Do you Need to have Boxed to be a Fan?

[mickey1975]

I've boxed(badly) and train 3 times a week. My little bit of knowledge comes more from watching a lot better kids, though, in the gyms and on the shows. I think I'm a "boxing man", terry? I best be after spending 25 years and a fortune on it...

[lefty]

How do people feel about their jobs when others, who pretend to be experts, but with no experience, make comments?

I don’t like it.

If I go on the ‘off topic’ forum and someone is spouting nonsense about my profession it does niggle…

Nothing wrong with being a male gigalo mate!

[stevieb_8006]

This thread should be re-titled 'do you need to have boxed to your opinion be taken seriously'. Most of these comments seem to be about whether joe public can understand the technicalities of the game and not whether they can actually just enjoy it.

[davie]

i think a few people have got the wrong end of the stick, although thats probably the OP's fault.
i dont think the title "do you need to have boxed to be a FAN?" Really asked the question he intended. if you read the OP its clear he is talking about the ability to read a fight, to have knowledge or "insight" about whats going on in the ring.

of course you don't need to have boxed to be a fan.
but does it give you an advantage, when reading a fight, having worked in the sport and experienced things you and I may not have.
thats not to say the 40 fight pro is an expert and always right and poor little me who has been to a boxing gym 20 times but never sparred knows nothing.
other things come into the equation.

basically, it's not impossible that casual fan could call a fight better than a pro. so the "but you've never boxed so you wouldn't know" argument is bullshit

[lefty]

An example for me going against some of the "you need to of boxed to fully understand or read a fight" is Lennox Lewis. Did any of you ever used to listen to his commentary on HBO?! Now he's one of the greatest heavyweights of all time but when he was commentating it sounded like he didnt have a clue as to what he was talking about or watching in front of him most of the time! ...... Paulie Malignaggi on the other hand who is now on Showtime seems really good when it comes to reading a fight.

[davie]

i regularly watch fights and ex boxer/commentators notice subtle little movements and punches that i hadn't noticed

where as i listened to macklin call the golovkin vs stevens and despite having first hand experience against golovkin, i felt he totally called it wrong regarding stevens gameplan

[Pipette]

It's like saying you have to play an instrument to enjoy music.

Excellent post

(If having boxed was a prerequisite to being a fan, there would be three people on this forum)

[johnreilly]

I watched a lot of fights on TV in the 80's and felt I knew quite a bit about boxing, even though I never set foot in a gym. I had my first session in a boxing gym one year ago, and realised I didn't have a clue. I would never have believed how much fitness it takes to box, or even just to move around a ring avoiding the other bloke. The skills I've picked up, and the ones I still struggle with, allow me to enjoy boxing as a fan far more than back in those early years.

[Grilling Machine]

I also know very knowledgeable fans who have never been near a gym.

And I know a few talented boxers who haven't much of a clue when it comes to training newcomers. I think that's because they learnt to fight instinctively from an early age, so their days of analysing their progress in detail are long behind them. Gyms can be pretty scary when you're 12, and I think that perception of danger makes you more receptive.

You get these guys who juice themselves to funk because they've never moved beyond that feeling of childhood vulnerability (commonly due to abuse), but most kids mature and find their confidence. Unfortunately, our learning often slows up in line with that confidence. The answer is to go pro and keep testing yourself; keep learning.

Personally, I feel that latecomers often make better trainers, if not boxers, because they've had to cram in as much learning as possible to catch up. I think too many of our ABCs hang their kids out to dry after the most basic of rote learning.

Curious-minded non-fighters are every bit as qualified as dudes who mindlessly hit pads throughout their teens, never straying from their trainers' barked orders. I do feel that participating unlocks a deeper appreciation, but I haven't fought, say, Eubank (bloody good job!), and experience or no, I'd be able to tell you that he was a master of using feints to reduce the demands on his fitness.

As a viewer, a good eye for subtle plays and movements is the most important thing. The one and only thing I would say about those without experience is that they haven't struggled to apply fundamentally good theories. I can see failings in many boxers that I wouldn't be able to exploit myself. I think Haye suffers badly from this, because it's really easy for us, as punters, to recognise his abilities and shout 'Just do X when he does Y!'.

[Manchester Massive]

I also know very knowledgeable fans who have never been near a gym.

And I know a few talented boxers who haven't much of a clue when it comes to training newcomers. I think that's because they learnt to fight instinctively from an early age, so their days of analysing their progress in detail are long behind them. Gyms can be pretty scary when you're 12, and I think that perception of danger makes you more receptive.

You get these guys who juice themselves to funk because they've never moved beyond that feeling of childhood vulnerability (commonly due to abuse), but most kids mature and find their confidence. Unfortunately, our learning often slows up in line with that confidence. The answer is to go pro and keep testing yourself; keep learning.

Personally, I feel that latecomers often make better trainers, if not boxers, because they've had to cram in as much learning as possible to catch up. I think too many of our ABCs hang their kids out to dry after the most basic of rote learning.

Curious-minded non-fighters are every bit as qualified as dudes who mindlessly hit pads throughout their teens, never straying from their trainers' barked orders. I do feel that participating unlocks a deeper appreciation, but I haven't fought, say, Eubank (bloody good job!), and experience or no, I'd be able to tell you that he was a master of using feints to reduce the demands on his fitness.

As a viewer, a good eye for subtle plays and movements is the most important thing. The one and only thing I would say about those without experience is that they haven't struggled to apply fundamentally good theories. I can see failings in many boxers that I wouldn't be able to exploit myself. I think Haye suffers badly from this, because it's really easy for us, as punters, to recognise his abilities and shout 'Just do X when he does Y!'.

So true, the openings I spot outside the ring or the weaknesses that I think I could exploit all become very different when you have shots bouncing off your nose and ribs

[Wa1nuts]

It seems to me people on here worry too much about whos the biggest 'expert' or whos knowledge is superior.

Of course you don't have to have boxed to be a fan, anyone can be a fan, and who cares if someone else knows more. Does my head in when people talk about match ups and say "So and So will be too much for him and will stop in rounds 9-12". Like its an absolute fact that can't be disputed because this person knows so much and is an 'expert' and had 3 amateur fights when he was 14.

[thepocketrocket]

The Question was almost tabloid sensationalist, but the conversation is exactly the one I wanted

[davie]

I also know very knowledgeable fans who have never been near a gym.

And I know a few talented boxers who haven't much of a clue when it comes to training newcomers. I think that's because they learnt to fight instinctively from an early age, so their days of analysing their progress in detail are long behind them. Gyms can be pretty scary when you're 12, and I think that perception of danger makes you more receptive.

You get these guys who juice themselves to funk because they've never moved beyond that feeling of childhood vulnerability (commonly due to abuse), but most kids mature and find their confidence. Unfortunately, our learning often slows up in line with that confidence. The answer is to go pro and keep testing yourself; keep learning.

Personally, I feel that latecomers often make better trainers, if not boxers, because they've had to cram in as much learning as possible to catch up. I think too many of our ABCs hang their kids out to dry after the most basic of rote learning.

Curious-minded non-fighters are every bit as qualified as dudes who mindlessly hit pads throughout their teens, never straying from their trainers' barked orders. I do feel that participating unlocks a deeper appreciation, but I haven't fought, say, Eubank (bloody good job!), and experience or no, I'd be able to tell you that he was a master of using feints to reduce the demands on his fitness.

As a viewer, a good eye for subtle plays and movements is the most important thing. The one and only thing I would say about those without experience is that they haven't struggled to apply fundamentally good theories. I can see failings in many boxers that I wouldn't be able to exploit myself. I think Haye suffers badly from this, because it's really easy for us, as punters, to recognise his abilities and shout 'Just do X when he does Y!'.

So true, the openings I spot outside the ring or the weaknesses that I think I could exploit all become very different when you have shots bouncing off your nose and ribs

just because you couldn't expose those weakness yourself, doesn't mean you arent able to watch the fight, analyse whats going on and see the faults.

[banjo]

Not at all and I'm suspecting somebody has already said this in the thread that boxers themselves were fans before they were boxers, that's why they took it up.

[Paul Wad]

Saying that you have to have boxed/sparred/been to a gym to be a fan or be able to comment knowledgeably on a fight is straying a bit too close to the nonsense spouted by footballers in my opinion. You know, when footballers start getting twitchy if anyone "who hasn't even played the game" tries to get involved. In actual fact, many of the top managers in the English League over the past twenty years or so were average players at best, so what do footballers know.

Of course, if you have been a professional boxer/footballer you will have an advantage over those who haven't when it comes to commenting on the sport, or at least you should have, but it's not always as clear cut as that. I've never been the Secretary of State for Education, have never been an MP or even a council member, but I reckon I could sum up Michael Gove pretty accurately.

