Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
It is an oversimplification to say skill means boring. There are boring boxers who are skilled and one who aren't skilled, same can be said for exciting fighters. It is also an excuse to judge fights on a criteria that isn't in line with the guidelines of scoring a bout. Within the context of a boxing match a fighter can fight a negative or boring style and still win, as he should according to the way a fight is judged. As far as I know the criteria is written the same across professional boxing, both fighters are pros and know the criteria so the person losing should take the responsibility for not doing enough to win. Ward can be a boring fighter at times and often has an ugly style but like Timothy Bradley his greatest tools in winning a fight are a willingness to do more work within a round and stay fighting in a style that will win them the rounds. They are more workman with above average skill than boring but extremely skilled defensive stylists.
As for Dibella saying that it is the casual fans who go to the events and buy the PPVs, bullshit. Casual fans and fans driven by national rivalries certainly do help make Pacman fights successful as well as PPV events like Latin Fury and Calderon headlined cards. I think the reason many hardcore fans don't go to the events as well as many potentially interested casual fans don't is simply that they are out of the price range for someone to spend on an evening of entertainment. The reason many hardcore fans don't buy the PPVs though is more a case of once burned, twice shy. Hardcore fans are more likely to see the meaninglessness or relatively low quality of many undercard fights and refuse to pay money for one big fight, two that couldn't headline an HBO or Showtime card, and one that would be at best a cofeature on FNF.
Boxing is a little odd compared to most other professional sports, could you imagine paying the same money to see two less competent but exciting soccer teams play as you would for the two very best teams in the same league compete for the league title at a more measured pace? We want entertainment value for our money but we also would like to watch the very best of the sport compete against each other, the two situations are too often not found in the same matches with boxing. Soccer matches, basketball games, hockey and other mainstream professional sports though only have the one event to sell you, boxing cards have the ability to somewhat safeguard the problem because there are multiple fights on the same card, for this reason the majority of the blame is on promoters in my view. They should be able to offer a more enjoyable and well rounded event that has compelling fights for the fans looking forward to the very best fighting as well as those looking for exciting all out wars. They end up telling you it is because it would cost too much money to get other high profile boxers on the undercard but that is really because they are willing to overpay the main event boxers at the cost of the rest of the card.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Fight fans love to hate on Ward. He doesn't knock people out, he fights ugly, blah blah blah. He is a joy to watch because he is one smart motherfucker. He changes styles for fights and often within fights. If plan A isn't working he has plan B and C.
His fight against Allan Green was a thing of beauty? How so? He just mauled the man. He mauled him with some very smart moves. There was times that he would get Green to the ropes. Ward would then position his body so that his left side pinned Green's arms against his body (without holding) and Ward could still get his right hand off without Green being able to throw either hand. Good ring IQ.
Against Kessler he stayed just out of distance. If Kessler took a step forward, he'd counter. If not he'd wait until Kessler had been moving laterally, then step in quickly, and get off. And out. Kessler doesn't move badly but after moving he has to reset.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
captainanddew
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Fight fans love to hate on Ward. He doesn't knock people out, he fights ugly, blah blah blah. He is a joy to watch because he is one smart motherfucker. He changes styles for fights and often within fights. If plan A isn't working he has plan B and C.
His fight against Allan Green was a thing of beauty? How so? He just mauled the man. He mauled him with some very smart moves. There was times that he would get Green to the ropes. Ward would then position his body so that his left side pinned Green's arms against his body (without holding) and Ward could still get his right hand off without Green being able to throw either hand. Good ring IQ.
Against Kessler he stayed just out of distance. If Kessler took a step forward, he'd counter. If not he'd wait until Kessler had been moving laterally, then step in quickly, and get off. And out. Kessler doesn't move badly but after moving he has to reset.
