Do you guys like Ward's style?

[j.razor]

He was beaten when Kovalev showed him too much respect. In the rematch, Kovalev will be like a shark. He has no hope at this point.

See me June 18th....

[j.razor]

Except I said Jacobs beat Golovkin? Now your whole agenda idea is ruined.

rrrriiiiggghhhhttt but you portray Ward losing. Please.

[Vegemil]

rrrriiiiggghhhhttt but you portray Ward losing. Please.

So because I like one black fighter I have to like the other? Bit of a racist aren't you? Or are you gonna bring up their styles which are nothing alike?

[j.razor]

So because I like one black fighter I have to like the other? Bit of a racist aren't you? Or are you gonna bring up their styles which are nothing alike?

Black fighter? racist? What are you talking bout? Never mind. Oh, and "Pretty Boy" Floyd "Money" Mayweather Jr. is T.B.E. figure I throw that in there. Peace.

[Ham Porter]

He's okay to watch when he's boxing on the outside and not disrupting the flow of the fight with excessive mauling and clinching up close.

[Jewish-Reptile]

I like winning styles, Ward I actually find entertaining in that sense. Each to their own I can understand why he's not liked by a select few the rest on here I put it down to can't bare another American to be on top of the sport again which is tough because they're going to have to get used to it.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Following the rules is something that is generally expected. Rule breakers usually get booed and for good reasons. Now, do fouls happen and many times unintentionally? Yes, they do. However, this doesn't mean some fighters don't cheat on a regular basis and due to poor officiating, they get away with it. This is always a black eye to the sport when cheating goes unpunished. Fans lose respect for the sport. If a guy can get by with that, what's the point? I see every foul called in basketball. After enough fouls, you're out of the game. Life isn't fair, but in a sport where we can control the elements at work, fairness is expected when it comes to rule breakers. The sport only suffers when cheaters get away with cheating. Bad decisions too but that's a different topic.

And yes, some styles I like and others I don't. But different styles make the sport interesting. I wouldn't have that any other way. I will say that there has become a sort of A-side fighter type thinking where the B-side fighter has to knock A out or beat him every round overwhelmingly and put up with his cheating to beat him. That has to stop. A win is a win regardless of who either fighter is.

Following the rules is something that is generally expected. Rule breakers usually get booed and for good reasons. Now, do fouls happen and many times unintentionally? Yes, they do. However, this doesn't mean some fighters don't cheat on a regular basis and due to poor officiating, they get away with it. This is always a black eye to the sport when cheating goes unpunished. Fans lose respect for the sport. If a guy can get by with that, what's the point? I see every foul called in basketball. After enough fouls, you're out of the game. Life isn't fair, but in a sport where we can control the elements at work, fairness is expected when it comes to rule breakers. The sport only suffers when cheaters get away with cheating. Bad decisions too but that's a different topic.

And yes, some styles I like and others I don't. But different styles make the sport interesting. I wouldn't have that any other way. I will say that there has become a sort of A-side fighter type thinking where the B-side fighter has to knock A out or beat him every round overwhelmingly and put up with his cheating to beat him. That has to stop. A win is a win regardless of who either fighter is.

Couldn't agree any more. There is a difference and a fine line between a CONSISTENT rule breaker and a rare, occasional rule breaker. When a specific illegal move is performed consistently over and over again, it becomes clear and fair to conclude at that point that the illegal move is being performed intentionally. However, if a boxer performs a rare illegal move without it happening consistently, it can be passed off as an unintentional move.

If a boxer consistently performs an illegal move such as Andre Ward headbutting and clinching, then it simply isn't possible to classify that as an 'unintentional' move. A rule being broken consistently can't be classified as 'unintentional'. Only if the rule is broken on rare occasions can an illegal move being performed be classified as 'unintentional', such as GGG unintentionally and accidentally punching an opponent below the belt the odd one or two times during a fight.

