How Much Infighting?

**JazMerkin** · 07-14-2011 01:05 AM

It depends how good the infighter is. There are too many fighters who just seek to maul in there with no real purpose. It's like any style of boxing. When it's done great (Angulo-Alcine a recent example) than it's thrilling to watch. When it's done badly (Froch-Dirrell comes to mind) it's the worst type of fight to watch for me. I will say that I'm personally more of a fan of seeing guys boxing at mid-range, but truthfully if I get to see a fight where all of the facets of the game are on show I will positively love it. It's why Mayweather-Mosley & Ward-Bika were two of my favourite fights of last year, because I got to see guys showing how completely rounded their game is.

**captainanddew** · 07-14-2011 02:22 AM

2 guys in a phone booth is my preferred type of fight as well. good infighting appears that it may become a lost art, only practiced by those fighters who have taught unbelievably well and have a desire to know all facets of the sweet science.

**marbleheadmaui** · 07-14-2011 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by captainanddew

2 guys in a phone booth is my preferred type of fight as well. good infighting appears that it may become a lost art, only practiced by those fighters who have taught unbelievably well and have a desire to know all facets of the sweet science.

Agree with that, but I also think there is a refereeing problem. They are, by and large, too damned active and intrusive.

**AdamGB** · 07-14-2011 01:14 PM

Please don't start 'nick naming' refs based on the average number of times that they interupt the boxing in a round!

**greynotsoold** · 07-14-2011 05:39 PM

The standard these days seems to be to break far too quickly, which I don't like at all. I love to watch an inside fight, far more than I'm interested in watching some guy with tassels on his shoes and a funny haircut skip around while being told that that is great boxing.
It has always been curious to me that there were boos doing the Charles Williams/James Toney fight, and I can only imagine how much interference there would be today during the in-fighting of the Gavilan/Graham fights. Let them fight!
And it is the responsibility of a fighter- if he is to be considered a professional- to be at least competent at all aspects of the activity.

**marbleheadmaui** · 07-14-2011 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Please don't start 'nick naming' refs based on the average number of times that they interupt the boxing in a round!

Believe me I only do childish things like that when one performs so far below the norm I don't know what else to do!

**marbleheadmaui** · 07-14-2011 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

It depends how good the infighter is. There are too many fighters who just seek to maul in there with no real purpose. It's like any style of boxing. When it's done great (Angulo-Alcine a recent example) than it's thrilling to watch. When it's done badly (Froch-Dirrell comes to mind) it's the worst type of fight to watch for me. I will say that I'm personally more of a fan of seeing guys boxing at mid-range, but truthfully if I get to see a fight where all of the facets of the game are on show I will positively love it. It's why Mayweather-Mosley & Ward-Bika were two of my favourite fights of last year, because I got to see guys showing how completely rounded their game is.

GREAT comment on the bold.

I also agree that the best fights are ones where tactical approaches must change. That's a big reason why the Hearns-Leonard, Hearns-Benitez, JMM-Diaz I, Arguello-Pryor I etc were such magical fights.