I agree! I suspect the reason folks find Ward boring is he offers little reason to think something sudden and shocking is possible. He dominates tactically and so doesn't seem vulnerable and he lacks the power to stop a fight suddenly. So I suspect what people do is watch 5-6 rounds and think, there is close to zero chance the next 6-7 are different. I get that. He's not a wolf or a tiger, he's a python who slowly wraps his guy up and increases the squeeze until the end. Me? I admire his tactical skill.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
We're hardcore fans. We understand the science behind the sport. But we also don't pay the bills in large numbers compared to casuals. Boxing survives off of the interest of casual fans. And that interests is decreasing.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Any boxer no matter how skilled will always be boring when there are 15 or more clinches per round. I don't want to watch brokeback boxing. His style is just does not match up well with other boxers. His style causes too many nuthugs and it get's boring really quick. At least Ward is not a runner who refuses to throw punches, like dirrell did in his first fight. Vlad Klit bores the hell out of me too and he isn't a runner, his style just does not excite me even though he has a high ko percentage. There is just something about Vladdy boy's style that i just can't watch for any length of time.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Steve Kim's point as I understand it was that those same people that appreciate Andre Ward's defensive style don't buy tickets and don't financially support the sport.
As much as you may not want to admit it, the Saul Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao's are great for boxing because they put people in seats and keep the sport at least somewhat relevant.
Also, I'm sure defensive doesn't have to mean boring. Marble - can you name defensive fighters of yesteryear that were able to hype the crowd?
And Fenster made a good point, there are plenty of defensive fighters that have never been in a memorable fight. Perhaps, great fighters too.
I admit the bold. Grudgingly and with teeth grinding. Dumbing down the sport to the lowest common denominator is a weak second choice to educating the fans to what they are seeing [grumble, grumble]
Sweet Pea sure shut up the Alamodome against Chavez! Pep had the Garden rocking against Saddler in their second fight. Benny Leonard drew 70,000 several times. Niclino Locche would have people calling his name and cheering when he made the other guy miss. It was like a bullfight. Muhammad Ali's defining characterstics were his moving and not getting hit. He was the biggest name in history.
I also think Fenster is just wrong about great defensive fighters never being in a memorable fight. I'd LOVE to see that list!
Marble - I'll defer to you here, but my question is did Sweet Pea sell those seats in the fight you mentioned, same for Pep, I'm pretty sure Leonard did draw well.
Ali and Floyd are the big notable exceptions though, right? Generally, The Mike Tyson's and Manny Pacquiao's, offensive beasts, are the fighters that put butts in seats. And that doesn't mean that they technically skilled too, but just more exciting to the casual fan.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Steve Kim's point as I understand it was that those same people that appreciate Andre Ward's defensive style don't buy tickets and don't financially support the sport.
As much as you may not want to admit it, the Saul Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao's are great for boxing because they put people in seats and keep the sport at least somewhat relevant.
Also, I'm sure defensive doesn't have to mean boring. Marble - can you name defensive fighters of yesteryear that were able to hype the crowd?
And Fenster made a good point, there are plenty of defensive fighters that have never been in a memorable fight. Perhaps, great fighters too.
I admit the bold. Grudgingly and with teeth grinding. Dumbing down the sport to the lowest common denominator is a weak second choice to educating the fans to what they are seeing [grumble, grumble]
Sweet Pea sure shut up the Alamodome against Chavez! Pep had the Garden rocking against Saddler in their second fight. Benny Leonard drew 70,000 several times. Niclino Locche would have people calling his name and cheering when he made the other guy miss. It was like a bullfight. Muhammad Ali's defining characterstics were his moving and not getting hit. He was the biggest name in history.
I also think Fenster is just wrong about great defensive fighters never being in a memorable fight. I'd LOVE to see that list!
I didn't say that.
If we poll the forums favourite fights, there are many a great skilful fighter that wouldn't feature in many.
The majority of hardcore fans, just like the majority of casuals, will get more excited by a "tear-up" between "average" fighters than two world-class guys exhibiting impressive skills.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
captainanddew
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Fight fans love to hate on Ward. He doesn't knock people out, he fights ugly, blah blah blah. He is a joy to watch because he is one smart motherfucker. He changes styles for fights and often within fights. If plan A isn't working he has plan B and C.
His fight against Allan Green was a thing of beauty? How so? He just mauled the man. He mauled him with some very smart moves. There was times that he would get Green to the ropes. Ward would then position his body so that his left side pinned Green's arms against his body (without holding) and Ward could still get his right hand off without Green being able to throw either hand. Good ring IQ.
