Stylistic nightmares.

[Sleepwalker]

De La Hoya was all wrong for Mayorga.

They can fight 1000 rounds and Oscar wins 998 of them.

[SlimTrae]

Pacquiao can't beat counter punchers (with respectable power)
Morales fight one to all Marquez & Floyd. If Bradley had any pop to his shots he wins both.

Yes Pac can take punches, but he responds recklessly.

Edit- another reason why his 2nd fight with MAB doesn't make highlight reels. Marco wanted to counter, so Pac couldn't get off.

[Sleepwalker]

Add the fact the Pac overcommits recklessly when he thinks he has his opponent in trouble. The Filipino Terry Norris.

He does it all the time. JMM was fortunate enough to catch him because of his perfectly executed timing. It was no fluke by any means.

[mikeeod]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Have to agree to disagree. I feel like Buster's size, boxing skill, and jab were perfectly suited to punish the much shorter Tyson. Style-wise, Tyson is made for Douglas, as he was for Holyfield, and would have been for foreman.

Norris was always chinny, so in my opinion, while he was a superior athlete and technician, guys like Simon Brown, Julian Jackson, and Mullings would always have something for him.

[mikeeod]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Second that, also

Kostya Tszyu vs Vince Philips/Ricky Hatton

Kostya Tszyu got soft version of what happened to Tyson before DOuglas, he got cocky, did not train hard enough, relied on his talent and low level of the opponent too much. This has nothing to do with style

Vince was blown out by Ike Quartey in 3 rounds a couple of fights before Kostya. Vince was a big man for 140, had solid boxing skills, and couldn't miss with his right if he tried vs Kostya. Horrible style match up. Ricky was just too physical, in my opinion. Kostya didn't like wars like that.

[Spicoli]

Think there is great similarity in how it describes some fighters style or lack there of and any given styles clash where a guy just couldn't resolve another. A 'he had his number' type thing. When I think nightmare style it might be everything from Hamed to a second half Hopkins to Zapata. Fight by fight maybe a Malinga vs Benn? Think Norwood was a nightmare style for Marquez even though still not convinced he beat him. He was also a dirty fighting mofo while we're at it . Griffin vs Toney was like looking in a mirror in spots..close both!..or Holmes clowning a ripe rage in Mercer. Martinez blowing up Chavez jr. Not sure we didn't all see it coming but man it's fun to watch. Juan Coggi...now that is a stylistic nightmare .

[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.

[Master]

Disagree with a lot of those including Tyson v Douglas and Terry v Mullings.

Tyson had beaten better fighters than Douglas like Tucker (who had beaten Buster already). Mike looked poor in that fight and almost unrecognisable from the fighter that blew away Berbick and Spinks.

Terry Norris was shot by the time he lost to Mullings, peak Terry would destroy him.

Have to agree to disagree. I feel like Buster's size, boxing skill, and jab were perfectly suited to punish the much shorter Tyson. Style-wise, Tyson is made for Douglas, as he was for Holyfield, and would have been for foreman.

Norris was always chinny, so in my opinion, while he was a superior athlete and technician, guys like Simon Brown, Julian Jackson, and Mullings would always have something for him.

Terry Norris was highly skilled and talented and the only criticism I can give him was his lack of control and possibly weak chin. His defeats were not because of his style, he beats almost everyone because his skills were of the highest order.

Jackson had freakish power and would have lost 9 times out of 10 against Norris. Simon got outboxed in the return to prove my point. Terry was finished by the time he beat Mullings and just broke down. His trainer said that his fight against the Aussie was when he realised that he was finished at the top level.

[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.