How would Pros pefrom against amateurs - Olympics?

[KostyaTszyu44]

they would get outpointed

different styles, basically different sports

like punchdrunk said a marathon runner and a sprinter

[PunchDrunk]

that style of fighting would not work against a mayweather, cotto or any top pro boxer... it dont matter if its 1 minute rounds.. javier molina woulda got schooled by that kid in 3 minute rounds too.. i know its slightly different but not that much different in terms of pro champs cant beat these kids.. gimme a breaak

Yet Mayweather and Cotto both failed when they went to the Olympics under those exact rules! Having trained to fight under totally different rules for a decade+ is not gonna enhance their chances at success. Even a blind man would see that.

[PunchDrunk]

Hey, punch, who are your favorites to shine at the olympics this year, the guys with the future in pros that is?

Future in the pros... Warren at flyweight, Matvey Korobov at middle, and Billy Joe Saunders and Demetrius Andrade at welter.

[KostyaTszyu44]

mayweather was ROBBED at the olypics dude, he iced that bulgarian, it was kinda close but floyd deserved to win

and the idiot saying pros would win, ITS DIFFERENT SPORTS MAN they are basically separate, the ams would school em

just like if an am was chcucked in a pro ring straight away without any adjustments to their style they would get mauled

[PunchDrunk]

I thought this post would get you going Punchdrunk!

well I tend to agree with you on this subject. But I dont think that the difference between Pro and amateur is as big as the difference between a long distance runner and a sprinter. Just looking at the two types of runners there is a huge difference.

Pros can get away with alot more holding and pushing which would not be tolerated for a second in top amateur competition. So a pro who does that to his advantage couldnt in Amateur.

By the way two Ecuadorian boxers made it through the first round, I am Australian (the Aussies arent doing well) but I want to see the Ecuadorians do well as it is my adopted country, Ecuador has only once won a medal at the olympics (in walking)!

I agree, it's not a perfect comparison, but the training, tactics and techniques required to succeed are quite different noneteless. That is why you see amazing amateurs like Mark Breland (who is probably top5 p4p ever at am) disappoint as pro's, and guys who didn't quite hack it as am's who go on to become all time great pro's.

[BrooklynBomber]

BTW, Wlad would do well in these olympics.

[them_apples]

Pros can hit harder, they just throw the right down the pipe and square the 19 year old in the face knocking him out cold.

[DA1CATAS]

Pros can hit harder, they just throw the right down the pipe and square the 19 year old in the face knocking him out cold.

Very real chance of that happening... Very real chance of it not happening too.

Lots of movement in the AM's.... and HEAD gear. and nice pillow gloves maybe.

[JayCoe]

It's really simple and some of the stuff written on this thread makes me wonder whether some of you box or not.

If small time gym pros went against those in the olympics they'd get killed because it's the best of the amatuers vs. small time proffessionals. But let's say we pit best vs. best. Olympic standard amatuers vs. world known pro's. I think generally the pros would win, almost all fights with the few exceptions, esp' with Cuban fighters where some of them, through out the decades, tend to be as good, if not better, than the pro's but refuse to turn professional.

Now here's some very very simple points that the braindead of you miss;

1) You always go through the amatuers. The top pros all went through the amatuers too, they know how it works, what to do and the top ones, generally, walked through the amatuers.

2) Amatuer bouts, even olympic, are fast but not as fast as many of you tend to make out. A seasoned pro' could easily keep up with the pace, knowing he needn't conserve energy which leads to #3;

3)Pro's are conditioned for 10, 12 rounds. This means if you said to them, look you're going into the olympics they'd so ok, slightly change their routine to include more bursts and use their energy which they would usually conserve. Asking a seasoned pro' to fight a 3-4 rounds is not going to scare him. If you just dumped a pro' in the olympics then maybe, just maybe, he'd find it hard to adjust for the first round. But if the Olympic commission allowed it I think only the dumbest of the dumb would continue to train for a 12 round pro' bout if the fights will only be faster but short bouts. The pro's fitness would handle it, comfortably.

4) You all talk about knock-down/out punches like they're not important in amatuer boxing because a knock down only wins 1 point and amatuers is more about points and you're not taught to knock out. Simply answer is, A) a knock out/TKO means the same in both styles, you win. B) If you take a big ass punch it effects how you fight, amatuers, who are less conditioned for these will probably find it more difficult to take it on the chin.

And i'm bored of writing basic stuff. End of the day, there's a reason why the Olympic Commission says amatuers only (with the exception of a few sports, which I don't understand) and that is because the professionals who would get into the Olympics would wipe the floor with them.

[sukhenkoy]

It's really simple and some of the stuff written on this thread makes me wonder whether some of you box or not.

If small time gym pros went against those in the olympics they'd get killed because it's the best of the amatuers vs. small time proffessionals. But let's say we pit best vs. best. Olympic standard amatuers vs. world known pro's. I think generally the pros would win, almost all fights with the few exceptions, esp' with Cuban fighters where some of them, through out the decades, tend to be as good, if not better, than the pro's but refuse to turn professional.

Now here's some very very simple points that the braindead of you miss;

1) You always go through the amatuers. The top pros all went through the amatuers too, they know how it works, what to do and the top ones, generally, walked through the amatuers.

2) Amatuer bouts, even olympic, are fast but not as fast as many of you tend to make out. A seasoned pro' could easily keep up with the pace, knowing he needn't conserve energy which leads to #3;

3)Pro's are conditioned for 10, 12 rounds. This means if you said to them, look you're going into the olympics they'd so ok, slightly change their routine to include more bursts and use their energy which they would usually conserve. Asking a seasoned pro' to fight a 3-4 rounds is not going to scare him. If you just dumped a pro' in the olympics then maybe, just maybe, he'd find it hard to adjust for the first round. But if the Olympic commission allowed it I think only the dumbest of the dumb would continue to train for a 12 round pro' bout if the fights will only be faster but short bouts. The pro's fitness would handle it, comfortably.

4) You all talk about knock-down/out punches like they're not important in amatuer boxing because a knock down only wins 1 point and amatuers is more about points and you're not taught to knock out. Simply answer is, A) a knock out/TKO means the same in both styles, you win. B) If you take a big ass punch it effects how you fight, amatuers, who are less conditioned for these will probably find it more difficult to take it on the chin.

And i'm bored of writing basic stuff. End of the day, there's a reason why the Olympic Commission says amatuers only (with the exception of a few sports, which I don't understand) and that is because the professionals who would get into the Olympics would wipe the floor with them.

I don't think you necessarily have to go through the amateurs in the United States to be a pro. Correct me if I'm wrong though.