Different things seem to impress fans from certain countries

[Sparked_1985]

I came to this conclusion after the Khan fight and the extremely positive (certainly on this board) reaction he recieved from our American cousins.

Does the American fight fan value knockouts more than anyone else?

Because as a Khan fan, he didn't really show me too much I didn't already know. Apart from the way he didn't just spoil his own work after he had Salita hurt. I knew Khan could punch when he sat down on his punches. I knew Khan was unbelievably fast. I knew Khan was accurate. I knew all these things. He's displayed them all before, before Prescott, and before Freddie Roach. He's shown them against fighters like Michael Gomez and Graham Earl and we can't for definete say that Salita is better than either of those two men.

On the undercard. Kevin Mitchell managed to emerge from fighting Breidis Prescott with Prescott managing to land just 11% of his punches and most of those landed to the body. Kevin Mitchell was a guy that so far in his career had only showed an appetite for war and would take and give punishment. He was a front foot fighter, he never took a backward step. When he got hurt it was a red rag to a bull - he'd start swinging for the cheap seats. Cue, the Prescott fight and a change to boxing off the backfoot for large periods and -Prescott couldn't hit him with anything. And, when he did. What happened?......nothing, absolutely nothing. Not a blink, not a grimace. Nothing.

I can't help but feel Kevin showed us far far more than Amir Khan did. I guess this is a global forum, so Kevin might end up getting more praise in the British boxing publications.

But Mitchell to me was more impressive. He showed an ability to stick to a gameplan. An iron chin. A great defence. A big heart to take risks to get inside and land bombs on his man and ultimately back up and batter the bigger man.

All this in his first fight at a new weight against the biggest guy in the division.

Anyway. It's understandable as there is more hype about Khan, but he got more praise than I expected. I guess Americans really love those knockouts.

British fans tend to value heart over most things like the Mexicans. What are the characteristics other nations?

[Clyde Barrow]

Fuck the countries. It's the individuals.

[Sparked_1985]

Fuck the countries. It's the individuals.

you say that.

But you can generalise. That's the point of this.

[tredh]

It doesn't matter what country you are from KO artist will always be more loved and get more exposure than a boxer or any other fighter who doesn't consistently get KO's. Majority of people give more credit to KO punchers because they seem to be more impressed by that than if a fighter a completely dominates fighter b for 12 rounds. Its just the way things are. Both are impressive to me in most cases.

[tnf1400]

I think in general American's enjoy the KO, but who doesn't.

As an American, I myself tend to support the boxers that I enjoy to watch. Like Andre Ward for example, many would have found that his victory over Kessler was pretty boring with the holding and such. I found it quite entertaining only because my fighter was winning.

I do understand what you are saying with the Mitchell fight and it is a good example. He showed me much more than Khan did and I was expecting to hear great things on this board, nope.

[Easy-E]

Wait Prescott is the biggest guy in that division?
Since when?

[Sparked_1985]

It doesn't matter what country you are from KO artist will always be more loved and get more exposure than a boxer or any other fighter who doesn't consistently get KO's. Majority of people give more credit to KO punchers because they seem to be more impressed by that than if a fighter a completely dominates fighter b for 12 rounds. Its just the way things are. Both are impressive to me in most cases.

I guess your right in a sense.

The thirst for KO's definetely effects how fights are judged.

Especially in America but also most countries. The fighter who is in perpetual forward motion will pick up cheap rounds.

I'll be absolutely fascinated if May/Pac goes 12 to see what the judge do. Because without a punch being thrown and the current ethos of judges in America Pacman has to be the favourite to get the nod in close rounds.

[Sparked_1985]

Wait Prescott is the biggest guy in that division?
Since when?

Biggest in length.

Maybe Funeka?

You know what I mean.

[Easy-E]

Biggest in length.

Maybe Funeka?

You know what I mean.

Well do you mean tallest? Heaviest? or biggest as in star power?

[tredh]

I guess your right in a sense.

The thirst for KO's definetely effects how fights are judged.

Especially in America but also most countries. The fighter who is in perpetual forward motion will pick up cheap rounds.

I'll be absolutely fascinated if May/Pac goes 12 to see what the judge do. Because without a punch being thrown and the current ethos of judges in America Pacman has to be the favourite to get the nod in close rounds.

You are right that most of the time come forward fighters with get the benefit of the doubt in a close round. The difference with PBF is that even though the other fighter is coming forward PBF's defense makes it so easy to see that the guy is not landing those punches either by missing badly, a clear block of the punch by PBF or PBF rolls with the punch so it doesnt look like a good clean landing punch. In turn PBF counter punches to those missed shots are so clear it doesn't matter that he is not coming forwward or the busier fighter. PBF lands the cleaner and harder looking shots in his fights. If judges truly judge a fight according to rules of boxing you get points for effective aggression not ineffective aggression. You also get points for defense. So with the way PBF makes fights look he is making the fighters aggression look inffective and his defense is great.