Why do?

[The Gambler1981]

Why do people call fighters who use even a little movement and defense running bitches? If all they did was run they can not be that hard to defeat. To me it is a fighters job to stop whatever his opponent is doing and if they can not do this it is not the opponents styles fault but the blame resides with the fighter who can not do anything about it.

If you lose because you can not do anything with an opponent do you know what this means?


It means you got beat by a better man.

[MANGLER]

Cuz it sucks to watch most of the time. I don't agree wit this criticism, but if it's boring it's boring. I like the style of a guy like Winky, who boxes and defends, but does so comin forward and settin pressure. JMM is a boxer/counterpuncher, but when he does let his hands go to counter it's great to watch, and he ain't afraid to fight if he has to (see the Pac and MAB fights). Joe C moved and clinched a lot when he destroyed Lacy, but he spent so much time punchin the **** out of him it was entertaining anyway. PBF picked his spots to move and flurry against Baldomir and it ******, but when he did it more frequently against Gatti it was a fun ass whoopin to watch. It goes both ways.

[krispy kreme]

Its called technique. Anyone remember what happened with Ray Leonard & Hagler? People are addicted now to fighters who trade blow for blow like Gatti & Corrales for example. Many people view the style of Floyd boring, but I never though so, I always admired the guys defensive work.

[The Gambler1981]

I understand the excitement part of it but if an exciting fighter can't beat a boring fighter why is it the fault of the boring fighter that the exciting fighter can not get the job done. To me that makes no sence.

[ROSS CALIFORNIA]

Why do people call fighters who use even a little movement and defense running bitches?

It has a lot to do with posters here putting down other posters fighters. But I will say, a defensive moving fighter that lands nothing is more boring than a strait forward coming fighter that also lands nothing. If that makes sense.

[The Gambler1981]

It has a lot to do with posters here putting down other posters fighters. But I will say, a defensive moving fighter that lands nothing is more boring than a strait forward coming fighter that also lands nothing. If that makes sense.

I dislike greco-roman wrestling over "running" but if a defensive fighter lands nothing they will not win, or should not win anyways unless the other fighter does even less. If someone can box effective moving backwards that is entirely different then running and on this board it is basically looked at the same.