Finishers finished in boxing?

I think there seems to be a tendency in boxing these days that fewer and fewer top level fighters jump to finish their opponents when they get them in trouble. Many greats of last decade or so, Jones, Mayweather, Hopkins, Lewis etc have been happy to dominate instead of finishing in style. Historically in boxing there has been the saying that you must finish you opponent when given a chance and best finishers have been admired.

Do you think the sport has changed in this sense (or is this another one of those UGTBK's bullshit theories)? And if you think that is what has happened, what do you think about the change? Does it tell you something about the change of the sport, the mentality of fighter ect. and is finishing in style better than not finishing?

Personally I think that finishing abilities have been traditionally overrated, if (and since) winning is what ultimately counts. Guys who always move for the finish are more fan-friendly, but that does not make them better nor worse as fighters compared to ones who play it safe.

What do you guys think?

 

the advent of the pussy style as a response to HBO's "win" criteria for handing out money.

 

I guess this should be a separate thread, but who are the biggest and most successful practitioners of the pussy style of boxing?

 

Might well be right there....

 

I'd say it's guys like Margarito, Castillo, etc, who felt that the best way to finish an opponent is to cheat, lie and deceive....

 

This is Yet Another Topic, Post AND Theory in a Looooooooooong, PLENTIFUL Line of BULLSHIT UGTBK Topics, Posts & Theories....



REED:shit:

 

:bears:

 

::
Its an interesting style like the Archie Moore "crab", the Ali hands-at-the-sides style, the more classic Arguello style, the Tyson/Patterson peek-a-boo ... the classic Pussy style, I can see the article in The Ring:

"THE PUSSY STYLE: WHO IS TODAY'S BEST?"

I wonder what the Pussy style looks like

 

:laughing::laughing::laughing:

 

The pussy style is the one adopted by every fighter I dislike. I think Double L will agree.

 

I've noticed the same thing...You remember when SRL buzzed you even a bit? The MF'er would be on you like a buzz-saw flailing away like a maniac trying to knock your head off.

 

Boxing the toughest sport in the world is full of pussies. Your right again dub.

 

It is like pornography. You know it when you see it. If you need someone to explain a "pussy" style, then you will never get it. Seriously, it is barely even subjective. Anyone who has seen Floyd or Cory Spinks fight should know what the gold standard is.

Your problem in PARTICULAR is you have described perhaps the biggest pussy style ever, as beautiful. Anyone that thinks Pernell Whitaker was even watchable has at best questionable taste. I like you CDOGG and you add much needed knowledge, but I think you ought to sit this thread out.

 

Lewis was underrated in the finishing department.

Sometime he fought more cautious, but overall he was a good finisher.

 

He could've finished Tua and Stewart had to curse him out to finish Tyson. He was more than a good fighter but he wasnt a good finisher cause he didnt want to be.

 

I thought he was generally a pretty good finisher. Ruddock, Golota, Briggs, Jackson, Bruno, etc...He didn't always push it, but overall I'd consider him an effective finisher.

 

I could be mistaken, but aren't you one of the folks who was excited about Haye's potential to bring back some much needed excitement back to the heavyweight division. And wasn't that because of his willingness to take an opponent out which was in contrast to the endless succession of Junior Prom slow dances that the division has become?

 

I got the impression that Lewis carried Tyson a bit to extend the punishment because of all the pre-fight BS.

Lewis wasn't an opening bell look for the KO kind of fighter, but when he knew he had an opponent in real trouble he usually went for the kill.

 

I doubt that was IGTBK, he is usually an apologist for the current state of the division

 

I don't know why you take this to person level, but no, I don't really care about that, although I do understand that one fighter like that would do good for the sport in general. (If you find a thread where you got this impression, let me know).

I think a difference must be made between what we want to see and what is good. To me, a fighter who wins all his fights by decision is as good as another one who knocks all the same opponents out in three rounds. That means that finishing skills do not make a fighter any better. However the knockout artist might be more exciting to watch.

 

Exactly, that guy always comes up with those ridiculous excuses

 

Now, now...there's no reason to get pissy. I asked you a question and I wasn't rude about. All you had to do is answer it like an adult. Perhaps I mistook you for someone else, but what is actually ridiculous is getting in a snit about it.

 

You're right, now that I think about it. Which is probably one of the reasons for this topic.

 

What is your take on the topic? Based on your knowledge of history of the sport, is it true that fighters don't go for the finish as often as they used to?