Is winning all you care here as a boxing fan?

[Chepppaaa]

so many people here only talk about "winning", that hate on barely everybody, because everybody can lose and therefore not win. they jusge who is better and who would win against the other.

I ask myself, why do people talk so much about winning and losing, is the fight itself, the action that goes on in the ring, not much much more important than winning or losing?

i dont understand people being so happy and so cheerful when their favourite fight won, but the fight itself was boring sh&/$t and than they say like they made millions themselves "yes, but he won", like the favourite boxer would afterwards give them money, ridicoulus. i dont have favourite fighter or defend them big, why, because we dont know them. manny comes accross nice, but behind his "nice persona" is somebody who tortured animals and always bullies his workers, fu&(k him. i dont care for boxers, all i care is action packed fight. and people out here act like 16 year old fanboys.

why do people for example hate on wilder, when he is the most action packed heavyweight in years, people should be happy that we have somebody who comes in the ring to do damage and got power and goes for the kill, instead we have people who try to downsize him and judge and compare him and how he would lose to this and that boxer. but than they watch a mayweather fight and the whole fight was boring ass and holding and running, but because he won they are cheering like school cheerleader. what is wrong with people, so many haters. same goes for golovking, finaly after years or boring middleweight with X, we have after pavlik and abraham an great fight in golovkin and all people try to do is "yeah but he would win not against this or that guy. who cares for winning. i like golovkin more than ward, but i think ward would win against golovkin, but what does it matter, the fight would be sh/()t, because of wards style and the fight would be meaningless, because only fun fight mean something, otherwise why watching boxing,when its not fun to watch? what would be basketball without action packed drive to the rim, without alley ups, without buzzer beaters?

how can you hate good action, how can you hate an action packed fight, isnt action what brought you to liking boxing, watching tyson, heans, trinidad, all action packed boxers, who brought fun and without them boxing would be as boring as darts or formula 1.

guys, dont be so stupid like german boxing fans, who know sh/()t and go to stadiums to watch the boringlitschkos, boring boxing is a sicknes, that has to be forced out of boxing. yes, boring boxing makes me sick. when i watch an whole fight of ward, his "wait and see" style boxing, his holding and simply aggravating, stumble style than i become sick.

[Badhusker]

Vince Lombardi: "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." 8)

[caldo2025]

I'm trying to understand your point here because it's interesting. So you are basically saying "forget about who you think will win in a certain fight, let's focus on what two guys would be the best fight to watch"? I apologize if i misunderstood but if that is your point, I like it. It's a great way to look at the sport. And, I agree completely with Ward's style being a sleeping aid. I'd rather see a two round fight end in a knockout than watch Counter Punchers. Counter Punching Only boxers are very boring.

But to get back to your point, there are many examples of boxers making a name for themselves after losing a bout. Look at Provodnikov with Bradly, Herrera with Garcia, Hearns with Hagler and Rocky Balboa with Apollo Creed I. lol. Just look at the Gatti/Ward trilogy. A lot of people couldn't tell you who won those fights. They just remember the heart and grit displayed. Your points a good one man. I like it.

[Boxing Prospect]

Entertainment first, winning second. I'd much rather watch Takuya Kogawa or Koki Eto get into an all out war than watch a safety conscious boxer take a tedious 12 round win. I don't watch fights to watch two guys refuse to engage in an attempt to squeak a scrappy decision.

For what it's worth outside boxers and counter punchers CAN be very exciting

[Chepppaaa]

Vince Lombardi: "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." 8)

nfl is like the most boring stuff ever. game, pause, commercial, game, pause, commercial, interruption. well....yeah

[Chepppaaa]

I'm trying to understand your point here because it's interesting. So you are basically saying "forget about who you think will win in a certain fight, let's focus on what two guys would be the best fight to watch"? I apologize if i misunderstood but if that is your point, I like it. It's a great way to look at the sport. And, I agree completely with Ward's style being a sleeping aid. I'd rather see a two round fight end in a knockout than watch Counter Punchers. Counter Punching Only boxers are very boring.

