Stylistic nightmares.

[Ron Swanson]

I think the saying styles make fights saying is overly simplistic. If 2 guys can each only fight one way, sure, styles will make the fight. You often see this in aggressive fighters. They look unbeatable, but then when things aren't going that one way they come apart.

This is why I always say aggressive fighters are always over rated and boxers are always underrated. A boxer by his very nature can adapt. He won't look as good against fighter A, or fighter B but he can beat fighter A, B and C. The aggressive fighter will destroy fighter A and fighter B and everyone gets excited but then things fall apart against fighter C.

People don't look at all the things people do wrong that decide fights, they mostly look at the things people do right that decide fights. I mean, many people though Pacquiao had good footwork FFS! Even though he was constantly off balance. They see the positive of fast feet and ignore the negative of horrible placement. Then when people use his horrible footwork against him they claim it as a stylistic maneuver when it's not really about his style but rather his ability. The terrible technique they never addressed because they could usually hide it with smart matchmaking.

But then again there are always 10 ways to look at things and I've narrowed my own view so I should shut the hell up.

[SlimTrae]

You often see this in aggressive fighters. They look unbeatable, but then when things aren't going that one way they come apart.
I agree. It is rare when it happens. My example is Pryor vs. Arguello. Legendary Nights Aaron said he was forced to mix boxing and some countering because Arguello was beginning to catch and hurt him mano y mano.



This is why I always say aggressive fighters are always over rated and boxers are always underrated.
Agreed

. The aggressive fighter will destroy fighter A and fighter B and everyone gets excited but then things fall apart against fighter C.
If fighter (C) is a strategist I agree. I am not sure about counter punchers specifically. Especially if they don't have the power to keep that aggressive fighter honest like Tim Bradley, Paulie Malinaggi or a Paul Spadafora or Eddie Chambers @ HW.



People don't look at all the things people do wrong that decide fights, they mostly look at the things people do right that decide fights. I mean, many people though Pacquiao had good footwork FFS!

The terrible technique they never addressed because they could usually hide it with smart matchmaking.

I humorously disagree. Most of us were drawn to PAC because of his reckless abandonment of fundamentals! !!!! LOL!

But then again there are always 10 ways to look at things and I've narrowed my own view so I should shut the hell up.

Informative and intuitive post!

[IamInuit]

Harada's non stop windmill style was surprisingly to much for Jofre's completeness. Not once but twice.

Much further back Harry Wills must have studied Langford to beat him that many times in about 22 fights.