Boxer or Brawler
Collapse
-
I like both, just give me a good fight. If I had to pick, though, I would probably go with boxing. I can always appreciate good technique, even if the fight isn't that good. If you're just a raw brawler and the fight is only average or good, I'm not interested.Comment
-
I think the best fights are boxer vs swarmer, brawler, or slugger though
Mayweather vs Hatton
Hopkins vs Trinidad
WHitaker vs Chavez
"Boxing" shines its brightest when used against swarmers, brawlers, and sluggers. It really makes "boxing" distinct and different from just plain ol fighting.Comment
-
Quoted for mother****ing truth.
You guys can thank the latinos mostly for this.Comment
-
-
Comment
-
Give me a brawler with some one quitta hitta power and that's my favorite to watch. You just can't beat the excitement of 2 men with big heart exchanging huge punches and then if it ends with a brutal KO.
Arturo Gatti, Mickey Ward, James Kirkland, Tyson, Kasiditis ect.
If I was a boxer I'd be a boxer/puncher though. They kick ass as well. Cotto is the perfect example. Not to mention he's as exciting as *****.
I think the worst fight is 2 technicians going at it. It's just so boring watching 2 fighters just circle all night with just a few jabs here and there that hardly even land at all. A brawler or boxer/puncher bring the excitement into boxing.Comment
-
If the sport was nothing but Mayweathers, Calderons, Broners, it would NOT be on TV. The sport was built commercially on brawlers and boxer/punchers. Historically, pure boxers or "boring" fighters have had to utilize additional methods to sell fights such as taking on a loud, brash, trash talking persona to generate public interests or throwing down flags of the opposing fighter's country.Comment
Comment