[Emmseegee]

Anyone can be a fan of any sport without any experience, Manny Pacquiao likes basketball but I dare say he aint got much chance of doing a slam dunk! lol

I had an argument with one of my mates when Hatton got stopped in his comeback, this guy im talking about has been to many fights alongside me and enjoys doing so but the argument went a bit like this.....
(Hatton gets dropped with a body shot)
me: 'He's not getting up from that'
him: 'He will, it hit him on the body'
(Hatton gets counted out)
him: 'He's a pussy, not as if it was a head shot'
me: 'are you having a fu**ing laugh?'
him: 'he's been training for weeks and gets beat like that'
me: 'Ive got one question for you, if he got back up and finished the round how would you score the round?'
him: '1-0 to the other guy obviously'
me: (Speechless)

I'm not saying everyone is like that, just thought I would share the story as there are quite a few people like this filling the seats at shows all over the country. lol

[Anzi]

Anyone can be a fan of any sport without any experience, Manny Pacquiao likes basketball but I dare say he aint got much chance of doing a slam dunk! lol

I had an argument with one of my mates when Hatton got stopped in his comeback, this guy im talking about has been to many fights alongside me and enjoys doing so but the argument went a bit like this.....
(Hatton gets dropped with a body shot)
me: 'He's not getting up from that'
him: 'He will, it hit him on the body'
(Hatton gets counted out)
him: 'He's a pussy, not as if it was a head shot'
me: 'are you having a fu**ing laugh?'
him: 'he's been training for weeks and gets beat like that'
me: 'Ive got one question for you, if he got back up and finished the round how would you score the round?'
him: '1-0 to the other guy obviously'
me: (Speechless)

I'm not saying everyone is like that, just thought I would share the story as there are quite a few people like this filling the seats at shows all over the country. lol

A lot of people are like that on this forum, I like Rugby union, but if you ask me for all the positions on the field, I would not know, different with football, nearly everyone has played it, so understand it more, all the positions, tactics, most would know, one thing in all sports is the abuse armchair fans aim towards sportsmen, in a very extreme way e.g calling a world champion shit, when they could not punch their way out of a paper bag themselves.

[dominik]

It gets mentioned a lot when people are 'debating'. The "what would you know, you have never laced a pair gloves on" line is designed to show the other persons opinion to be worthless.

But can a non-fighter at least empathise with what is going on? And because you have fought, does that make your opinion inherently right?

Thoughts?

no you don't Need to have boxed to be a fan. however you should have boxed to be an expert. if you do not have boxed don't Claim you are an expert but a fan and everything is fine.

[palooka]

People (fans of the sport) see different elements within the sport that they relate to and admire, sometimes that is because they have tried the sport and have an appreciation of how difficult some things are. Some people are from the same town or village as boxer or know them personally and can see no wrong in them, they will argue black is white.

Any sport takes effort and is difficult, getting into a school football team takes effort and commitment, getting to a level where people will pay to watch you perform takes some doing.

A sensible person doesn't have to have boxed to appreciate a bout/ boxer but even being sensible or having had experience as a boxer doesn't mean you know it all or that your view is far superior than a novices (see the betting thread).

[stevieb_8006]

It gets mentioned a lot when people are 'debating'. The "what would you know, you have never laced a pair gloves on" line is designed to show the other persons opinion to be worthless.

But can a non-fighter at least empathise with what is going on? And because you have fought, does that make your opinion inherently right?

Thoughts?

no you don't Need to have boxed to be a fan. however you should have boxed to be an expert. if you do not have boxed don't Claim you are an expert but a fan and everything is fine.

Brilliantly put

[palooka]

It gets mentioned a lot when people are 'debating'. The "what would you know, you have never laced a pair gloves on" line is designed to show the other persons opinion to be worthless.

But can a non-fighter at least empathise with what is going on? And because you have fought, does that make your opinion inherently right?

Thoughts?

no you don't Need to have boxed to be a fan. however you should have boxed to be an expert. if you do not have boxed don't Claim you are an expert but a fan and everything is fine.

Brilliantly put

What about if you've had a few scraps outside the pub?

[macaca]

It reminds me of the mentality that used to exist in football that you had to of been a top player to be a top manager. The likes of Mourinho, Wenger and co put that one to bed.

Stick Sir Bobby Robson in that list RIP

[JC]

It reminds me of the mentality that used to exist in football that you had to of been a top player to be a top manager. The likes of Mourinho, Wenger and co put that one to bed.

Stick Sir Bobby Robson in that list RIP

Robson was a top flight player though played for England too.

[palooka]

It reminds me of the mentality that used to exist in football that you had to of been a top player to be a top manager. The likes of Mourinho, Wenger and co put that one to bed.

Stick Sir Bobby Robson in that list RIP

Robson was a top flight player though played for England too.

The thing is, unless they are well known superstars who've been at the very top they are thought to know nothing; some of the more astute don't do as well, in a physical sport injuries, timing and luck comes into it.

[davie]

It gets mentioned a lot when people are 'debating'. The "what would you know, you have never laced a pair gloves on" line is designed to show the other persons opinion to be worthless.

But can a non-fighter at least empathise with what is going on? And because you have fought, does that make your opinion inherently right?

Thoughts?

no you don't Need to have boxed to be a fan. however you should have boxed to be an expert. if you do not have boxed don't Claim you are an expert but a fan and everything is fine.

Brilliantly put

however, i would have added, being a boxer does not automatically make you an expert!