Tweet
What do you value more in a boxer?
Someone who's entertaining or someone who knows how to win fights?
Discuss.
Someone who's entertaining or someone who knows how to win fights?
Discuss.
-
-
I'd take a guy who can find a way to win vs a guy who goes in there to entertain everyone.. Nothing wrong in entertainment but this is a sport, if I want entertainment I'll go elsewhere & a boxing match is not I'll be thinking..
I firmly believe in "Win today, you can always look good next time"... -
I can see the upside & respect for either approach & it would likely depend on what sort of mood I'm in what I'd prefer to see on any given night. I suppose if push comes to shove the entertainment angle is always fun doe while its more arguably that there is always appeal in the "intelligent boxer" hit & not get hit type guys. I mean I respect the hit & not get hit guys more, but its silly to suggest its not more fun to watch the Tyson, Gatti & Corrales type guys.Comment
-
I value both.
efficiency is important for so many reasons, and efficiency is what I strive for myself in the ring.
Boxing is fighting for entertainment though, it would be foolish to neglect the entertainment aspect of combat.
It's a lesson taught in the film The Gladiator - since the beginning of time, when it comes to spilling blood for entertainment, winning the crowd matters.
If I had to only choose between them, of course efficiency is more important, but you can be an efficient, intelligent, careful fighter, and still entertain the crowd, showboat a bit, goad your opponent.
Just like recievers like to dance in the endzone, just like Deion Sanders would do that little chicken dance walk into the endzone from 10 yards out, so I like to drop my hands and shimmy in front of you in punching distance, I am confident in my reflexes, and i'm feeling it!Comment
-
Tough question really. The two can intersect. There is no rule that states you can't be both. Anyways as to the question. If by knowing how to win you mean someone capable of changing up what they do in the ring to fit their opponent, I would go with that option. I generally prefer fighters that are'nt one trick ponies.Comment
-
you have to provide entertainment one way or the other to get to the top and be remembered. Winning isnt enough on its own. If you arent going to be all action in the ring, you sure as hell have got to cause some excitement out of it.Comment
-
When a fighter sacrifices his efficiency for entertainment it usually means that he just wasn't that efficient at all.Comment
-
Tim Duncan wasn't entertaining but he was efficient.
Allen Iverson wasn't efficient but he was entertaining
One can be argued as a top 5 NBA player all time the other is a borderline top 40-45 player all-time.Comment
-
I'll take entertaining and knows how to win.
Sugar Ray Leonard the best of both worldsComment
Comment