Thread: Amateur boxing changing how skilled prospects fight?

Berto, Gamboa, Khan, now Gary Russell Jr. I am seeing a trend of guys who have all the physical talent in the world and a ton of technical talent, but they all seem to be far to be a hybrid between quality top quality boxers and brawlers. They all seem to have lapses in defense when guys like them in the past have been much harder to hit, in particular Gamboa, Berto, and Russell are top knotch physical specimens that would match up physically with anyone in the history of the sport, but the amateur game seems to leave holes in their fighting. I am not sure what they can do, but maybe they can stop having the refs jumping in to stop the fight every 5 seconds and actually let these guys fight in the amateurs like I have seen when guys are still fighting locally in the states, or maybe they should seriously consider going back to the style of amateurs how it was before and at the 1988 Olympics. Because for me, a guy who likes pure boxers it is frustrating to see such talented guys with such highly decorated amateur careers not maximize their potential the way guys used to. Then again guys like Mayweather, De La Hoya, Mosley, Wright all fought in the scoring system as amateurs and look how they turned out. Either way it is frustrating.

Dunno what it is. Good/great fighters seem to come in cycles but it does seem that training methods have changed. Is it a matter of seeing things how we want to see them? E.g old fighters are better than todays crop.

Is that a product of the professional game where pure aggression regardless of how effective it is is scored more highly than defensive prowess? Why do we rarely see body punching being scored in the am's?

Are todays fighters not as well rounded. What happened to being able to box on the back foot rather than only coming forward? What happened to having a plan B or C or hell even D! If things aren't working.

I was going to argue this BUT for every modern fighter who seems to have one style where it works (and where it doesn't) I can think of old fighters just the same.



I was thinking about this over the weekend. Perhaps it's not the sport but the people in it.

It's all over the boards right now but look at video of Barrera at 21 and look at Khan at 21, Oscar at 21 at Khan. They look a world apart in terms of skill and maybe that's it. It comes down to the individual.

Personally I think it's more the individual than the amateur ranks scoring style. Infact the only problem with the am's to me is that they encourage more and more fighters to stay amateur longer because in britain at least, I know the top lads get paid around £50k a year (by the ABA I presume), and though it is a lot less than they could make POTENTIALLY make as a pro it is a safe ground with decent pay. And then when they do turn pro it's harder for a man in his late twenties to adjust to the pro's as opposed to a young man in say his teens and early twenties.

Originally Posted by rjj tszyu

Personally I think it's more the individual than the amateur ranks scoring style. Infact the only problem with the am's to me is that they encourage more and more fighters to stay amateur longer because in britain at least, I know the top lads get paid around £50k a year (by the ABA I presume), and though it is a lot less than they could make POTENTIALLY make as a pro it is a safe ground with decent pay. And then when they do turn pro it's harder for a man in his late twenties to adjust to the pro's as opposed to a young man in say his teens and early twenties.

This would make sense. The longer you stay with one style of anything the more effort it takes to break a habit or adapt to something new.

Alot of its the head gear, in the Ammies you create bad habits of walking in to punches because you know it cant hurt you,or you know you can take it. At the pro-level that same punch puts you on your ass

Roy Jones was a balls to the wall fighter as an amateur, he was as much of a fighter as he was a boxer, but he made the transition very quickly. Floyd pretty much stayed the same. Is it because a lot of these guys are fighting in the amateur style instead of changing it? I don't know, but I thought if anything the amateur style of scoring would make them much better at fighting off the back foot, because in theory how amateur boxing is scored and ref'ed it should be a much more tactical and technical affair.

Originally Posted by Taeth

Roy Jones was a balls to the wall fighter as an amateur, he was as much of a fighter as he was a boxer, but he made the transition very quickly. Floyd pretty much stayed the same. Is it because a lot of these guys are fighting in the amateur style instead of changing it? I don't know, but I thought if anything the amateur style of scoring would make them much better at fighting off the back foot, because in theory how amateur boxing is scored and ref'ed it should be a much more tactical and technical affair.

