If every fight was a Gatti-Ward, how would that make Boxing different from MMA?

[2501]

I've been watching him since his days at the Forum.

Don't be mad that your "pro Dawson" thread failed.

You just pretty much point out your own contradiction you moron.

[johnm is...]

The only problem I have is when one guy is completely outclassing his opponent, is not in any danger and just continues to pitty pat or throw 1-2's and no combinations or anything. Go for the win damnit.

But of course, if that fighter goes for the win, gets caught, and gets knocked out, you'd hear.. "What an idiot, he had the fight won, why would he try to make it a war?" Or something close to that.

[JoeKickAss]

But of course, if that fighter goes for the win, gets caught, and gets knocked out, you'd hear.. "What an idiot, he had the fight won, why would he try to make it a war?" Or something close to that.

That's why I said "not in any danger" aka, the other guys punches aren't hurting him.

[deanrw]

I enjoy all aspects of boxing. To compare MMA to Gatti/Ward though is doing a disservice to those two. Find me an MMA player that can throw beautiful nonstop combination's in proper form like they could and I'll be a monkey's uncle.

[2501]

My point of the thread was not to say that all fighters need to be like Dawson or Floyd, but at the same time all fighters dont need to be Cotto and Pacquiao. If you only watch boxing just for one style alone, then I feel sorry for you.

[PittyPat]

I'd absolutely hate for every boxing match to be a crazy Gatti-Ward or Corrales-Castillo. It would make such rare wars less special if everyone engaged in them and came out looking like a piece of freshly cut meat. Too much of something ruins it, y'know?

As a fan of the sport, I crave a balance between slugfests and chess games. There has to be both, to keep me happy. Occasionally I'll want to see 2 guys smashing the **** out of each other, but most of the time I enjoy a good boxing clinic far more (i.e. the kind that Dawson put on). It's the clever, thinking man's aspect I love the most about boxing.

[deanrw]

My point of the thread was not to say that all fighters need to be like Dawson or Floyd, but at the same time all fighters dont need to be Cotto and Pacquiao. If you only watch boxing just for one style alone, then I feel sorry for you.

That I totally agree with.

[The Gambler1981]

To me the contrast of styles is one of the most interesting aspects of boxing.

Now it is not like rock paper scissors because technical skill matched with speed is very tough to overcome, unless the opponent also has those attributes almost as good plus other advantages.

I enjoy greatly watching how an fighter uses his advantages to the fullest, boxing is much to dangerous to be giving up advantages and letting an opponent off the hook.

I enjoy true excellence; fighters who have honed their skills, worked countless hours to perfect their craft, who understand what their strengths and weaknesses, how to exploit both. To me that is the pinnacle of the sport if you can not enjoy (or atleast appriciate) the best of the best then I really do not see how people like that can truly understand and appriciate the sport. That is kind of sad.

[S.G.]

Some people fail to understand that boxing is a sport and not just two men trying to hurt each other.

[MANGLER]

Still no dry humpin in a slugfest.

And nothin wrong wit technical boxing, long as there's punches thrown in between movement and clinches.