what is the point of boxing??

[GunStar]

Coward seems to gets used alot around here to describe some boxers, but no way is someone who goes into that ring to fight for 12 rounds a coward, id say the ones sitting behind their keybaords and talking all this **** about boxers on an internet forum and are usually the ones to never participate in this sport, are the real cowards.

Good karma for you, great post!

[Dynamite Kid]

what is the The point of Boxing ?

from a fans perspective its entertainment & different people apreciate watching different styles ,different fighters etc who provide different things ,
from a fighters point of view its Money self preservation & selling yourself as a product

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

i want to see what peoples opinions are. i think it is to knock the other guy out. that is why they didnt have no judges in the early days and the fight would go on until there was a knockout. that was the days when real men were in boxing not all these cowards and businessman we have today. what do you think is the main objective of boxing??

If the main objective is to knock the other guy out, then why are there judges?

Peso, your goal here is transparent. Lemme ask you: is Perenll Whitaker a great fighter?

[MindBat]

Pot shotting your way to 12 round decisions isn't what the spirit of boxing is about. yes, a fighter like Gatti would have loved to posses silky skills but when ******s say "If you don't like Mayweather, then you know nothing about boxing" are as dumb and ignorant as they proclaim YOU to be. I can appreciate fighters like Floyd, Guzman, Casamayor, but they don't excite me.

If the rule was: 'You can only win if you knock your opponent out', I might agree with you.

But, the sport has come a long way, and today it's evident that there is a science to boxing with rules and regulations that allows one to accomplish the objective of winning by KO, or Decision, within a 12 round period.

The variety of styles just makes for more interesting match ups.

[squealpiggy]

The sport of boxing is about rendering your opponent unable to continue. That's the point. If it were not then there would be no point in recording knockouts (it would be "RSC" or "Referee Stopped Contest" and would be a footnote, not a displayed part of every fighter's record).

The art of boxing is to hit and not get hit, with the principle aim being to render your opponent unable to continue while preventing him from rendering you unable to continue.

The judges are there to decide who won in the event that neither fighter is rendered unable to continue. That means judges are secondary to the referee's count, not the other way around.

[PRboxingfan]

The point of boxing is to WIN.

You try to do this by inflicting more pain/damage to your opponent than he can inflict upon you. If you happen to KO him in the process, great! If not, then at least you try to win a decision based on you being the one who inflicted the most damage. But, the point of boxing, as it is in every other sport, is to win.

[VIVA MEXICO!!!]

If the main objective is to knock the other guy out, then why are there judges?

Peso, your goal here is transparent. Lemme ask you: is Perenll Whitaker a great fighter?

theres judges in case there is no ko you idiot. there used to be rules for real men that you couldnt win unless it was by ko and the fights would go on for hours until someone got laid out. now they try to make the sport safer and it can end without knockout but it has given us many cowards who would rather run than fight. you think guys like mayweather and spinks would be anything special if they had to win by knockout like in the old days??

whitaker is a great fighter who didnt run from his opponent. he went toe to toe even though he was very slick. not sure what the point of your question.

[VIVA MEXICO!!!]

The sport of boxing is about rendering your opponent unable to continue. That's the point. If it were not then there would be no point in recording knockouts (it would be "RSC" or "Referee Stopped Contest" and would be a footnote, not a displayed part of every fighter's record).

The art of boxing is to hit and not get hit, with the principle aim being to render your opponent unable to continue while preventing him from rendering you unable to continue.

The judges are there to decide who won in the event that neither fighter is rendered unable to continue. That means judges are secondary to the referee's count, not the other way around.

plus the judges sometimes dont score the fight right. we just saw that in the casamayor fight. with a knockout there is no doubt who won so the fighters should be trying for the knockout not just to survive 12 rounds.

[Dorian]

if you think about it, Hit and not get hit

[small_warrior]

theres judges in case there is no ko you idiot. there used to be rules for real men that you couldnt win unless it was by ko and the fights would go on for hours until someone got laid out. now they try to make the sport safer and it can end without knockout but it has given us many cowards who would rather run than fight. you think guys like mayweather and spinks would be anything special if they had to win by knockout like in the old days??

whitaker is a great fighter who didnt run from his opponent. he went toe to toe even though he was very slick. not sure what the point of your question.

Stop calling everyone a coward, a fighter is no coward. You open your mouth a lot, i don't even know if you stood already in a ring. There is no shame when youy are not a fighter but then you shouldn't talk **** like you do