How would Pros pefrom against amateurs - Olympics?

[JoHnNyBoXeR]

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.

Exactly. Punch said mayweatheR and cotto Lost Olympics and they wouldn't succeed nowhere as if technically they didn't get much better as boxers since 19 years old-!!!!

[JayCoe]

You don't HAVE to, but like I said at the top, let's talk best vs. best. It'll be hard to find a top pro' boxer who hasn't been through the amatuers.

[Mafcherano]

Exactly. Punch said mayweatheR and cotto Lost Olympics and they wouldn't succeed nowhere as if technically they didn't get much better as boxers since 19 years old-!!!!

Whoever said that is a moron. Ignore him! Everyone knows Mayweather was robbed at the Olympics.

[PunchDrunk]

Exactly. Punch said mayweatheR and cotto Lost Olympics and they wouldn't succeed nowhere as if technically they didn't get much better as boxers since 19 years old-!!!!

Don't misquote me, thank you very much! ****ing read what I said before putting words in my mouth! I said they've spent a decade working on different techniques than those used in amateur boxing.

Another point you guys are forgetting (or rather, don't know, because you obviously don't know **** about top level amateur boxing), is that the amateur style has changed a lot in the last ten years, because the judging has changed. This means that the tactical and technical aspects of am fights are now very different than they were when these guys were am's.

[PunchDrunk]

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.

1. They don't all go through the amateurs. Some of the top pros didn't do so well as amateurs, and some of the top ams don't do so well as pros.

2. They are fast paced. No one ever claimed a top pro wouldn't have the stamina. My point is that they're not used to the level of activity in such a short round mentally and that takes more than a little adjustment to adapt to, just like it takes some time adjusting to the pros, where you have to settle down a little and take your time. There's also a bunch of technical aspects (more on that in #4) that are completely different, not to mention the amount of feinting, and different techniques the pros aren't accustomed to.

3. Again, not a fitness issue. And by the way, if they can't adjust in the first round, fights over, tehy've lost. As Rau'shee Warren, he'll tell you.

4. I agree KO's are the most effective way to win a fight. I have to disagree with everything else you said; it's the pro's who will have to adapt. Because of the pace of the short rounds, and the movement they're not used to (not even when Mayweather was am did he move as much as they do now), a pro will, like a top am, very rarely be able to sit down on his punches like he's used to, he'll have to use his feet a hell of a lot more than he's used to, and it may come as a surprise to you, but you don't hit as hard when you're up on your feet. Especially when you're not used to it, so this actually favors the am fighters. Add to that the bigger gloves and the headgear, and it's all in the am's favor.

Who's braindead now?

[JoHnNyBoXeR]

1. They don't all go through the amateurs. Some of the top pros didn't do so well as amateurs, and some of the top ams don't do so well as pros.

2. They are fast paced. No one ever claimed a top pro wouldn't have the stamina. My point is that they're not used to the level of activity in such a short round mentally and that takes more than a little adjustment to adapt to, just like it takes some time adjusting to the pros, where you have to settle down a little and take your time. There's also a bunch of technical aspects (more on that in #4) that are completely different, not to mention the amount of feinting, and different techniques the pros aren't accustomed to.

3. Again, not a fitness issue. And by the way, if they can't adjust in the first round, fights over, tehy've lost. As Rau'shee Warren, he'll tell you.

4. I agree KO's are the most effective way to win a fight. I have to disagree with everything else you said; it's the pro's who will have to adapt. Because of the pace of the short rounds, and the movement they're not used to (not even when Mayweather was am did he move as much as they do now), a pro will, like a top am, very rarely be able to sit down on his punches like he's used to, he'll have to use his feet a hell of a lot more than he's used to, and it may come as a surprise to you, but you don't hit as hard when you're up on your feet. Especially when you're not used to it, so this actually favors the am fighters. Add to that the bigger gloves and the headgear, and it's all in the am's favor.

Who's braindead now?

Mayweatehr wouldnt have to move he could just stand in the pocket and make the opponent miss and come back with combinations.. if u watched the cotto vs margarito fight cotto would smash these amatuers.. bigger gloves and headgear ok.. ive seen kids get knocked out in sparring so that padding thing is a bit overated.. u saw when sadam ali got hurt he fought different the rest of the way.. thats what jaycoe is saying.. if u get hit with a punch as hard as ur not used to it doesnt have to knock you out it can change the whole momentum and the way a person approaches the fight.. one counter combination of a 1, 4, 2 from cotto if it dont knock the kid out the kid is not fighting the same way after.. If Andrade goes to the pros and fought pavlik or margarito hed be knocked out in the first 3 rounds most likely the 1st with or without headgear .. so that 4 round 2 minute argument is garbage..

Andrade has a chance to become a world champ as do alot of these olympic boxers but they need to become better boxers for it to happen they are too green for the champions i dont care under what circumstances they fight.. they are still boxing

[Mafcherano]

Some amateurs like Mario Kindelan would win, but alot may be battered as in general the quality is less. Even though some countrie have full time fighters, most of their comp is part time. You will get some winning, but best v best the pro's might do a job being more experienced in both fields.

[Ryn0]

Depends which pro's the top 50 Pro in the world would proberbly KO or heavily outpoint the AM's. Although it depends which AM fighter your looking at Cubans tend to be very pro like in there tendancies. Fighters like Savon, Kindelan would fair pretty well.

[KostyaTszyu44]

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.

shut up, have you ever had a fight? how long have you boxed for? exactly now shut up, you know little to nothing about boxing and boxing techniques. punchdrunks a ****in trainer so trying to argue with him about something you know **** all about just makes you look like a petulant little *****

[Mafcherano]

Depends which pro's the top 50 Pro in the world would proberbly KO or heavily outpoint the AM's. Although it depends which AM fighter your looking at Cubans tend to be very pro like in there tendancies. Fighters like Savon, Kindelan would fair pretty well.

Plus they wil know the amateur game well. Apart from Cubans and the odd few others, very few am's are at that level though.