Boxing Forums banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

ChicoTheBoy

· Registered
Joined
·
2,818 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
So I look at guys like Floyd, Bernard etc. They are not gunning for the KO and everyone knows it from the outset but you dont mind because they are greats and you know you are watching history and greatness when they fight.

Meanwhile you get a young guy, or average fighter do something similar and its boring as fuck.

Do you think that a fighter can earn the right to be boring due to their accomplishments?
 
We want a lot of things from athletes - greatness, risk, entertainment, character, etc. Each one of us in different proportions and sometimes these traits will collide, will conflict. To me greatness above all. Greatness does not always mean high risk. Floyd fighting Pac is not that risky in my opinion but will add to his greatness MORE THAN ANY OTHER FIGHT other than going to 160. Floyd's style and athleticism and high adaptability makes the fight with Pac a low risk. So Floyd or Bernard or Rigo can all be "boring". As long as they seek greatness and takes some risk.

If they get paid or not - not really a big concern to me. But I am a realist and know that being boring will often not get you paid. Then again, being a KO artist, does not always mean you get paid either (GGG).
 
Floyds fights haven't actually been boring in a while though. His cards usually deliver now and that compliments the night greatly. The pageantry is something that adds a bit of interest to the night.

Wlad on the other hand, you're better off watching the walk out and turning the channel once the bell sounds. And no, he hasn't 'earned the right to be boring' Not when you pay to watch a fight. What an insult to a paying boxing spectator.
 
They have the right to be boring from the beginning, just don't expect them them to be selling out arenas or to be headlining any PPVs.
 
Kind of a strange question. Not so sure about "boring", but a fighter has the right to fight cautious. If you think fighting that way has to be "earned", then, I suppose Gatti is a good example of someone who toned down his brawling style, and deservedly so.
 
I don't find anything in boxing "boring" really, I can appreciate a brawl or chess match and can pretty much say I am happy with either one. But you know what I mean by "Boring" here...the guys who don't want to take risks just to appease the fans..
I did NOT know that's what you meant, and that wouldn't be my definition, hence the question.

Rigo doesn't take foolish chances for the fans, yet he is anything BUT boring.

Maybe you should ask: "Can a fighter earn the right to get paid lots of money, if he doesn't constantly go for a KO? " - or something to that effect.

I STILL don't understand your point.
 
Define "boring."
making a conscious effort to be 'negative' and landing too few clean punches because of it

clottey when he fought emmanuela

erislandycwhen he fought saul

emmanuela when he fOughT mosley
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts