Out Boxer Style Killing The Sport?

According to the established rules of the sport. In other words, penalize points for excessive clinching and holding, penalize points for bending below waist level to avoid punches. Not difficult to do. Do it once, get warned. After three warnings, deduct points. After three point deductions, DQ. This is the responsibility of the referee. Any referee found not to be applying the rules fairly and evenly and consistently should be fined and if he continues in the same way, he should be fired as a referee and his certification revoked. As for the judges, they should be given the aid of monitors and have to justify their scores after each round. Basically what it outlined in Holyfield's article. The sport has to evolve. Most other sports have evolved to take advantage of technological advances, now it is boxing's turn to do so. The bold has nothing to do with judging/scoring of fights. I don't have a problem with judges getting help. I personally agreed with someone who said years ago judges should not even be out in the arena ringside because of the crowd & how sometimes they have blocked views of the actual fight. I have no problems with the actual scoring criteria for fights which is Clean punching, Defense, Effective Aggression and Ring generalship. I think far too many people just look at aggression regardless of it being effective. The scoring criteria is not subjective it doesn't say a person gets more points for hitting harder than their opponent and it doesn't say any of the 4 is more important than the other. Too many people try to place their own rules on how to score a fight when the scoring rules are clear.

. How are fights supposed to be properly judged? According to the established rules of the sport. In other words, penalize points for excessive clinching and holding, penalize points for bending below waist level to avoid punches. Not difficult to do. Do it once, get warned. After three warnings, deduct points. After three point deductions, DQ. This is the responsibility of the referee. Any referee found not to be applying the rules fairly and evenly and consistently should be fined and if he continues in the same way, he should be fired as a referee and his certification revoked. As for the judges, they should be given the aid of monitors and have to justify their scores after each round. Basically what it outlined in Holyfield's article. The sport has to evolve. Most other sports have evolved to take advantage of technological advances, now it is boxing's turn to do so.

When you're part of a fight called the 'fight of the century', and the ppv is $100, and ringside seats cost in the THOUSANDS, people expect a very very very good fight. They expect a big statement!!!! When you go out there and just do enough to win and run most of the time instead of FIGHTING!!!!! Then you are hurting the sport!!!!! What good is it to call a fight the fight of the century and tell people to purchase the ppv if you end up stinking up the place??????? People expect more out of someone who calls themself the TBE!!! They expect more out of THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY. IT TAKES TWO TO FIGHT!!! Not one!!! TTTTTTWWWWWWWWOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a joke. again, floyd fought how he usually fights, it was pac man who fought a different fight the fans should be angry at him for not going all balls out like he usually does 48 0

A lot of people seem to feel that way. BKB is perfect for most of them. The more support they get, the better the pool of combatants will be. I'm just not into it myself. From what I heard in a recent Elie video, it seems like Rios is looking to get into BKB to stay busy. Rios in a BKB ring is perfect.

The problem is that they stopped judging fights properly due to Floyd's hype and popularity. Referees stopped enforcing the rules due to the money Floyd brought to the sport, not because his way of 'fighting' improved boxing in any way. The way I look at it, is if you don't want to exchange punches, if you don't want to get hit, if you don't want to FIGHT, if all you want to do is duck and run and hide, then you are in the wrong sport. Boxing is not for you. Try judo where there are no strikes at all, only throws. Or maybe needlepoint. How are fights supposed to be properly judged?

thats always the argument niche boxing fans go to, i know what he is doing, i know how he is doing it, doesn't mean i like it. can you grasp that at least? its not a hard concept You can not like it all you want. Just like I can like it all I want to. Guess what in the end neither one of us is right or wrong in what we prefer to see. I find it strange that people are actually trying to get the rules changed because of what the winner of certain fights is doing. But have nothing to say about what the loser is not doing or learning how to do to stop the winner from imposing their style. Only in boxing. People hated the way Univ of Virginia mens b-ball team slowed the game up this year but nobody said a damn thing about changing the rules to make them play at a more fan friendly pace. All the commentators said you can not like it but they are winning games no matter how ugly it may be to SOME people. The key word in that is "SOME" What all this boils down to that nobody can tell people what they should and shouldn't like. If you like more agressive boxing good for you. If I like more thinking and chess match style of boxing good for me.

Every week some ******* declares (in dramatic fashion and with great pompousness) that boxing is dying or dead, yet here we are. What do you think?

Boxing is hit, and don't get hit. all these ****ing filthy casuals in here who ain't never stepped into a ring before. if someone is "running" from you, learn to ****ing step to your right/left, basic skill really. Though a certain ATG hasn't learned it, despite being "improved". yeah, let's promote a certain style and help eliminate a style of fighting because retards want to see Gatti/Ward every fight....