But to get back to your point, there are many examples of boxers making a name for themselves after losing a bout. Look at Provodnikov with Bradly, Herrera with Garcia, Hearns with Hagler and Rocky Balboa with Apollo Creed I. lol. Just look at the Gatti/Ward trilogy. A lot of people couldn't tell you who won those fights. They just remember the heart and grit displayed. Your points a good one man. I like it.

i am exactly with you.

the point is, sure do i favour boxer a over boxer b. sure do i like golovkin more than quillon, but like i said, what i focus about is "is it a good match up", "will it be fun to watch" and afterwards "it was great exciting bout, no matter who won", even if the boxer who i dont like so much like quillon won, i focus on saying "it was still a great fight".

that is a problem with fans i have today. they only focus about who wins and who win against the other in near future and are totaly haters on so many boxer, that should deserve credit, because they bring fun to the game. fun in boxing means for me tkos, kos, action. wilder brings all this, yet so many haters say "povetkin would beat him, he did not prove himself". fu&/()k proving yourself, it is about bringing action into a division and he is 100 % doing so.

same goes for so many other boxers. maidana, he goes into the ring for the kill, he brings fun and what does he get for return "well he lost against floyd". as if winning is the most important thing for a fan of boxing. for a boxer, there i can understant that winning might be the most important thing, but for a fan who watches tv, the most important thing should be great entertainmant and not hate and only focus about who won.

[KBB]

BOXING is like jazz, the better it's done the less they'll appreciate it. Notice how he calls it "running" when he refers to Floyd but when Manny does it then it's called "boxing".

The Double Standard only exists towards Floyd but hate is universal.

[Tony1244]

Winning is numero uno. But entertainment is also important.

[palooka]

Vince Lombardi: "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." 8)

I don't like to see winning ugly, I don't like cheats either. I love to see skill and learned responses in a boxing match.

[pound per pound]

No. Hardly. As long as there is effort and fair score cards, I'm happy.

[punchoutsb]

so many people here only talk about "winning", that hate on barely everybody, because everybody can lose and therefore not win. they jusge who is better and who would win against the other.

Oh man, I hate 100% of most of the people who hate on barely everybody. Every one of almost all of them are so annoying!

[northern]

Winning is just the end of a fight, in my opinion it takes something really special in a fight that the victory wouldn't matter anymore, its the men in the ring and their ability and determination that defines a great fight to me.

*Mickey ward vs Arturo gatti: three fights, all fantastic to watch and it didn't matter who won
*Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier: it mattered to them who wont he trilogy, but everyone in the world loves all of the fights.
*Henry cooper Muhammad Ali (and Cassius clay): Cooper lost both, but captured the hearts of everyone in a country at the time.
*James J Braddock vs Max Baer: Braddock needed to win the fight, his story and his victory is one of the resounding stories in boxing.
*Joe Louis vs Billy conn: a good first fight that everyone in attendance loved, watching this fight the world clamoured for a rematch and that's just because it was such a great fight.

these fights have all been and gone but because they have been such a contest, the winner is remembered but only because of a fight or fights that can define your career and that's what's remembered at the end of day.

[caldo2025]

I think that the judges have a lot to do with this as well. If you watched the Wilder/Stiverne fight the other night, you saw Stiverne chasing Wilder down the whole fight, pushing the action. Wilder was walking backwards just snapping a million jabs for most of the fight. Though I still think Wilder won the fight comfortably for landing the most effective blows, I had that fight a lot closer then the judges did. To me, a boxer should get some credit for pushing the action and trying to make a fight. Wilder wasn't dancing or using ring general skill, he was almost running backwards. Judges barely gave Stiverne a couple of rounds. if you continue to reward fighters for avoiding fan pleasing action, boxing entertainment will suffer. I'm all the idea of hit without getting hit but to me, you can't win a fight backing up for 12 rounds.

[Ricky_]

if it were up to me, fights would be 15 rounds and if there's a final bell a fight is a draw or no contest. If you want to win a fight, then win it in the ring, not in the eyes of a pensioner sitting at a desk 4 feet away.