Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: Ring Generalship

Share/Bookmark

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    66,332
    Mentioned
    1697 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3108
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Ring Generalship

    Ring generalship is a fancy word for hitting and not getting hit, in other words fighting smart.
    Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    9,493
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1361
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Ring Generalship

    I don't think we have a consistent definition of what pro boxing is supposed to be. It seems like everybody judges fights by their own definition, like we're at an art museum looking at paintings.

    Some people will say Lara had the ring generalship because he was moving effectively and dictating range and pace. Some people will say Canelo had the ring generalship because he was the one moving forward and "making the fight", and Lara had to react to everything he was doing. I have no idea who's right anymore.

    Every time there's a controversial decision, people spout cliches that have absolutely no bearing in reality, but for some reason now have somehow become law. Things like "you can't win a fight going backwards" (I've seen hundreds of fights dominated by going backwards), "you have to really beat up the champ to take his belt" (actually it should be you have to win more rounds than the champ to take his belt. What, is a judge supposed to say "well fighter A won that round clearly, but it wasn't a domination so I'm gonna give it to Fighter B because he's the champ". What the fuck is that?)

    So yeah, I don't know how you're supposed to judge a pro boxing bout anymore. I thought it was about clean, effective punching and/or effective aggressiveness. But I'm constantly told things like "this isn't the amateurs this is pro". So fuck, I don't know anymore.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,795
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Ring Generalship

    Professional Boxing

    The scoring process 'sucks'.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. ring generalship tips
    By knocktown in forum Ask the Trainer
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-15-2014, 12:34 PM
  2. Some old musings on ring generalship
    By Dadi Astthorsson in forum Ask the Trainer
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-03-2009, 12:42 AM
  3. How do you define Ring Generalship?
    By OumaFan in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 07-27-2009, 05:30 AM
  4. Define Ring Generalship?!
    By Jimanuel Boogustus in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:35 AM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-30-2007, 09:56 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2025 Saddo Boxing - Boxing