1. I was not questioning you personally, only noting that most people who make such comments would likely have a different perspective if they were put in Algieri's place, and whilst I'm sure that what you say is true it doesn't change my opinion - boxing is not about brute force, it's about mastery of self and one's opponent through skill and strategy, the medium for which is the application of force. I think that we fundamentally disagree on this point and so there is really no sense in developing the point much further unless you are so inclined.
2. I did not mean to imply that it was a 'sign of the times', merely that it was one of many things that is wrong with modern boxing, and I was also connecting the proliferation of such fighters with the dilution of the weight classes via the introduction of so many different belts. Sure there have always been sluggers and those who see boxing as pure entertainment often take great pleasure in watching them. I think it's a stretch to compare Provodnikov to Lamotta, to say the least.
3. Are we really going to argue semantics? Just because a man doesn't lead with his face, doesn't make him a runner. Just because he uses footwork and distance rather than upper body movement to evade punches, doesn't mean he has stopped boxing and gotten on his bike. Besides, as the fight went on, Algieri regularly stood in front of Provodnikov and let off combinations, before either circling, or moving in, smothering and letting off another combination before moving out. In fact, short of continuously backing up, which Algieri never did, I don't see how or why you would call someone a 'runner' just because they were smart enough not to stand and trade with someone who hits harder than them. Unless of course you're using it in some non-derogatory sense which I don't quite understand - because in the sense that Provodnikov used it, it's a term which denotes the user's inability to counteract the strategy of his opponent, and nothing more. Fair play to you for actually indulging, but I think in assessing Algieri, and perhaps in comparing his methods to your own, you have confused bravery with stupidity. Bravery was getting up, and confronting a man who was trying his best to decapitate him, overcoming the natural instinct to (actually) run, and staying in there with him, outsmarting him every step of the way. Stupidity would have been digging his heels in and giving Provodnikov an easy target. As far as hitting hard I think the limited experience of Algieri contributed somewhat to him not gaining proper leverage at all times, but you should also consider that Provodnikov has an iron chin and it was clear when Algieri did land some firmer shots he never had the power to trouble him. Now if you've been in with such guys you will know (or perhaps you won't) that the realisation you can't hurt a guy with your best shot may certainly create some trepidation, especially if that guy has already knocked you down and swollen up one side of your face. You will also know that it puts a lot of pressure on you to then be hunted by a guy who is relentless in cutting off the ring. Yet Algieri stuck to his game plan, even though the odds were stacked against him. It really was a (poorly trained) matador against a bull, except they didn't cut the bull before they put him in the ring, and Algieri was carrying plastic sticks rather than the traditional banderillas. On that account I think the man deserves credit - more credit than you would want to give him. But each to his own.


Thanks:
Likes:
Dislikes: 


Reply With Quote
Bookmarks