What type of fights do you like to see most?

Those are fights I don't like. Those are todays virtuoso performances. Todays dominant performances. Not all of them, but a lot of them. I'm not interested in these "virtuouso" performances where somebody has forced somebody else to drop weight or offered them cash for relaxed rules.

Give me a fight where a limited dude uses guts to force a talented dude to use all of his talents, where it goes right down to the wire.

Example: Benn vs McClellan, a particularly extreme example, perhaps, but fitting nonetheless.

Example: Antuofermo vs Hagler, a more rounded example would be Hagler vs Duran, where Duran held a lot of the aces but was forced to throw them all to carry the hand.

 

Disagreeing isn't the issue. Of course we all have different taste. That's excellent.

It's your fucking insistence that most of us feel a certain way because we've been told to. Not a single example of a virtuoso performance was stated here, yet you log on with your typical garbage.

It's most threads, EVERY round by round thread - it's fucking tiring.

 

Floyd vs Marquez. Floyd won every round. Totally dominant. But of course he was, he weighed in pretty much as he saw fit, paid cash for the luxury, and went to town on a naturally smaller dude who had a much harder career, no experience at the weight, who was much nearer the end of his days and who had distinct height, reach and weight disadvantages.

Ostensibly, its a dominant, easy, virtuoso performance. But it was designed to be such. It was carefully laid out to be such. A fucking architect couldn't have planned that one better.

Same with the Ortiz fight. Functional Weight Advantage. Sounds like a NASA term.

Same with Manny Pac vs Cotto. No Miguel, you must weigh 145, for Manny. Manny hold the purse strings.

Same with Vitali vs Adamek, if you must.

Same with Haye vs Ruiz, a real favourite on this side of the pond, where the virtuosity on display was derived as much from Ruiz having a creaking shell of a body as Haye being any good in the first place.

Ironically, irony of fucking ironies, you get a proper dominant, clean-cut performance with Wlad vs Haye, and you stroll in here and tell me I have nothing to "beat my chest" about.

Wlad vs Sam Peter I was a good example of the sort of fight I like. One guy forcing the other guy to survive every inch of the way, dragging the fight out of him. No bollox about functional weight advantages, nobody forced to dry out on the scales, nobody being paid chump change or offered cash to relax the rules. Just two guys, each bending the rules and being allowed bend them, struggling to get the better of the other.

EDIT: Take Duran vs Buchanan. That would have been a perfect virtuoso performance, from both men, but for the ending. Buchanan insisting he could tame and deal with Duran via the jab and his skills, Duran insisting he could out-work and out-tough Buchanan. No Ped's, no functional weight advantages, just classic boxer vs Swarmer, with both men distinguishing themselves, until Roberto cheated.

Another example: Marquez vs Katsidis. My sort of fight. Katsidis insisted he could grind Marquez down, Marquez insisted otherwise. Katsidis forced Marquez to deal with him. Once again, no BS, just a straight honest contest.

 

Wow. Nevermind. I gave you more credit than I should have.

You really don't get it.

 

Lomachenko vs Toledo. That was some virtuosity right there.

 

When it happens live, I like back-and-forth fights with good action and drama.

For replay value, my most watched fights are pretty much a mixture of great fights (Corrales-Castillo 1, Trinidad-Vargas, Saad-Johnson), virtuoso performances (Starling-Honeyghan, Mayweather-Corrales/Gatti), and highlight reel KOs (Ruddock-Dokes, Tyson-Thomas).

 

Gatti wasn't good enough for Floyd's target practice to count for all that much. As Hut says, the test should be whether the opponent was good enough in the first instance. For Corrales, Floyd wasn't responsible for Diegos distractions or his weight issues, and so I'd mark that down as a "virtuoso" performance, considering not just how good Floyd looked, but also how Diego went on to notable success after that fight.

 

You know, on second thought... you're right. We definitely had Haye/Ruiz and Floyd/Marquez on the mind when talking about fights we like to rewatch.

 

"What fights do you like to see most"....is the thread title.

Ruiz vs Haye and Floyd vs Marquez are not the sort of fights I like to see most.

I hate handicappers. I hate guys who look for a wounded fish and go in for the kill.

I hate scavengers. Floyd scavenges. Manny scavenges. Boxing Carrion is their staple.

I like it when two able-bodied dudes, one talented, one unbelievably courageous, meet in a clash of styles and designs.

Even better, I like to see fights where a supposedly finished, dead-man-walking {Wlad vs Peter, Duran vs Moorer, Leonard vs Hagler} somehow finds a way to pull it out.

I hated, hated, hated the machinations that put Maidana vs Morales together. But I enjoyed the talent and balls that Morales displayed, not just surviving, half-blind, but having the balls to actually try and WIN.

 

Yet, by virtuoso performance, that's what you thought we meant?

 

No, I never mentioned what you thought, did I?

I merely said that a lot of crap got called "Virtuoso" when it was nothing of the sort.

Benny Leonard and Morales showed more "Virtuosity" in their defeats to McLarnin and Maidana respectively than half of these so-called "virtuoso" performances were are served up today.

That was my point.

It's not virtuous to fight a man you know can't beat you. Where is the virtue in that?

Yet, it is surely virtuous to fight a man you can't beat, and try like hell, and almost pull it off.

Leonard staggered McLarnin. Morales staggered and extended Morales. If we are talking virtuosity, thats my version of same.

Not 12 round fait-accomplit a la Floyd vs Marquez.

 

Without focus, we're all lost.

 

More dainty ditties and neat one-liners.

:shit:

 

You're all over the map, dear.

 

Says a Canadian :laugh11:

 

same here... fucking GORGEOUS

 

no one here said a fucking thing about any of these fights you are harping on, Irish, NOBODY

What, Napoles/Cokes isn't a virtuoso performance???

Locche/Cervantes I ?

Whitaker/a bunch of guys??

who here said they like watching Pac/Clottey or Mayweather/Ortiz?

 

Joe Brown vs Wallace Smith III... you wanna see a real pro with basic talent who achieved a 5 year period of greatness because he had taken the hard road and learned every trick, every move, every strategy in the book? Watch Brown in that fight... he does a little of everything... changes up his foot positioning constantly, switches stances, counters, attacks, jabs, right hand leads, the works... does it all, some here, some there... brilliance

 

I'm sure I read it said somewhere that Bill Gore considered Brown the most technically complete champion he ever trained. Don't quote me on that, it might have been somebody elses opinion. Either way, high praise.

 

Beautiful shot to KO Minami.

 

ones that end with a ko

 

Klitshko fan :Thumbs:

 

My original post had the proviso 'against an opponent good enough for it to mean something'. :Thumbs:

Mayweather-Corrales is a virtuoso performance; Mayweather-Marquez at 147 is a farce.

 

Thank you. This shit happens in every thread. It's a nuisance.

 

'ko', not 'submission by 1200 arm punches'.

Even Wlad very rarely really lays somebody out.

 

I was asked to name fights I did not regard as virtuoso.

 

He's laid out 2 of his last 3.

 

In fact has Wlad ever layed somebody out cold? :dunno: I can't think.

 

No you weren't.

 

What shit, you Dream Act faggot? I mentioned that I liked fights of a certain sort. You then went off with your snide little remarks. The only person looking for an argument was you.