It really does come down to the head gear,the spots it covers are nighty night spots in the pro's,you can just walk through shots more with the gear on

Originally Posted by Missy

Dunno what it is. Good/great fighters seem to come in cycles but it does seem that training methods have changed. Is it a matter of seeing things how we want to see them? E.g old fighters are better than todays crop.

Is that a product of the professional game where pure aggression regardless of how effective it is is scored more highly than defensive prowess? Why do we rarely see body punching being scored in the am's?

Are todays fighters not as well rounded. What happened to being able to box on the back foot rather than only coming forward? What happened to having a plan B or C or hell even D! If things aren't working.

I was going to argue this BUT for every modern fighter who seems to have one style where it works (and where it doesn't) I can think of old fighters just the same.



I was thinking about this over the weekend. Perhaps it's not the sport but the people in it.

It's all over the boards right now but look at video of Barrera at 21 and look at Khan at 21, Oscar at 21 at Khan. They look a world apart in terms of skill and maybe that's it. It comes down to the individual.

I think Khan is as skilled as Oscar or Barrera, just he has defensive lapses and obvioulsy a bad chin, but the quality is there, same with Berto, same Andrade, same Russell, I just hope for the last two they can do other things as well, I know Andrade is pretty good off the back foot, unfortunately the only guy I saw being super well rounded coming out of the Olympics is going back and that was Rau'shee Warren.

Originally Posted by Taeth

Originally Posted by Missy

Dunno what it is. Good/great fighters seem to come in cycles but it does seem that training methods have changed. Is it a matter of seeing things how we want to see them? E.g old fighters are better than todays crop.

Is that a product of the professional game where pure aggression regardless of how effective it is is scored more highly than defensive prowess? Why do we rarely see body punching being scored in the am's?

Are todays fighters not as well rounded. What happened to being able to box on the back foot rather than only coming forward? What happened to having a plan B or C or hell even D! If things aren't working.

I was going to argue this BUT for every modern fighter who seems to have one style where it works (and where it doesn't) I can think of old fighters just the same.



I was thinking about this over the weekend. Perhaps it's not the sport but the people in it.

It's all over the boards right now but look at video of Barrera at 21 and look at Khan at 21, Oscar at 21 at Khan. They look a world apart in terms of skill and maybe that's it. It comes down to the individual.

I think Khan is as skilled as Oscar or Barrera, just he has defensive lapses and obvioulsy a bad chin, but the quality is there, same with Berto, same Andrade, same Russell, I just hope for the last two they can do other things as well, I know Andrade is pretty good off the back foot, unfortunately the only guy I saw being super well rounded coming out of the Olympics is going back and that was Rau'shee Warren.

I am shocked at that but can't really disagree with the rest.

Originally Posted by Missy

Originally Posted by Taeth

Originally Posted by Missy

Dunno what it is. Good/great fighters seem to come in cycles but it does seem that training methods have changed. Is it a matter of seeing things how we want to see them? E.g old fighters are better than todays crop.

Is that a product of the professional game where pure aggression regardless of how effective it is is scored more highly than defensive prowess? Why do we rarely see body punching being scored in the am's?

Are todays fighters not as well rounded. What happened to being able to box on the back foot rather than only coming forward? What happened to having a plan B or C or hell even D! If things aren't working.

I was going to argue this BUT for every modern fighter who seems to have one style where it works (and where it doesn't) I can think of old fighters just the same.



I was thinking about this over the weekend. Perhaps it's not the sport but the people in it.

It's all over the boards right now but look at video of Barrera at 21 and look at Khan at 21, Oscar at 21 at Khan. They look a world apart in terms of skill and maybe that's it. It comes down to the individual.

I think Khan is as skilled as Oscar or Barrera, just he has defensive lapses and obvioulsy a bad chin, but the quality is there, same with Berto, same Andrade, same Russell, I just hope for the last two they can do other things as well, I know Andrade is pretty good off the back foot, unfortunately the only guy I saw being super well rounded coming out of the Olympics is going back and that was Rau'shee Warren.

I am shocked at that but can't really disagree with the rest.

He probably is as good potentially in his offence but his defence is miles behind.