Is lateral movement now considered running

[j0zef]

Saturday night is Larry meltdown night.

[Vlad_]

Saturday night is Larry meltdown night.

He’s having another episode.

[Larry the boss]

Saturday night is Larry meltdown night.

He’s having another episode.

[boliodogs]

Side to side movement is not running. Moving backward and circling the ring to stay well out of range of your opponent's punches while throwing no punches is running.

[b00g13man]

Hell yeah. You must present yourself as a stationary target at all times, to give your opponent a fair chance of hitting you.

[The Problem Child]

Stop making excuses for cowardice and lack of balls. You are either a man or you aint. You either stand your ground and defend it like a true man, or be scared and avoid confrontation because otherwise you'd get knocked out. That's weak, Larry. Accept it. How the f are you going to run backwards and retreat from another man??!?!

[TonyGe]

Lateral movement to avoid punches and set up angles for your own attack is good boxing. Habitually moving backwards without punching
is called running. The guy doesn't have to literally run. It's been called running for as long as I've been watching boxing over 40 years.

[NearHypnos]

Depends.

For example, Mayweather used a lot of movement, but he usually remained the one in control of the distance and pace of the fight. He dictated what happened in the ring. If that's the case, it's not running. That's the art of boxing.

Canelo v GGG for example is very different. Canelo was not dictating anything and was not in control at any point in that fight. He simply moved/ran because he was forced to and needed to. At no point in that fight could Canelo dictate where or how they fought.

Canelo made GGG miss and outlanded him in power shots and also landed the better shots and Canelo looked like he was in significantly more control of GGG than the other way around...at least when it came to distance. He avoided GGG’s power AND nullified completely his body attack.


Your analysis is one of complete bias and ignoring one side entirely. They both fought extremely well but Canelo by far seemed to be doing what he wanted more than GGG who was missing and had to settle for the jab.

Canelo tends to fight this way unless he’s forced to push. He prefers fighting off the backfoot. His output has always been about the same. In fact, it’s one of his biggest criticisms, if not his biggest which is his fighting in spots/output.

In terms of game plan, they both did do well, but Canelo seemed to have a bit more class down the stretch. He just didn’t throw enough and that’s not a GGG thing, it’s a Canelo thing.

It’s the reason that if the fight wasn’t won by KO, he could still lose a decision (all things being fair of course...judge wise which is another store). Everyone foresaw it.

It’s always been the thing. He can be outworked.

But because of the way the fight played out, it’s why most think Canelo is the favorite to win the second. Peds aside.


To answer the topic...

It’s only running when the fighter you’re a fan of can’t hit the other guy. Lmao. That’s what it comes down to on this site.




We’ve seen borderline from guys like Lara, but Oscar vs Tito is a def good example like someone else said. There are instances of guys completely avoiding action in the later rounds to secure their win...


But if a guy makes you miss your power and in turns lands more of his power and better quality in addition to volume....

Well..we call that boxing usually. Unless it’s Floyd or Canelo then it’s running. Obviously.

[AKAcronym]

I seem to be under the impression that Canelo dominated in power punches, which is why Golovkin relied so heavily on the jab, yet barely outlanded him overall. Did Canelo land the flashier, more memorable shots? Yes. But I didn't know that won you rounds when you fight for a third of it. People need to stop acting like Gennady missed everything.

[JAB5239]

Why not? Hugging is now good defense.