I now realize that I would much rather watch a fighter like mayweather, jones, toney,calzaghe, etc... than fighters like angulo or kirkland. I don't find fights like Kirkland and Angulo as entertaining. Maybe it's just me.
Printable View
I now realize that I would much rather watch a fighter like mayweather, jones, toney,calzaghe, etc... than fighters like angulo or kirkland. I don't find fights like Kirkland and Angulo as entertaining. Maybe it's just me.
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabvargas24
The fight round was a total slugfest, but after that it was like watching Kirkland hit a heavy bag.
I do enjoy toe-to-toe battles if they're conducted at a high level - Morales - Barrera I is my favorite fight of all time - but I do not enjoy fights like we saw tonight. As I said in the fight thread, it reminded me of Pavlik - Miranda.
I enjoy great pure boxing and pure slugfests. Both have their place. After the fights that have missed over the last few months, this was needed.
It was entertaining for what it was. It's not like these guys tonight were billed as technical geniuses or anything! I have to agree that watching a beautiful tactician like Marquez is more satisfying, but this fight was a great balm after the nonevent that Narvaez served up last time.
i think i prefer tactical complete dominations in almost or all rounds from champions to challengers when the challengers are supposed to be strong, and hate close fights, although please, no beatings to challengers that are 40 years old, unless a young champions are known by not ducking anyone, in that case they are totally forgiven. Thats why i have liked to watch fights with some of these: klitschkos, lewis, hopkins, ali, holmes, and i hated pacquiao, tyson, mayweather, marciano, calzaghe and especially bob arum and haye and amir khan
I've said since day one KO's are overrated. But the same top billing technical guys mentioned had they're share of devastating fist of fury moments at one time or another coming up. Fights and displays that made them look like power houses. But unlike a Angulo or Kirkland they had the pedigree and learned skillset to become a showman and develop gears overtime. You need shoot outs, and honestly shoot outs that don't even go according to 'plan'. Not many picked Kirkland to dismantle Angulo in that manner and it was like putting two rocks in a blender...put two defense minded guys together and you may get a display of true craft....but you also get some snoozers. Watching two guys read and react to break one another down is fantastic, but there is something primal and conclusive when two plant the feet and impose a physical will. Raw and 'simple' yes but even sluggers think a bit.
Truth be told whats great about this sport is alot of the time you don't know what you have until the bell rings and it becomes cause and effect.
No problem watching 2 entertaining fighters at their level go at each other but nothing beats watching premier fighters whether they are pure boxers or fighters.
The thing cool about this sport is the different paths fighters use to get the job done . A good scrap is a good scrap doesn't have o b done the way I'd do it to be entertaining . Kirkland and angulo deserve a bonus in my opinion .
The first round for a neutral is just pure entertainment. It's all about levels and these might not be the two most technically proficient fighters operating in world boxing but they ain't bums either. So for a while it was anybodies fight. This cuts to the heart of what boxing is all about, two opponents matching their skills, gameplans ,heart and conditioning against each other. Neither was going through the motions and although in the end Kirkland dominated by doing so he was for many tearing up the script. Not the greatest boxing match ever, but great fight and awesome first round.