Against Kessler he stayed just out of distance. If Kessler took a step forward, he'd counter. If not he'd wait until Kessler had been moving laterally, then step in quickly, and get off. And out. Kessler doesn't move badly but after moving he has to reset.
I agree! I suspect the reason folks find Ward boring is he offers little reason to think something sudden and shocking is possible. He dominates tactically and so doesn't seem vulnerable and he lacks the power to stop a fight suddenly. So I suspect what people do is watch 5-6 rounds and think, there is close to zero chance the next 6-7 are different. I get that. He's not a wolf or a tiger, he's a python who slowly wraps his guy up and increases the squeeze until the end. Me? I admire his tactical skill.
I admire his tactical skill too a lot and I enjoy watching him, but I'm not sure I qualify as the casual fan. I stream Felix Sturm fights ffs! I also routinely attend boxing events and pay for ppv's. I'm not who Steve Kim was referring to.
Ward is not a python because a python finish by crushing the prey's diaghram and then killing and eating it, when was the last time Ward stopped anyone? I mean say what you want about Floyd but he stopped Hatton in a recent fight and stopped Chico. Same goes for Ali. Ward couldn't even stop Edison Miranda. His style is more of a wet blanket than a Python. ;D I kid, I kid.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dropanuke
Quote:
Originally Posted by
awdleyfuturehalloffamer
Any boxer no matter how skilled will always be boring when there are 15 or more clinches per round. I don't want to watch brokeback boxing. His style is just does not match up well with other boxers. His style causes too many nuthugs and it get's boring really quick. At least Ward is not a runner who refuses to throw punches, like dirrell did in his first fight. Vlad Klit bores the hell out of me too and he isn't a runner, his style just does not excite me even though he has a high ko percentage. There is just something about Vladdy boy's style that i just can't watch for any length of time.
Maybe u should watch mma.
Cos I'd b bored of boxing if every round was a tear up!!
Boxing is an art and Roy vs Bernard is in the top 20 fights of all time including the rematch.
That's boxing and it entertains a true boxing fan. Iv always said I will never b a weekend boxing fan and I won't b
I'm not saying i didn't admire his skill. I'm saying his style has not matched up well with other fighters styles to make me interested in watching his fights more often. I avoid nuthugger fighters, they bore me to death. I admire Floyd's skill too, that's when he comes to fight. Floyd bores me to death when all he wants to do is potshot most of the fight.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Steve Kim's point as I understand it was that those same people that appreciate Andre Ward's defensive style don't buy tickets and don't financially support the sport.
As much as you may not want to admit it, the Saul Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao's are great for boxing because they put people in seats and keep the sport at least somewhat relevant.
Also, I'm sure defensive doesn't have to mean boring. Marble - can you name defensive fighters of yesteryear that were able to hype the crowd?
And Fenster made a good point, there are plenty of defensive fighters that have never been in a memorable fight. Perhaps, great fighters too.
I admit the bold. Grudgingly and with teeth grinding. Dumbing down the sport to the lowest common denominator is a weak second choice to educating the fans to what they are seeing [grumble, grumble]
Sweet Pea sure shut up the Alamodome against Chavez! Pep had the Garden rocking against Saddler in their second fight. Benny Leonard drew 70,000 several times. Niclino Locche would have people calling his name and cheering when he made the other guy miss. It was like a bullfight. Muhammad Ali's defining characterstics were his moving and not getting hit. He was the biggest name in history.
I also think Fenster is just wrong about great defensive fighters never being in a memorable fight. I'd LOVE to see that list!
I didn't say that.
If we poll the forums favourite fights, there are many a great skilful fighter that wouldn't feature in many.
The majority of hardcore fans, just like the majority of casuals, will get more excited by a "tear-up" between "average" fighters than two world-class guys exhibiting impressive skills.
Then I'd argue the majority of hardcore fans are chowderheads too. Like I said, Gatti worship is a problem. Greatness is just that and if that doesn't excite one? I don't know what to say.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
captainanddew
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Fight fans love to hate on Ward. He doesn't knock people out, he fights ugly, blah blah blah. He is a joy to watch because he is one smart motherfucker. He changes styles for fights and often within fights. If plan A isn't working he has plan B and C.
