Should Fighters Be Given Credit For Having A Defense First Style?

TIL Pernell, Toney, and Floyd are "boring" even if they're ATG's. Yawn. I thought PacFU.CKS left?? Pernell and Toney were entertaining defensive fighters. Floyd was when he was young. Guys like Hopkins, Ward, and old Floyd are a different type of defensive fighter. Please try to follow the conversation if you wish to comment, its not rocket science.

UFC has even more man hugging. the defensive first fighters are the equivalent of lay and prayers in the ufc. they take someone down or push them on the fense.. then just cuddle up to them to neutralize their offense. nobody gives them credit for drowning their opponents offense like they do in boxing. OH ANYBODY THAT FIGHTS FLOYD THEIR OFFENSE GOES DOWN! SKILLS! That's cus he's hugging you 10X a round you facken numbnuts

What people fail to realize is that boxing is a sport, and sports is entertainment. I have a lot more respect for a defense-minded boxer who choses to stand in with an opponent and make them miss and then counter (Toney, Whitaker) then a fighter who runs and clinches for 12 rounds (Floyd, Rigo, Lara) and merely wants to win by decision. Fans pay good money for fights, and they should be entertained. Apparently, some of those fans are very easily entertained. Me personally, I feel the best fighters are the ones who are the complete package--Duran, Leonard, Pac, De La Hoya, Arguello, prime Tyson, etc. They have a combination of offense/defense and a style that is entertaining--that's boxing! Truth here. In boxing, there are 2 distinct versions of "defensive" fighters. Those who stay active and fight defensively and those who dance around to reduce actual fight time to only a few seconds a round. I can't think of another sport allow that allows stalling, yet, here we are allowing boxers to drain 2/3 of a round just running around or holding.

What people fail to realize is that boxing is a sport, and sports is entertainment. I have a lot more respect for a defense-minded boxer who choses to stand in with an opponent and make them miss and then counter (Toney, Whitaker) then a fighter who runs and clinches for 12 rounds (Floyd, Rigo, Lara) and merely wants to win by decision. Fans pay good money for fights, and they should be entertained. Apparently, some of those fans are very easily entertained. Me personally, I feel the best fighters are the ones who are the complete package--Duran, Leonard, Pac, De La Hoya, Arguello, prime Tyson, etc. They have a combination of offense/defense and a style that is entertaining--that's boxing!

Can you imagine if this was years ago and the TS said willie pep didn't deserve credit for his style?

No, because they're boring ******* who are bad for the sport they all need to get their purses drastically reduced The UFC fires boring wrestlers all the time, they want KO's to keep the fans entertained and it has worked very well for them boxing should create rules to prevent the defensive minded wusses from stinking up the joint take away points for running and hugging at least Says the guy who's never even had a fight with a 5 year old girl

I don't disagree with this at all. And we all see the impact of it all the time. Tyson made millions & millions cuz he was entertaining more than cuz he was good. And ironically the same thing with Floyd despite his lack of entertainment value for some fans. Floyd entertained outside the ring & got people invested in him losing. If boxing really wants to maximize its revenue it'd change the rules to be more fan friendly. I've talked about this numerous times cuz I think its an underutilized reality boxing has at its disposal. Rules can be altered (penalize holding & avoiding the fight quicker) & equipment changes (lighter gloves creating more KO's) among other changes could make boxing have broader appeal tomorrow. I agree fully with what you're saying on the earnings aspect of it. The thread started asked if they should get credit, which to me they fully should. If they're not DQ'd its technically legal....doing what you can to win gets you credit in my book. Ticket sales and credit are different beasts. Look at the spurs for awhile there, they built up a fantastic team based on solid fundamentals and defense....it was boring but they won and got their credit.

beta cuck detected. "Doesn't matter if the fight is full of hugging and running. as long as you win. I'm happy for you!" - Mindless beta cuckold Everything is about winning. No one cares about the loser. It might not be entertaining to watch, but that's where purses and ticket sales come in. If you're not a fan of winning then you probably should steer clear of competitive sports.

I don't think you can get some form of agreement from our bros here with that type of subject, at least openly. Like when Lara called out Mayweather, his fans were the first to say, "Lara brings no money to the table doe." "It will be boring doe." "Boxing is bidsness doe." "Lara hasn't earned his shot yet doe." All the while they've been saying sweet science, sweet science, hit and not get hit doe, and you'd think they would support such fight. But no, no, no.... It kills me.

boxing is about entertainment. people on here seem to lose track of that. just because it not entertainment to you dose not mean someone cant find it entertainment to them some people think nascar and soccer is exciting I think they both are boring I think you guys forget that not everbody going to agree with you on what entertainment or not

defensive-minded / defense-first fighters deserve as much credit as they earn via a win. the style means nothing if it doesn't produce WINS "looking good" in a loss usually does not come via looking good defensively :lol1:

the defense first style historically is box office poison. the only reason Floyd is popular is because of blatant homosexuality. there's no explanation for it. logically, explain why would a grown man pay to watch a fight and end up with the dude hugging his opponent 100 times to a decision? if you praise that style, you're a dick chugger. it's very simple. why were fighters like Ali, Jack Johnson, Floyd Mayweather, the highest paid and most well known boxers of their day? its more so tears from butthurt fake fans who want to see certain fighters lose.......wonder how mayweather became a cash cow? he realized casuals cant relate to sheer dominance so he turned heel.....made the idiots pay in hopes of seeing him lose, he never did, and laughed all the way to the bank....just like jack johnson and Ali

I post maybe twice a year now because of idiots like the OP. You have clearly NEVER stepped foot into the ring. Try going a round with someone trying to take you out and make them miss the whole round. I bet you couldn't. It takes skill to make world class fighters miss. Not to mention, they don't want to get countered.

should fighters be given credit for taking unnecessary punishment...... boxing is hit and not get hit....wanna go watch rock em sock em robots? find another sport bro. its called the sweet science for a reason.

Just come on out of the closet you f@g:lol1: it's just pure concrete logic. a straight male trait. now logically explain why you would cheer on a fighter that hugs another man 100 times a "fight" to a decision? why do you let him pimp you like that?

the ultimate goal is to make money, it's that simple the defense first style historically is box office poison. the only reason Floyd is popular is because of blatant homosexuality. there's no explanation for it. logically, explain why would a grown man pay to watch a fight and end up with the dude hugging his opponent 100 times to a decision? if you praise that style, you're a dick chugger. it's very simple.

the money comes from it being entertainment, no entertainment= no fans = no money. the ultimate goal is to make money, it's that simple

boxing is about entertainment. people on here seem to lose track of that. Dumbest thing I've ever heard of, boxing is about money, like it or not