Hit and not get hit. There's a reason why 'hit' goes before 'not get hit'

[Fox McCloud]

Sure you did. And even going by your four criteria, emphasis is placed on offense.

You lose. Again.

He said defense you illiterate ****.

[Mozza]

Perhaps you need to brush up on your boxing history. Do a little search or something and you'll find that a certain boxer of the past has won a round without landing (could be throwing, i'm not sure of that) a single punch. See if you can't figure out who it is. That should keep you entertained for a while and help you obtain some knowledge.

I have heard this story about Pep and I have stated before that I would have scored the round even. In any other sport if you do not attack you cannot win and the same applies to boxing.

[ThaHorseman]

I have heard this story about Pep and I have stated before that I would have scored the round even. In any other sport if you do not attack you cannot win and the same applies to boxing.

I don't understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend. There are FOUR criteria to scoring a boxing match. I didn't make the rules and just because you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue.

[Mozza]

I don't understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend. There are FOUR criteria to scoring a boxing match. I didn't make the rules and just because you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue.

It is simple, whoever lands the most punches wins the round. If nobody lands a punch nobody wins the round.

[ThaHorseman]

It is simple, whoever lands the most punches wins the round. If nobody lands a punch nobody wins the round.

Thats amateurish. I'm not going to try explaining the rules of boxing to you again, but you may want to consider checking them out. Boxing is a great sport, you should get to know about it.

[Mozza]

Thats amateurish. I'm not going to try explaining the rules of boxing to you again, but you may want to consider checking them out. Boxing is a great sport, you should get to know about it.

Essentially what you are saying is that a so-called fighter could win a UD without throwing a single punch. If you can direct me to the rule which backs this up then feel free to do so but until then you can continue wishing everyone fights like Floyd and I'll continue wishing for real fighters.

[ThaHorseman]

Essentially what you are saying is that a so-called fighter could win a UD without throwing a single punch. If you can direct me to the rule which backs this up then feel free to do so but until then you can continue wishing everyone fights like Floyd and I'll continue wishing for real fighters.

In theory, if Pep (or any fighter) won 7 rounds without throwing punches he would get the decision. Am I wrong?

[THE REAL NINJA]

You like the Floyd gyrations more than the Tyson KOs?

Please die.

That's not what I said.
It's like in baseball everyone loves to see the home runs but sometimes a someone like Ozzie Smith comes around and does everything else so well that you can enjoy it just as much as a Bonds home run.

Another thing is that you can watch a good boxing technician and learn something from it , you can't really learn as much from a one round knockout.

[squealpiggy]

Perhaps you need to brush up on your boxing history. Do a little search or something and you'll find that a certain boxer of the past has won a round without landing (could be throwing, i'm not sure of that) a single punch. See if you can't figure out who it is. That should keep you entertained for a while and help you obtain some knowledge.

Ah the apocryphal "Won a round without throwing a punch". That individual was remarkable and was probably the best defensive technician of all time. That he won a round without throwing a punch is remarkable, and is a standout point of boxing. It certainly isn't the norm that a round would be won without attempting to throw punches, hence the oft-quoted round.

If it wasn't remarkable then you may have a point.

Incidentally the individual in question had 65 wins by knockout.

[Tuggers1986]

Ah the apocryphal "Won a round without throwing a punch". That individual was remarkable and was probably the best defensive technician of all time. That he won a round without throwing a punch is remarkable, and is a standout point of boxing. It certainly isn't the norm that a round would be won without attempting to throw punches, hence the oft-quoted round.

If it wasn't remarkable then you may have a point.

Incidentally the individual in question had 65 wins by knockout.

I don't believe this and never will until I see it.