i feel like you learn more about a fighters ability when he shuts out an opponent (or shutout till TKO)
Which impresses you more KOs or Shutouts?
Collapse
-
IDK man, I was deliberately trying to avoid getting too specific to avoid influencing peoples decisions. Treat it like a mental exercise. Though I would have to say that If the Shutout Maestro managed to get to 30 and 0 without getting any KOs he's probably not laying on many beatings or has had the misfortune of being matched with some real tough hombres or maybe he's got a mean streak and just likes to humiliate his opponent but doesn't really go for the KO, or tries but is merely a bit of a light hitter.Well it really depends. What type of shutout is it? If it's a boring, tip tap shut out with a handful of punches that really matter then I'd favour the KO every day.
Now, if it's a shut out where the guy winning really puts a physical beating on his opponent, like a prime Duran, Leonard or Pacquiao, who put out virtual shutouts against top, top opponents, all the while battering them pillar to post, then this is the most impressive aspect of one's boxing ability.
Plus, I guess it feeds into my blood lust. All that prolonged torture.Last edited by Citizen Koba; 10-30-2016, 05:46 AM.Comment
-
I prefer a prolonged beating, if it ends up being a shut out then great. I feel the best performer in recent years of that type is Pacquiao. In years gone by, it would have been Leonard or Duran.IDK man, I was deliberately trying to avoid getting too specific to avoid influencing peoples decisions. Treat it like a mental exercise. Though I would have to say that If the Shutout Maestro managed to get to 30 and 0 without getting any KOs he's probably not laying on many beatings or has had the misfortune of being matched with some real tough hombres or maybe he's got a mean streak and just likes to humiliate his opponent but doesn't really go for the KO, or tries but is merely a bit of a light hitter.
A KO is always great too though and depending on context, I might prefer that. Tbh, it was amazing seeing Tyson fights as a kid or when Haye manhandled that welsh guy and later Chisora at hw.Comment
-
even though sol is far from talented, the schooling sergio was putting on him was :wank:worthy (until sergio got ****** in the final moments). that shlt could have gone on for 50rds and id love every minute.Comment
-
It takes more skill and risk to commit to knocking someone out than it does to just avoid them and ride the rules for 12 rds.
This was considered common wisdom until a few years ago when suddenly "the sweet science (of bruising)" took on a strange new meaning, mostly to rationalize the predominant style of floundering US-based fighters.Comment
-
hhhhmmmm....i think it takes more balls for a guy with little/no power to face a ko beast. srl vs hearns 1, tell me that wasnt the shlt (even though srl had ''power'').Comment
-
I think they are both impressive when your not expecting it or when it's the underdog that's come and does it. If it was mayweather then we know your getting a shut out its what's expected. But for example I didn't expect kovalev to shut out Hopkins or bradley to ko rios.Comment
-
A fighter who gets the knockout against quality competition but isn't dominating is not impressive.
A fighter who dominates against quality competition and gets the UD is impressive.
Dominating and knocking out a fighter is obviously more impressive than the UD think George Foreman pre Ali.Comment
-
Both are impressive. Entertainment wise the KO's win. In overall boxing talent the 12-0 decisions win.
Its all the same caliber of eliteness in a way. Its just about the type of style/body types/talents a particular fighter has. The KO guy obviously has more abilities in power & aggression that lead to more KO's & the whitewash decision guy has more technical boxing abilities.Comment
Comment