I like any boxing style as long as the boxer-fighter is truthful and doesn't bend the rules of boxing beyond their limits... This should be obvious...

He never will be in a fight as huge as the Pacquiao fight again, but I don't think he will do bad in future PPVs at all. He is more popular right now than in any point in his career. I know grandmothers that know who Floyd is all of the sudden. And look at the angles for his next fights: in September it will be his "last" fight and next year is 50-0. Both of those would get a ton of coverage and fascinate the public. Yeah, thats why waiting this long was a very astute move. his next fight will have the build up of his "last fight", but we all know hes going to go for 50, and than that will have the build up of obtaining the record. Had he fought Pac, after, lets say Mosley, and the fight played out exactly how this one did he would have not done as well financially from his proceeding fights, imo. The same level of interest would not be there as there is now

Floyd is a out boxer and he has the 3 highest PPV ever. He has fantastic skill. But lets get things straight, people want to see him lose, otherwise if it just him people are coming to see, his fights with no hopers, like Maidana, Guerrero & Marquez would still do extremely well. Floyd has no obligation to anyone the way he fights, but after the Manny fight and seeing how much money that has managed to generate, from a business point of view, its extremely smart waiting all this time rather than fighting in 2008/9, fights out a boring fight and than takes a massive hit in proceeding fights in PPV sales against lesser opponents people have little interest in He never will be in a fight as huge as the Pacquiao fight again, but I don't think he will do bad in future PPVs at all. He is more popular right now than in any point in his career. I know grandmothers that know who Floyd is all of the sudden. And look at the angles for his next fights: in September it will be his "last" fight and next year is 50-0. Both of those would get a ton of coverage and fascinate the public.

A lot of people seem to feel that way. BKB is perfect for most of them. The more support they get, the better the pool of combatants will be. I'm just not into it myself.

Floyd is a out boxer and he has the 3 highest PPV ever. He has fantastic skill. But lets get things straight, people want to see him lose, otherwise if it just him people are coming to see, his fights with no hopers, like Maidana, Guerrero & Marquez would still do extremely well. Floyd has no obligation to anyone the way he fights, but after the Manny fight and seeing how much money that has managed to generate, from a business point of view, its extremely smart waiting all this time rather than fighting in 2008/9, fights out a boring fight and than takes a massive hit in proceeding fights in PPV sales against lesser opponents people have little interest in

The difference is that people like to call someone who sits back playing defense skillful, Yet they call someone who only plays offense a bum, when it's the same one dimensional limitation. i dont call any boxer a bum

Even "hardcores" can barely make it through one of Floyd's fights without getting distracted and counting ceiling tiles. Imagine what it's like for a 17 year old kid who just saw a Tyson/Dempsey/Tua clip to google "best boxer in the world". About 3 minutes into a Floyd fight, we've probably lost them forever. Boxing is better than MMA if you know where to look, but the most visible fighter in this sport makes people allergic to it. His people have brilliantly groomed him for maximum income via celebrity association, fighting on Mexican holidays, bypassing conventional matchmaking and just letting fighters publicly beg for a shot, etc. All very businesslike, but people already have jobs. Every time he fights it's the same anti-climax: "Even my friends who never watch boxing are pumped about this fight because Bieber and TMZ and undefeated and...." "My friends started asking me to change the channel half way through... I told them this is a $100 pay-per-view They started laughing at me". well then they should have been mad at pac man because floyd always fights this way...pac mans job was to force him to fight his way... he sure did handle the running algierie with ease

Movement is part of boxing, no question and is beautiful to watch. The problem that I and a lot of fans see is the disengagement and taking off 10 ft from the action. That is uncalled for and should be penalized. On top of that is the holding and clinching which again kills the action, again those are actions that are supposed to be penalized. Pure defense, is head movement, blocking, evading, slipping and foot movement. Holding, clinching and taking off to the other side of the ring to kill the action is not. That's what the fans of the sport look for. What the fans want and what the boxers want could be two different things. However it's the fans who are paying for it, so you would think their opinions count. most boxers clinch and all the greats used certain things to gain advantage, but nothing will be perfect or ever has... floyd was in front of pac for alot of this fight and pac didnt do much he didnt run much he moved to escape and offset pac mans attack, all im seeing is floyd ran etc these kind of so called fans clearly do not know boxing im re watching the fight now and floyd did not run the whole fight and his style is not killing the sport... and ali was one of the biggest clinchers of all time lol all of the greats use dirty techniques u know thats a part of boxing