Also, the justification for breaking the rules and performing illegal moves that I come across very often is 'boxing is fighting and fighting is meant to be dirty, thus illegal moves are justified as acceptable'. Or claims like 'it isn't possible to distinguish when a rule is being broken to when it isn't being broken'. All of these claims are horrible excuses and justifications for excusing and justifying a boxer breaking the rules, just so that the boxer in question can be exempt from valid criticism.

Firstly, what does that say about a boxer like Andre Ward who breaks multiple rules in his bouts in a consistent basis intentionally, yet rarely scores convincing knockouts over even low quality opposition, never mind top quality opposition, whilst having to almost always win nearly every fight by the smallest possible margin (winning by decision whilst inflicting minimal damage upon the opponent)? On the other hand, boxers like GGG and Sergey Kovalev who never appear to use any illegal moves or break the rules consistently and intentionally, yet almost always knock nearly every one of their opponent out in every fight. Or at the very least, inflict significantly more damage on their opponents than Andre Ward does. What does that tell us about Sergey Kovalev and GGG who despite not breaking any rules, win their fights far more convincingly against simular calibur of opposition than Andre Ward does even though Andre Ward consistently break rules? There is no way Andre Ward deserves to be ranked as more skilled boxer than GGG or Sergey Kovalev with that being the case!

GGG and Sergey Kovalev are clear examples of why performing illegal moves isn't necessary. They debunk the notion that "boxing is fighting and fighting is meant to be dirty, thus illegal moves are justified / acceptable" when you take into consideration that boxers like GGG & Kovalev (who rarely break the rules of boxing) win their fights more convincingly (by knockout or by inflicting greater damage upon their opponents) than Andre Ward (who consistently breaks the rules of boxing and still has to settle for decision wins whilst barely inflicting any damage on most of his opponents).

As far as the second justification, boxing has very clear rules to establish when a boxer is breaking the rules or not. So that's also an unacceptable justification for breaking the rules.

Also, I totally agree that some boxers are handicapped into having to win their bouts by a bigger margin than their opponent, which is not providing equal rules to both boxers. It's as if Sergey Kovalev must KO Ward or beat him to the brink of death in every round to get a victory. Whereas, any round where Both Kovalev and Ward are equally effective, Ward will win that round by default and then some people will start praising Ward for how Ward 'schooled' Kovalev in that round even though the round was equal where neither guy did anything special. It's like for every goal one Football (soccer) team scores, the opposition has to score 3 more in order to equal that one goal. Just like how Kovalev has to land 3 more extra punches than Ward in order for Kovalev to get the same credit as Ward

As far as I'm concerned, equal rules should be applied for every boxer. Kovalev doesn't have to do anything extra to beat Ward. If Ward is given credit for surviving and not getting knocked out by the end of the fight, then so should Kovalev for not even having to survive at all and not only lasting the full distance without getting knocked out, but coming closer to knocking out Ward than vice versa.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Couldn't agree any more. There is a difference and a fine line between a CONSISTENT rule breaker and a rare, occasional rule breaker. When a specific illegal move is performed consistently over and over again, it becomes clear and fair to conclude at that point that the illegal move is being performed intentionally. However, if a boxer performs a rare illegal move without it happening consistently, it can be passed off as an unintentional move.

If a boxer consistently performs an illegal move such as Andre Ward headbutting and clinching, then it simply isn't possible to classify that as an 'unintentional' move. A rule being broken consistently can't be classified as 'unintentional'. Only if the rule is broken on rare occasions can an illegal move being performed be classified as 'unintentional', such as GGG unintentionally and accidentally punching an opponent below the belt the odd one or two times during a fight.

Also, the justification for breaking the rules and performing illegal moves that I come across very often is 'boxing is fighting and fighting is meant to be dirty, thus illegal moves are justified as acceptable'. Or claims like 'it isn't possible to distinguish when a rule is being broken to when it isn't being broken'. All of these claims are horrible excuses and justifications for excusing and justifying a boxer breaking the rules, just so that the boxer in question can be exempt from valid criticism.

