Re: "To Hit and Not Be Hit Boxers" - Steve Kim
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
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.
Very nicely put.
