Comments Thread For: Ronnie Shields: Lara's Style is His Style - I Won't Change it For Critics!

[aboutfkntime]

Effective aggression is already scored so I don't know the crazy logically jump you'd need to go to to score aggression.



That's catchy, but boxing is boxing. Boxing is whatever boxing wants itself to be & that's the way its been. Boxing used to be who could take the most damage & comeback to the chalk line inside of a minute iirc.



LMFAO wut!?!?! WE ALREADY score on effective aggression what difference does it make if you cross out the word effective? Same sport just a lower watermark to cross on aggression. The same guys who won yesterday would win tomorrow in 95%+ of fights & they might even be more entertaining & with more KO's because of that simple change.



Didn't watch the video. And if you think that's what I'm suggesting you have no grasp on what I'm trying to say here. Very little changes if you cross out effective on the scoring criteria & all else stays the same under the boxing rules.



That's like saying ring generalship as a scoring criteria is trying to smarten up the face first brawlers.

You are gonna fight how you fight still largely. But how fights are scored will change a couple degrees so that all things being equal the guy pushing the fight wins those rounds.

How different does that really make Erislandy or Floyd or Canelo fight? I don't think they change at all. They all were/are VERY effective doing what they do thus wouldn't be at much risk at losing rounds since they win rounds fighting their way so clearly.



Like I said I don't think you are even grasping what I'm saying cuz scratching off effective in the rulebook isn't having as serious changes to the sport as making every top ten guy fight look like a toughman semifinals fight.

boxing is..... hit, but don't get hit

scoring for aggression ABSOLUTELY is turning the sport into a tough guy contest..... no question about that

it would lessen the impact of ring generalship/defence.....

which would make it a completely different sport

i don't think you have either.... thought it through.... or realized the impact that change would make

[Eff Pandas]

boxing is..... hit, but don't get hit

No...it isn't. Boxing is whatever it wants to be. It hasn't always hit & not get hit. If it hasn't always been that it doesn't have to be that.

Although idk wtf the making of aggression a scoring criteria has with that any damn way. If you are hitting & not getting hit you are winning over the aggressive guy still lol.

it would lessen the impact of ring generalship/defence.....

which would make it a completely different sport

Feel free to explain this more cuz that makes zero sense to me. The scoring criteria now is clean punching, effective aggression, ring generalship + aggression. Taking out effective isn't making this a whole new sport lol. That's silly to even suggest.

i don't think you have either.... thought it through...or realized the impact that change would make

I mean any change you make has impact there is no debating that & like I said I suspect 5% or less fights come out with a different winner & the fights would likely be more fun + end more conclusively more often which is gonna be good for all boxing. Suggesting crossing off one word from the scoring criteria turns boxing into toughman fights is hilariously wrong & I got no idea why you would think that would alter the sport so much.

[Eff Pandas]

takin out that one word IS everthing but the other guy on here has said about best poss but we can also just agree to disagree

I'd argue effective aggression is more confusing than anything else. That's the problem with scoring in boxing anyway. Everything is mentioned to make it more subjective lol.

And they just make it more subjective by using terms like "effective aggression" & "clean punching". Ring generalship is even up for debate on what that is exactly. Some will say its the guy pushing the fight & others will say its the guy deciding where the fight takes place at.

Boxing would be easier scored if we just scored damage, aggression & defense. And whoever is winning most of those 3 things is usually the guy who's winning the ring generalship battle.

[rickJen]

I doubt he'll change his style. Why force him to?
Solution is make him an undercard fighter and let him fight whoever he wants to.

[Eff Pandas]

are you serious ?

you think that in basketball a shooter should get a point simply for putting up a shot...... regardless as to whether that shot was "effective"???

Horrible analogy cuz basketball has clear criteria to what wins a game. Get the most points on the board & you win. And you get 1 to 3 points depending on where you shot from.

If basketball had no clear points making system then yea attempts on a making a basket would likely be scoring "points" by the judges.

Boxing doesn't have clear ways that everyone can see for winning a round. Its all debatable.

that sounds like a completely different sport man

you want to score for the " tryer "..... or for the " aggressor "..... regardless as to whether he happens to be a limited puncher, just because he is trying really hard.....

you really can't see the difference ?

If all things are equal-ish yes the aggressor should win the round. Same sport, just a slight adjustment on the scoring criteria & I'd argue all things being equal today most cats give the round to the aggressor anyway so its definitely the same sport.

that is one tiny little step away from ranking Lemieux an ATG, and Mayweather as a C-class runner

I was posting too high a couple days ago, but I think you might be posting too high today cuz if you think Mayweather is C class with this rule change & Davey is a ATG you definitely aren't understanding how little this changes with top guys.