Firstly, what does that say about a boxer like Andre Ward who breaks multiple rules in his bouts in a consistent basis intentionally, yet rarely scores convincing knockouts over even low quality opposition, never mind top quality opposition, whilst having to almost always win nearly every fight by the smallest possible margin (winning by decision whilst inflicting minimal damage upon the opponent)? On the other hand, boxers like GGG and Sergey Kovalev who never appear to use any illegal moves or break the rules consistently and intentionally, yet almost always knock nearly every one of their opponent out in every fight. Or at the very least, inflict significantly more damage on their opponents than Andre Ward does. What does that tell us about Sergey Kovalev and GGG who despite not breaking any rules, win their fights far more convincingly against simular calibur of opposition than Andre Ward does even though Andre Ward consistently break rules? There is no way Andre Ward deserves to be ranked as more skilled boxer than GGG or Sergey Kovalev with that being the case!

GGG and Sergey Kovalev are clear examples of why performing illegal moves isn't necessary. They debunk the notion that "boxing is fighting and fighting is meant to be dirty, thus illegal moves are justified / acceptable" when you take into consideration that boxers like GGG & Kovalev (who rarely break the rules of boxing) win their fights more convincingly (by knockout or by inflicting greater damage upon their opponents) than Andre Ward (who consistently breaks the rules of boxing and still has to settle for decision wins whilst barely inflicting any damage on most of his opponents).

As far as the second justification, boxing has very clear rules to establish when a boxer is breaking the rules or not. So that's also an unacceptable justification for breaking the rules.

Also, I totally agree that some boxers are handicapped into having to win their bouts by a bigger margin than their opponent, which is not providing equal rules to both boxers. It's as if Sergey Kovalev must KO Ward or beat him to the brink of death in every round to get a victory. Whereas, any round where Both Kovalev and Ward are equally effective, Ward will win that round by default and then some people will start praising Ward for how Ward 'schooled' Kovalev in that round even though the round was equal where neither guy did anything special. It's like for every goal one Football (soccer) team scores, the opposition has to score 3 more in order to equal that one goal. Just like how Kovalev has to land 3 more extra punches than Ward in order for Kovalev to get the same credit as Ward

As far as I'm concerned, equal rules should be applied for every boxer. Kovalev doesn't have to do anything extra to beat Ward. If Ward is given credit for surviving and not getting knocked out by the end of the fight, then so should Kovalev for not even having to survive at all and not only lasting the full distance without getting knocked out, but coming closer to knocking out Ward than vice versa.

Absolutely man. The part about boxing being fighting and illegal tactics being allowed is the biggest cop put ever. Boxing is not fighting. Boxing is boxing and is a sport. In every sport, there are rules. Fighting is fighting outside of any kind of established rules. Fights don't happen with boxing gloves. Fights happen whenever and wherever they break out. Boxing is boxing and these same guys who let him off the hook for this will downplay Kov and GGG as brawlers who just want to fight and point out that this is boxing- not fighting. Total hypocrisy.

And yes. Kovalev should have to do no more than beat Ward and vice versa. This A side mind game bull has been established and should perish. These guys are all human boxers. Any one of them can be beat on any given night. An edge on either side is bull. If they're so confident in this boxer, why does he have to be handed rounds for his style? It is nonsense. The same thing happened with Mayweather. I thought he clearly lost to Castillo, Maidana and possible Oscar and Pac, but they didn't kill him. So they didn't get the nod. It's quite ridiculous. Yet, RG lost his last fight in a very close affair where he was far from being killed at all. The rule doesn't apply to him because he doesn't bring the big money in. If it did, the Thai would have never won IMO.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Boxing is boxing and these same guys who let him off the hook for this will downplay Kov and GGG as brawlers who just want to fight and point out that this is boxing- not fighting. Total hypocrisy.

Excellent post! This pretty much sums up everything that needs to be stated. It is very true!

[LetOutTheCage]

I dont find his style entertaining but it is effective