amatuer boxing can someone help me understand this??

[PunchDrunk]

why is everyone on here for a forum is to discuse issues if you found this issue ****** or what not why reply just move on and i am not bitching i lost it is a L no doubt i was just speakin out on my experience of getting robbed like i am sure every amatuer fighter has been through fighting in someone else is back yard...

That's cool. I just tend to get a little offended when someone disses a sport that I live and breathe for.

[spanishdred]

tru punchdrunk your right me and my trainer are going to do that

[totalstranga]

to produce guys with great amatuer records like Jeremy Monster Williams who get KTFO by Akinwande and cost me money.

Okay that was bitter, but it develops young talent. You can't turn pro until you are 18 so, it helps those who are very talented refine those skills at a young age

[Deeznuts]

You mean as good as Zelenoff?

It's just a different sport. Look at a guy like Gamboa (or any other top 10 am in the world), are you telling me he wasn't good enough to go pro when he won the Olympics? Truth is, the top ams are better than 99% of the pro fighters out there. They just compete under a different format.

Better at what???? at amateur boxing yea, at pro no. Amateurs that are good in the amateurs are not necessarily good at pro. Pro has more rounds and no headgear

[PunchDrunk]

Better at what???? at amateur boxing yea, at pro no. Amateurs that are good in the amateurs are not necessarily good at pro. Pro has more rounds and no headgear

That is a point I've already made myself. Good pro's aren't necessarily good ams either, so that goes both ways.

Gamboa would beat 99% of the pro's in his division, right out of the Olympics though. Bear in mind that 95% of the pro's haven't gone 12 round either. Top5-10 guys would give him a hard time in a long fight though. Not because of boxing ability, but because of pro experience. The fact remains; top ams are better than 99% of the pro's out there.

[guzi815]

whats the point of it??

It's like playing College ball...that will determine if you make it to the Pro's. You are probably basing this on the fact that Kobe Bryant, Lebron James..and a hand full of others, went straight into the NBA from High School, skipping College. Some athletes are gifted like that. But a contact sport such as Football and Boxing...man, you gotta crawl before you can walk...there is where you learn how to take a hit...there aint no skipping into the Pros. The art of fighting requires tactical skills, skills you must develope. And that can only come with time.

[Ryn0]

The goal is obviously effectiveness. If you land more punches than your opponent, you'll win. Since the fights are so short, aggression can be a great ally, but you can also counterboxand win, just like in the pro's.

Furthermore, unlike what people who don't really know what they're taking about say, harder punching will give you an advantage. The harder the punch, the bigger the chance of the judges seeing it, and rewarding it. I watch over 1,000 am fights a year from beginners to world level, and it is much more common for a guy throwing harder punches yet landing less to get a win, than a featherfisted guy getting a win over a heavier puncher in a remotely close fight. Especially in the last few years, where the number of registered punches in bouts have gone down considerably.

Actually i think the reason for the lowered number of punches scored is because they changed the rules ( i think) they no longer count inside punches they give a point (or two) to the fighter that they think got the better in the inside exchanges.

[squealpiggy]

That is a point I've already made myself. Good pro's aren't necessarily good ams either, so that goes both ways.

Gamboa would beat 99% of the pro's in his division, right out of the Olympics though. Bear in mind that 95% of the pro's haven't gone 12 round either. Top5-10 guys would give him a hard time in a long fight though. Not because of boxing ability, but because of pro experience. The fact remains; top ams are better than 99% of the pro's out there.

Top pros tend to have been good amateurs (good showing at the world championships, olympics, multiple golden gloves wins etc).

[PunchDrunk]

Actually i think the reason for the lowered number of punches scored is because they changed the rules ( i think) they no longer count inside punches they give a point (or two) to the fighter that they think got the better in the inside exchanges.

Not correct. They've simply changed the judges guidelines as to what constitutes a legitimate scoring blow. The reason inside punches tend to not score so well is that they're hard to see from more than one angle, and if only one judge sees it, it won't score on the combined scored of all the judges.

[BrooklynBomber]

Not correct. They've simply changed the judges guidelines as to what constitutes a legitimate scoring blow. The reason inside punches tend to not score so well is that they're hard to see from more than one angle, and if only one judge sees it, it won't score on the combined scored of all the judges.

Yeah, what he said. The judging system is setup so that the blow is only scored when all the judges see you land the punch. That's why amateur boxing suits the best guys with a style that constitues a lot of moving, straight punches and outside work, along with a relatively low workrate.