Counter puncher or Stylish slugger?

[FistFest]

In the stamina department...
If you're the type of fighter who wants to last long with minimal effort, being a counter-puncher helps since you basically just react to what your opponent dishes out. A stylish slugger has a greater chance of tiring early. A slugger can give the most crowd satisfying performance though.

[m00ks]

do you watch boxing?

there good boxers caue they sure aren't sluggers

Hearns= Boxer/Puncher
Trinidad= Boxer/Puncher
Morales= Boxer/Puncher
MAB= slugger early/boxer late
Morales=Boxer/puncher
Hagler= Counter puncher
Pac=Slugger
Gatti=Slugger

last I checked how manny PPV has Gatti headlined? what about Pac?

There is a big difference between a boxer/puncher and a slugger. Watch guys like Morales, Tito, Hearns and Hagler box. They could box with the best of them. They all work/worked behind the jab and moved in circles and broke guys down.

a slugger is a guy that is contanlty moving forward.

Like I said.It doesn't matter what style you fight in. Charisma and personality is what sells PPV's

wow I really have to be carefull with my post don't I! Can't have any grey areas or jose will move in for the kill.

Guessed I misinterpreted sluggers with punchers.

Those guys I listed, the fact that they "slugged" it out with their opponents when called upon sure helped with the growth of their respectable fan bases. It is more appealing to the crowd.
I also said in my first post (b4 you got all excited to find an error in my misinterpretation) that you have to be good in either to be successfull (sell ppvs).

Would a successfull counterpuncher be more appealing and likely draw a larger crowd than a successfull slugger? I think so.

[grayfist]

The best ones don't think those styles are mutally exclusive. They know how to do both, though many are known to be one or the other for the reason that they do one better than the other. Having said that, Rocky Marciano was an uncontrite and irrepressible slugger and won all his fights. Joe Frazier lived up to being "Smokin' Joe" and was seldom, if at all, seen to have stretched out to make a jab worthy of the name. Ali was basically a counter-puncher: the "Rope-a-Dope" illustrates that vividly; but he has been seen to have brought the fight to his many of his foes when the opportunity arose. Ali-Frazier I,II and III are classics partly because each was a meeting of two leading exponents of divergent styles. But in those meetings, there were times when Ali surprised Frazier and spectators, when he shifted styles and had spurts when he brought the fight to JOe which put Joe off balance. I think it's both knowing how to counter and slug as well as having the sense when to do one or the other that a fighter should learn so he can adapt to the styles of his opponents.

[m00ks]

**Oh yah jose, I forgot to ask you...slip or knockdown? lol

[FistFest]

wow I really have to be carefull with my post don't I! Can't have any grey areas or jose will move in for the kill.

Guessed I misinterpreted sluggers with punchers.

Those guys I listed, the fact that they "slugged" it out with their opponents when called upon sure helped with the growth of their respectable fan bases. It is more appealing to the crowd.
I also said in my first post (b4 you got all excited to find an error in my misinterpretation) that you have to be good in either to be successfull (sell ppvs).

Would a successfull counterpuncher be more appealing and likely draw a larger crowd than a successfull slugger? I think so.

My fault. My topic was a little vague

[m00ks]

My fault. My topic was a little vague

No no. Just a quick reply form my part without thinking carefully.

[Junito-Rulez]

lol, WTF is that Silva or Rutten? So BS was a MMA forum in the past?