As long as the you don't make aggression the only scoring criteria I think Davey is who he is & Floyd is who he is & idk if one fight of either guy gets changed under the change I'm talking about.

MAYBE Floyd loses to Castillo the first time if aggression is rewarded more, but sh^t I think most fans thought Floyd shoulda lost that fight anyway so to many guys that woulda been the more just decision anyway. Hell I'm a big Floyd fan & I even had that fight a draw.

if you were going forward, and you were not effective..... then you just got outboxed..... and long may it remain that way

Sh^t I'd agree. Like I said I think you are running the ball in the wrong direction that I'm not trying to guard against.

If I'm outlanding you at a nice clip & you are coming forward being aggressive all night you're still losing. I'm not saying the aggressive guy is winning the round lmfao.

I'm saying tie or tie-ish type rounds goes to the aggressive guy making the fight. And that's pretty much what people do now cuz people don't seem to actually follow the effective aggression criteria or effective aggression is a subjective enough term people can talk themselves into saying it was effective aggression even if most of us would disagree.

[Eff Pandas]

Solution is make him an undercard fighter and let him fight whoever he wants to.

That's really the biggest problem.

I'm a big Lara supporter, but he's shown himself to me to be a Stevenson-like guy who's perfectly okay taking home $700k-$1M paydays for fighting guys none of us give a f#ck to see him fight. Plus & more of the problem somehow Haymon keeps putting him on the top of bills despite Cuban fighters in general having the fanbase of the fat girl at the strip club while not even getting into the poor opponent selection he's been in against & the less than exciting style.

Boxing is a asses in seats sport. If you sell or are exciting enough to become a seller in the future you should be at the top of the bill.

[garfios]

are you serious ?

you think that in basketball a shooter should get a point simply for putting up a shot...... regardless as to whether that shot was "effective"???

that sounds like a completely different sport man

a sport where you get points for trying

like getting a participation award in junior high

you want to score for the " tryer "..... or for the " aggressor "..... regardless as to whether he happens to be a limited puncher, just because he is trying really hard.....

you really can't see the difference ?

that is one tiny little step away from ranking Lemieux an ATG, and Mayweather as a C-class runner

again..... you can see everything you want to see in lower level club fights, without completely abortionizing the sport.....

if you were going forward, and you were not effective..... then you just got outboxed..... and long may it remain that way

John L Sullivan admitted that he got beat

It is about ****ing time that someone say it like it is. I agreed. If I hit you and you can't hit me, even if is only three times. That is three more times than you did. It is to the opponent to make Lara fight. williams did it, angulo did it too. And they were very good fights. Now if the guy is wining every minute of every round. Why does he needs to go and start trading? Why give the opponent a chance to turn the fight around? I have never seen in my time as a fan so many stupid comments about the sport. And so much blatantly ducking. Specially against Rigondeaux. And fans supporting that is the worst. "High Risk low reward" is their favorite excuse. Shame for the ducking boxers and the complacent fans...

[ruedboy]

People always say "hit and not get hit" but the fighters who stand out are the ones who can hit, not get hit and hit again.
The first one can be accomplished by hitting and holding, the second one takes a bit more skill.

[Afi23]

What I really appreciate about the Cuban style is the ring discipline that Rigo, Lara and co have. Sure, against a Gausha level, you'd like Lara to step out of his style to put on a show. However, I can appreciate the fact that despite the boos, he'll have the discipline to stick to his style because eventually against a top level opponent you need that discipline when you are under fire.
Sure, Rigo has been involved in alot of "boring" fights but at least we know he won't unravel when the going gets tough against Loma.

I also feel like commentators could do a better job of explaining what is amazing about what a guy like Lara. Last saturday, I feel like Paulie did a good job of explaining the subtle things that Lara does because indeed, he was in front of Gausha all night yet Gausha could never catch him.

[TexasCowBoy]

He doesn't have to change his style, as long as the judge's keep giving his opponent's the rounds for outworking him - then that's fine.

Boxing used to be if the guy who moved backwards didn't score a knockdown - he lost the round. We need to go back to that style of judging; otherwise, the sport will remain marginal. Nobody cares about Lara outside of the internet nerd crowd on here.

He lost to Canelo - plain and simple.

Canelo had baLARAina running around like crazy and when he sat on his punches Canelo cut him with a punch (7th rd) so there went baLARAina again.....baLARAina has no chin and his handlers know this that is why his opponents are carefully chosen