslan and it didn't end well... I agree with you. When there is no power, you have to use other assets (boxing or running as known by NSB "Know it alls"). I don't think you can be agressive while not having any punching power, at least not effectively. Psychology plays a big part in this sport and very few boxers can brag about A+ defense which in my opinion, are the ones who could get away with being agressive while not punching. If you are not getting your opponent's attention with your power, you will never be able to discourage them....unless......you are pitching a shoot out. Again, very few if any can get away with this.

I believe there is a correlation between having power and being agressive. You don't see Miguel Vazquez, Paulie, Ivan Calderon (in his days) and many feather fisted fighters being pressure fighters. Only the guys that are confident on their devastating/KO power are the ones that pressure the action because they know they can finish the fight with a KO. I can't really think of a confimed "feather fisted fighter" who displays an aggresive, "go get them style" (I could be wrong). Boxers with no power tend to be more counter punchers or "I will score when I can and go" type of fighters(can't blame them for utilizing their skills!) So in summary, I think the agressive guys, in general, have legit power whether exagerated or not. Good post. I generally agree. However, do you think that if feather fisted fighters were very aggressive, they would have more success? Perhaps not, as Bradley tried it v Ruslan and it didn't end well...

The answer is yes. not everyone hits hard. not everyone fights in the right style. The way humans work ,word of mouth ,visual effects

I believe there is a correlation between having power and being agressive. You don't see Miguel Vazquez, Paulie, Ivan Calderon (in his days) and many feather fisted fighters being pressure fighters. Only the guys that are confident on their devastating/KO power are the ones that pressure the action because they know they can finish the fight with a KO. I can't really think of a confimed "feather fisted fighter" who displays an aggresive, "go get them style" (I could be wrong). Boxers with no power tend to be more counter punchers or "I will score when I can and go" type of fighters(can't blame them for utilizing their skills!) So in summary, I think the agressive guys, in general, have legit power whether exagerated or not.

power is power. if someone have 1 shot ko power, he can one shot ko someone regardless of style. the aggressive style just puts dude in position to get it in more often. but yes i do agree, when people talk about a fighter's power, they sometimes bunch everything up as a whole. oh hes so powerful = aggressive, brawler, knockouts, entertaining, fan friendly, etc. or no power = runner, defensive, boring, technical, skillful, sweet science, etc

Like any aggressive fighter with power if you control the pace with a hard crisp jab and 3 punch combos you chip away at the fighters confidence and he will deviate from a gameplan or just mentally give up This great thread will go over nsb head though Hah, tell me about it mate, it's going to be drowned out by the generic or repetitive b/s we usually get on NSB. Thanks for your input though, good post. Without thinking about it I think that's a part of a whole when we talk about a fighter having "power". Just the willingness to get in strong stance, take the risk, and throw lots of big shots coming forward with everything behind it. I think thats also behind the "great punchers have bad chins" folklore. It's just that if your really throwing yourself behind the punch, your also exposing yourself a more devastating shot if the guy catches you coming in, rather than if your on your toes moving light. Good points. :boxing: IMO it is really on the opponent. They will either be overwhelmed and sooner or later a shot will get in, end of story. Now on the other hand, if the opponent is able to "tame the beast" by maintaining distance, effective countering, good legwork, etc, and most of all mental toughness. Agood boxer should be able to ward off most brawler types. Yeah, I do agree that power can be negated by the right fighter with the right tactics. But still, hard to say then if the power is overrated if suddenly it has less of an effect.

IMO it is really on the opponent. They will either be overwhelmed and sooner or later a shot will get in, end of story. Now on the other hand, if the opponent is able to "tame the beast" by maintaining distance, effective countering, good legwork, etc, and most of all mental toughness. Agood boxer should be able to ward off most brawler types.