To Beat a Champion...

[Rantcatrat]

Effective aggression is not popping shots from the hip and hitting gloves.

That's another bad one. Too many people (judges included, apparently) score fights for the aggressor, not the effective aggressor.

But, let's say that you are doing that all round and your opponent can't get off any punches, then you won the round by effective aggression, or by ring generalship. Right?

[IamInuit]

Effective aggression is not popping shots from the hip and hitting gloves.

That's another bad one. Too many people (judges included, apparently) score fights for the aggressor, not the effective aggressor.

But, let's say that you are doing that all round and your opponent can't get off any punches, then you won the round by effective aggression, or by ring generalship. Right?

Who knows? I have yet to see that happen in a fight. If fighter A is not coming forward and flicking shots and hitting air or gloves and fighter B lands five punches and is stalking he should win the round. But then again Pep won a round supposedly against Graves w/o throwing a punch. Must have been ring generalship.

[Spicoli]

I've never prescibed to it. Its more a catchphrase for blow by blow talking heads though at times it would seem a whispered guidline for judges. With the ever growing disregard and skepticism of trinkets it rings hollow with the majority of fans. You just simply don't get to win rounds before the bell rings, its become a default justification to remain the same while what people are really saying is..."shit , I think he just pulled off the win".

[Beanflicker]

But, let's say that you are doing that all round and your opponent can't get off any punches, then you won the round by effective aggression, or by ring generalship. Right?

I've never seen that happen, really, but hypothetically yeah, if a guy throws 50 punches that hit arms and gloves, and the other guy doesn't throw a punch, then I'd give it to the 50 punch guy.

[erics44]

But, let's say that you are doing that all round and your opponent can't get off any punches, then you won the round by effective aggression, or by ring generalship. Right?

I've never seen that happen, really, but hypothetically yeah, if a guy throws 50 punches that hit arms and gloves, and the other guy doesn't throw a punch, then I'd give it to the 50 punch guy.

i rekon the last pac marquez fight that pac won is a good example of aggression winning the fight

pac was pushing the fight all the way whilst marquez was on the back foot all the way

marquez probly landed the best 10 punches of the fight mainly due tho to pac trying to make a fight out of it

i havent seen the punch stats or owt but id say pac out landed marquez even tho at times it was less eye catching

i think pac deserved it

[Beanflicker]

i rekon the last pac marquez fight that pac won is a good example of aggression winning the fight

pac was pushing the fight all the way whilst marquez was on the back foot all the way

marquez probly landed the best 10 punches of the fight mainly due tho to pac trying to make a fight out of it

i havent seen the punch stats or owt but id say pac out landed marquez even tho at times it was less eye catching

i think pac deserved it

I disagree, I don't think you should get credit for trying to "make a fight" and I don't think you should get discredited for being on the back foot.

Larry Holmes was on the back foot for 15 rounds against Tex Cobb, who was constantly moving forward and throwing punches, and that was about one of the most one sided fights I ever seen.

If you're coming forward and getting countered cleanly, you're not winning the fight IMO.

[erics44]

i rekon the last pac marquez fight that pac won is a good example of aggression winning the fight

pac was pushing the fight all the way whilst marquez was on the back foot all the way

marquez probly landed the best 10 punches of the fight mainly due tho to pac trying to make a fight out of it

i havent seen the punch stats or owt but id say pac out landed marquez even tho at times it was less eye catching

i think pac deserved it

I disagree, I don't think you should get credit for trying to "make a fight" and I don't think you should get discredited for being on the back foot.

Larry Holmes was on the back foot for 15 rounds against Tex Cobb, who was constantly moving forward and throwing punches, and that was about one of the most one sided fights I ever seen.

If you're coming forward and getting countered cleanly, you're not winning the fight IMO.

obviously theres different situations

i think what i meant by pac marquez is that pac was landing as many if not more punches and making the fight what it was, marquez was countering well

but on that occasion due to that fact that pac was the one pushing it, he deserved it

obviously if youre just comming forward windmilling you dont deserve the credit for it