His fight against Allan Green was a thing of beauty? How so? He just mauled the man. He mauled him with some very smart moves. There was times that he would get Green to the ropes. Ward would then position his body so that his left side pinned Green's arms against his body (without holding) and Ward could still get his right hand off without Green being able to throw either hand. Good ring IQ.
Against Kessler he stayed just out of distance. If Kessler took a step forward, he'd counter. If not he'd wait until Kessler had been moving laterally, then step in quickly, and get off. And out. Kessler doesn't move badly but after moving he has to reset.
I agree! I suspect the reason folks find Ward boring is he offers little reason to think something sudden and shocking is possible. He dominates tactically and so doesn't seem vulnerable and he lacks the power to stop a fight suddenly. So I suspect what people do is watch 5-6 rounds and think, there is close to zero chance the next 6-7 are different. I get that. He's not a wolf or a tiger, he's a python who slowly wraps his guy up and increases the squeeze until the end. Me? I admire his tactical skill.
I admire his tactical skill too a lot and I enjoy watching him, but I'm not sure I qualify as the casual fan.
I stream Felix Sturm fights ffs! I also routinely attend boxing events and pay for ppv's. I'm not who Steve Kim was referring to.
Ward is not a python because a python finish by crushing the prey's diaghram and then killing and eating it, when was the last time Ward stopped anyone? I mean say what you want about Floyd but he stopped Hatton in a recent fight and stopped Chico. Same goes for Ali. Ward couldn't even stop Edison Miranda. His style is more of a wet blanket than a Python. ;D I kid, I kid.
The bold is the line of the morning!
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Steve Kim's point as I understand it was that those same people that appreciate Andre Ward's defensive style don't buy tickets and don't financially support the sport.
As much as you may not want to admit it, the Saul Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao's are great for boxing because they put people in seats and keep the sport at least somewhat relevant.
Also, I'm sure defensive doesn't have to mean boring. Marble - can you name defensive fighters of yesteryear that were able to hype the crowd?
And Fenster made a good point, there are plenty of defensive fighters that have never been in a memorable fight. Perhaps, great fighters too.
I admit the bold. Grudgingly and with teeth grinding. Dumbing down the sport to the lowest common denominator is a weak second choice to educating the fans to what they are seeing [grumble, grumble]
Sweet Pea sure shut up the Alamodome against Chavez! Pep had the Garden rocking against Saddler in their second fight. Benny Leonard drew 70,000 several times. Niclino Locche would have people calling his name and cheering when he made the other guy miss. It was like a bullfight. Muhammad Ali's defining characterstics were his moving and not getting hit. He was the biggest name in history.
I also think Fenster is just wrong about great defensive fighters never being in a memorable fight. I'd LOVE to see that list!
I didn't say that.
If we poll the forums favourite fights, there are many a great skilful fighter that wouldn't feature in many.
The majority of hardcore fans, just like the majority of casuals, will get more excited by a "tear-up" between "average" fighters than two world-class guys exhibiting impressive skills.
Then I'd argue the majority of hardcore fans are chowderheads too. Like I said, Gatti worship is a problem. Greatness is just that and if that doesn't excite one? I don't know what to say.
That may be a little unfair. Personally I admire all styles of boxing and recognise "greatness" even in fighters I believe are pretty dull.
However, on the recent Pac-Mosley bill, did you enjoy the main event more than Arce-Vazquez Jr? Whether you're a meathead or a connoisseur surely that was fight of the night?
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Steve Kim's point as I understand it was that those same people that appreciate Andre Ward's defensive style don't buy tickets and don't financially support the sport.
As much as you may not want to admit it, the Saul Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao's are great for boxing because they put people in seats and keep the sport at least somewhat relevant.
Also, I'm sure defensive doesn't have to mean boring. Marble - can you name defensive fighters of yesteryear that were able to hype the crowd?
And Fenster made a good point, there are plenty of defensive fighters that have never been in a memorable fight. Perhaps, great fighters too.