The real problem guys dont want to admit is yes Floyd is defensive, but...he still outlanded the offensive guy. Floyd landed as many power punches as manny landed ANY punches. Floyd was close enough to outland pac and made pac miss, pac couldnt avoid Floyds jab or many counters...when has he ever been known to avoid right hands and counters? Floyd is just that good, are they gonna come up with Floyd rules i.e. Jordan rules, cause Floyd is just that damn good and his haters just cant admit it even when the guy that was supposed to be his biggest and best competition according to "fans", got taken to school in "boxing". I guess he just perfected "boxing". Dont hate just appreciate skill. Manny was supposed to be able, with his ferocious offense, to overcome Mayweathers skill and it didnt. People lose at competitive events get over it. Don't rely on compubox. It's not reliable. Mayweather's actual punches landed are less than half of the compubox scores. A big problem with this fight was that everyone relied on compubox numbers. The commentators and Kellerman based it on compubox scores. He was flabbergasted that Pacquiao thought he won. And Pacquiao was flabbergasted that Kellerman thought otherwise.

Is this a true statement? I have seen this posted alot lately and it's very stunning to see supposed boxing fans state this. The sport of boxing has various styles and as a "Boxing" fan i appreciate ALL of them. However i tend to lean towards or favor thinkers in the ring who rely on movement, wearing opponents down, making their opponents look lost and not fight their fight, and making thier opponents pay for mistakes. when i trained in the sport this is they approach I took. Of late this style has been bashed due to the fact a particular fighter has mastered it and uses it to his advantage. But is it true that this style is really ruining boxing? The sport of boxing has survived many years with some of the greatest boxers using this style, while some used their offense a little more others relied more on movement, foot placement, technical aspects, ring IQ, and actually MOVE out of the way when their opponents swing their glove at them in the ring. All of a sudden this style has now been labeled "running" or the fighter is called a coward for not standing still and allowing their opponent to use their strengths... Lets take a look at a list of boxers who have used this style and are high on alot of peoples ATG list to see if this style is killing the sport. The out-boxer (also out-fighter, pure boxer, boxer) is the opposite of the swarmer. The out-boxer seeks to maintain a gap from their opponent and fight with faster, longer range punches. Out-boxers are known for being extremely quick on their feet, which often makes up for a lack of power. Since they rely on the weaker jabs and straights (as opposed to hooks and uppercuts), they tend to win by points decisions rather than by knockout, although some out-boxers can be aggressive and effective punchers. Out-boxers such as Benny Leonard, Gene Tunney, Muhammad Ali, and Larry Holmes have many notable knockouts, but usually preferred to wear down their opponents and outclass them rather than just knock them out. Notable out-boxers include Muhammad Ali, Wilfred Benitez, Cecilia Brækhus, Ezzard Charles, Kid Chocolate, Billy Conn, James J. Corbett, George Dixon, Chris Eubank, Tiger Flowers, Mike Gibbons, Tommy Gibbons, Holly Holm, Larry Holmes, Harold Johnson, Jack Johnson, Junior Jones, Benny Leonard, Tommy Loughran, Joey Maxim, Floyd Mayweather Jr., Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, Ken Overlin, Willie Pep, Maxie Rosenbloom, Barney Ross, Gene Tunney, Jersey Joe Walcott, and Pernell Whitaker. The bottom line is this, casual fans and fans of one style or one fighter are not real boxing fans, this can be okay if you at least respect other styles (read the art of war), but when you come in disrespecting craft and the technical aspect of boxing you to will be disrespected by us and we would like you to stop commenting on the sport we love and grew up on! YOU ARE KILLING BOXING... and polluting the comment sections of every article with your nonsense. I recommend Pu55y, it has helped alot of men.. BYE! Movement is part of boxing, no question and is beautiful to watch. The problem that I and a lot of fans see is the disengagement and taking off 10 ft from the action. That is uncalled for and should be penalized. On top of that is the holding and clinching which again kills the action, again those are actions that are supposed to be penalized. Pure defense, is head movement, blocking, evading, slipping and foot movement. Holding, clinching and taking off to the other side of the ring to kill the action is not. That's what the fans of the sport look for. What the fans want and what the boxers want could be two different things. However it's the fans who are paying for it, so you would think their opinions count.

The difference is that people like to call someone who sits back playing defense skillful, Yet they call someone who only plays offense a bum, when it's the same one dimensional limitation. Well put. It's either a blind-spot borne of not having watched enough fights from different eras, or straight-up hypocrisy. For me at least, the pinnacle in this sport is a man standing in the other guy's range, countering him, out-smarting him, and out-hustling him. A lot of the dudes who talk about the 'sweet science' on this forum need to be sat down and forced to watch prime Mike McCallum until the penny drops.

It makes me sad when someone can't throw an uppercut or find a way to find the targets that still exist. I ain't got time for dumb fighters who can't figure out a different way to skin the cat. Throw an uppercut, when someone is FACING THE OPPOSITE DIRECTIOn while bent below the waist?!! If a punch is thrown while someone is in that position they'd be throwing a foul (kidney/rabbit punch)