I admit the bold. Grudgingly and with teeth grinding. Dumbing down the sport to the lowest common denominator is a weak second choice to educating the fans to what they are seeing [grumble, grumble]
Sweet Pea sure shut up the Alamodome against Chavez! Pep had the Garden rocking against Saddler in their second fight. Benny Leonard drew 70,000 several times. Niclino Locche would have people calling his name and cheering when he made the other guy miss. It was like a bullfight. Muhammad Ali's defining characterstics were his moving and not getting hit. He was the biggest name in history.
I also think Fenster is just wrong about great defensive fighters never being in a memorable fight. I'd LOVE to see that list!
I didn't say that.
If we poll the forums favourite fights, there are many a great skilful fighter that wouldn't feature in many.
The majority of hardcore fans, just like the majority of casuals, will get more excited by a "tear-up" between "average" fighters than two world-class guys exhibiting impressive skills.
Then I'd argue the majority of hardcore fans are chowderheads too. Like I said, Gatti worship is a problem. Greatness is just that and if that doesn't excite one? I don't know what to say.
World Class guys exhibiting exceptional skills should be just as fun to watch in theory though. It's like the matrix. Potshoting and fighting negatively or in retreat just isn't very fun to watch. For exampel, when Calzaghe and Kessler fought a few years ago, the skill-level in that fight was pretty high, and it was a lot of fun to watch.
I want to see Ward fight Froch because I believe Froch's skills are underrated (or at least were underrated). He has a ring savy to him that goes unnoticed. I believe Ward will win in the end but I believe the skill-level in that fight could make for a fun fight. Now, if Ward goes the Dirrell route to win, it won't be. I just don't think that's Ward's style though.
Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marbleheadmaui
I think more people line up to see car wrecks than to see good driving.
I couldn't care less what most people do.
Ward is efficient and effective as hell. People who believe themselves to be dedicated boxing fans and yet cannot appreciate it need to do a better job of understanding boxing and what they are seeing.
The worship of men like Arturo Gatti sets the sport back in my view.
Steve Kim's point as I understand it was that those same people that appreciate Andre Ward's defensive style don't buy tickets and don't financially support the sport.
As much as you may not want to admit it, the Saul Alvarez and Manny Pacquiao's are great for boxing because they put people in seats and keep the sport at least somewhat relevant.
Also, I'm sure defensive doesn't have to mean boring. Marble - can you name defensive fighters of yesteryear that were able to hype the crowd?
And Fenster made a good point, there are plenty of defensive fighters that have never been in a memorable fight. Perhaps, great fighters too.
I admit the bold. Grudgingly and with teeth grinding. Dumbing down the sport to the lowest common denominator is a weak second choice to educating the fans to what they are seeing [grumble, grumble]
Sweet Pea sure shut up the Alamodome against Chavez! Pep had the Garden rocking against Saddler in their second fight. Benny Leonard drew 70,000 several times. Niclino Locche would have people calling his name and cheering when he made the other guy miss. It was like a bullfight. Muhammad Ali's defining characterstics were his moving and not getting hit. He was the biggest name in history.
I also think Fenster is just wrong about great defensive fighters never being in a memorable fight. I'd LOVE to see that list!
I didn't say that.
If we poll the forums favourite fights, there are many a great skilful fighter that wouldn't feature in many.
The majority of hardcore fans, just like the majority of casuals, will get more excited by a "tear-up" between "average" fighters than two world-class guys exhibiting impressive skills.
Then I'd argue the majority of hardcore fans are chowderheads too. Like I said, Gatti worship is a problem. Greatness is just that and if that doesn't excite one? I don't know what to say.
That may be a little unfair. Personally I admire all styles of boxing and recognise "greatness" even in fighters I believe are pretty dull.
However, on the recent Pac-Mosley bill, did you enjoy the main event more than Arce-Vazquez Jr? Whether you're a meathead or a connoisseur surely that was fight of the night?
First off, good answer!
Unfair question I think though. The Manny-Shane fight was NOT a great performance by either guy. So the Arce fight was better in my view. But do I choose Arce-Vasquez or a comparably competitive fight between great fighters fighting near their best, say Lopez-Chacon? I'll take the latter.
